Mr. OFFICER. Well, Senator, there are two things that we have been consistently doing, at least over the time I have been in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is the last 6 years. Prior to the time that a claims attorney contract is due to expire, we inform the Indians and the attorney so that they can make a timely submission of the request for an extension of that contract. Now even though we do this, sometimes they do not always get it in in time. And we will have to approve an extension retroactively. But we do follow that procedure. In the instance of those groups who at the present time do not have attorneys as I think has been mentioned, we are dealing with several small Alaskan groups, some of whom are Eskimos as a matter of fact, who have never had attorneys and never really been completely certain of their authority to push a claims case forward. In other instances we are dealing with contracts that have expired in fairly recent times, and renegotiation of those contracts is in progress with respect to a majority of them. There are I believe, about four or five cases involving small groups in the Pacific Northwest where the attorney who served them previously simply has not been retained by the Indians. In these cases they have been attempting to get new counsel and we have been working with them to do that. We do not feel that we have the authority or the responsibility to actually go out and hunt for an attorney for them and approve the contract whether they like it or not. So we have been trying to encourage them to go forward with it. But there are a number of problems involved. Some of the settlements that have come in adjacent areas and in similar cases have been relatively small, and while the amounts of money involved may be very important to the Indians, the potential of 10 percent recovery for the attorney may not be enough to really attract the attorney that they are trying to get. So we do have a delay of some kind because of this. But it is part of our procedure both to advise the tribe and the attorneys prior to the expiration of a contract and to attempt to work with them once a contract has expired, or in the event one is canceled, or in the event none has ever been negotiated. We try to get them some legal representation. Senator McGOVERN. Senator Hatfield. Senator HATFIELD. No questions. Senator McGOVERN. Let me just ask one question about the loan fund, Mr. Anderson. Could you fill us in on just what the status of the loan fund is, and whether that has anything to do with the logjam on the handling of the claims? Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, Mr. Chairman. To date applications for funds to the extent of $1,025,610 have been approved. Funds have actually been advanced to the extent of $253,744. That is where they have the funds in hand, where they have entered into contracts. But the bulk of them are in application forms yet. They are attempting to line up their expert witnesses. And this should move more rapidly now. Here again, this is something that we leave to the attorneys, working with the tribes, to negotiate, and to hire and contract for these expert witnesses. Senator McGOVERN. Thank you very much. I think that takes care of our questions. Is Dr. Edward Campbell in the room? Dr. Campbell is the regional director, National Archives and Records Service, region 3, General Services Administration. He is accompanied by John B. Nix, Indian Tribal Claims Branch Chief, region 3. STATEMENT OF EDWARD G. CAMPBELL, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE, REGION 3, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; PRESENTED BY ROBERT DAVIS, DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATION, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN B. NIX, CHIEF, INDIAN TRIBAL CLAIMS BRANCH Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, my name is Robert Davis, Director of Legislation, General Services Administration, Office of the Administrator. Dr. Campbell is unable to be here this afternoon. I would like to read his statement. Senator McGOVERN. Thank you, Mr. Davis. You may proceed. Mr. DAVIS. On behalf of the Administrator of General Services, Lawson B. Knott, Jr., who asked me to represent him at this hearing, I wish to thank you for the opportunity of appearing before your committee for the purpose of expressing the views of GSA on S. 307, a bill designed to expedite consideration and final disposition of all claims which have been filed against the United States under the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946 and which have not yet been acted upon by the Indian Claims Commission. The interest of the General Services Administration in this proposed legislation, Mr. Chairman, stems from the fact that most of the material relied upon by the Department of Justice and the Indian tribes in proceedings before the Indian Claims Commission is based on certain original documents held in the National Archives. Since creation of the Indian Claims Commission by the act of August 13, 1946, letters have been received from the Attorney General of the United States enclosing copies of a total of 578 petitions which have been filed with the Commission and requesting that the Department of Justice be furnished accounting reports in response to the allegations set out in the petitions. Generally these reports include an accounting showing the extent to which various treaty obligations have been fulfilled by the United States, an accounting of investments and trust funds, and in most cases a statement of gratuitous expenditures for consideration as possible offsets against any judgment which may be rendered against the United States. These accounting reports are presently prepared for the Department of Justice by the Indian Tribal Claims Branch of GSA's region 3, National Archives and Records Service. Prior to February 28, 1965, the reports were prepared by the General Accounting Office. Over the years some of these 578 petitions have been dismissed by the Indian Claims Commission but accounting reports on all the other petitions have been furnished the Department of Justice with the exception of 64 which are in the process of being prepared by GSA's Indian Tribal Claims Branch. The preparation of such reports is time consuming and involves extensive research. The information required is compiled from reports of the Bureau of Ethnology, documents of the Senate and House of Representatives, records of the former Department of War, the Departments of Treasury and the Interior, the General Accounting Office, and the National Archives and Records Service dating back to the year 1795. Assembling this information and compiling it into a finished report involves a comprehensive analysis of the claims recited in each case, preparation of a history of the particular tribe of Indians, its migrations and unions with other tribes, and an analysis of all treaties made with the tribe and the acts of Congress affecting such tribe. As an example of these accounting reports, Mr. Chairman, with your permission I submit for the record a copy of the report prepared by the General Services Administration for the Department of Justice involving petitions of the Winnebago Tribe and Ñation of Indians, Indian Claims Commission dockets Nos. 243, 244, and 245. Senator McGOVERN. The material will be made a part of the files. Mr. DAVIS. With respect to the remaining 64 petitions mentioned above we expect to furnish the Department of Justice with the requested accounting reports responding to the allegations made in such petition not later than June 30, 1970. Our tentative schedule, copy of which is available for the record, if desired, calls for completion of the work on accounting reports involving 13 of the petitions by the end of fiscal year 1967; completion of the work on accounting reports involving 22 of the petitions during fiscal year 1968; completion of the work on accounting reports involving 23 of the petitions in fiscal year 1969; and completion of the work on the remaining six petitions in fiscal year 1970. In addition to furnishing the Department of Justice accounting reports in response to petitions filed with the Indian Claims Commission, occasionally the appropriate officials of our Indian Tribal Claims Branch are called upon to testify before the Commission as expert witnesses with respect to those accounting reports which such officials were responsible for preparing. Having discussed the activities of the General Services Administration in the adjudication of Indian claims I turn now to S. 307 and offer the following comments on behalf of the General Services Administration. Section (a) of the bill would, as you know, amend the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946 by adding a new section 27 thereto so as to provide that (1) each claim not previously set for trial would be set by the Indian Claims Commission for trial on a day not later than January 1, 1970, and (2) if the claimant is unable or unwilling to proceed with the trial on that day the Commission shall enter an order dismissing the claim with prejudice, except that on motion of the claimant and for good cause shown the Commission may grant a continuance of the trial for not more than 6 months and may stay the dismissal if the Commission finds that a final compromise of the claims is being negotiated in good faith by the parties. As to the adequacy of the time element as well as the merits of the other provisions of this proposed new section 27, Mr. Chairman, GSA defers to the views of the Department of Justice and the Indian Claims Commission. Section (b) of S. 307 would amend section 23 of the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946 so as to provide that (1) the existence of the Indian Claims Commission shall terminate at the end of 5 years from and after April 10, 1967, or at such earlier time as the Commission shall have made its final report to the Congress on all claims which have been filed with the Commission, and (2) upon its dissolution the records of the Commission shall be delivered to the Archivist of the United States. The General Services Administration concurs in this proposed extension of the existence of the Indian Claims Commission as well as the delivery of its records to the Archivist of the United States upon dissolution of the Commission. In view of the foregoing and insofar as the responsibilities and functions of the General Services Administration are concerned GSA has no objection to the enactment of S. 307. That concludes our statement, Mr. Chairman. Now, just to make certain I understand the thrust of your statement: you have completed action on all of the petitions that have been referred to except for 64. Mr. DAVIS. Right, sir. Senator McGoOVERN. Do you think you can take care of those 64 and wind up your part of this operation within 5 years? Mr. DAVIS. Within the framework of this legislation, we will have completed our work, Mr. Chairman. And if so desired, I have our scheduled workload here on the remaining 64 if you would like it for the record. Senator McGOVERN. You see no bottlenecks in your Department that are going to cause any particular difficulty if we move on the schedule projected in the bill. Mr. DAVIS. We see no difficulty. Mr. Nix, who is in charge of preparing these accounting reports, has concurred in the statement-you foresee no difficulty, Mr. Nix? Mr. Nix. No, sir. I feel, Mr. Chairman, that we can meet the projected schedule that we have mentioned in our statement. I have before me a copy of the present Indian Claims Commission calendar for the next 3 years and see no problem with that. By that I mean the 125 specific dockets listed here for hearings in this 3-year calendar. We have already reported out reports of 101 of those, and 21 are presently in process. But we feel that we can meet this 5-year program without difficulty. Senator McGOVERN. Senator Hatfield, do you have any questions? Senator HATFIELD. Mr. Chairman, were hearings of this type held on the previous extensions of this act of 1946? Senator McGOVERN. I believe they were. Senator HATFIELD. Were any of these same people present? Senator HATFIELD. Do you know if the answers today compare with the ones given then? Mr. DAVIS. We were not asked to comment then. Senator McGoVERN. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis. Mr. DAVIS. Would you like this work schedule, Mr. Chairman? Senator McGOVERN. Yes; I think it would be helpful to the committee. The letter of Senator Jackson to the General Services Administration and their reply will be included at this point. (The data referred to follows:) U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Hon. LAWSON B. KNOTT, Jr., Administrator, Washington, D.C. General Services Administration, MY DEAR MR. ADMINISTRATOR: Under date of January 19, I advised you that the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs has scheduled a hearing for Monday, February 6, 1967, on S. 307, a bill that would extend the life of the Indian Claims Commission. In connection therewith, would you please furnish us the following information: Describe instructions you receive from the Justice Department in preparation of accounting reports for cases before the Indian Claims Commission, and describe the procedures used by your organization in establishing priorities to accomplish the preparation of these reports in relationship to the readiness of the petitioner in the claims case to go to trial. In order that the information you have been asked to provide may be properly analyzed, it would be appreciated if it is submitted as far in advance of the hearing date as possible. Sincerely yours, HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In reply to your letter of January 25 in further reference to the hearing your Committee has scheduled on S. 307, a bill that would extend the life of the Indian Claims Commission, the following information is submitted as requested: Letters are received from the Attorney General enclosing two copies of petitions which have been filed against the United States before the Indian Claims Commission and requesting that the Department of Justice be furnished accounting reports in response to the allegations set out in the petitions, and statments of gratuity payments made under section 2 of the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946. The order in which these requested accounting reports are prepared in response to the allegations made in the petitions is determined primarily by the Department of Justice. Subsequent to receipt of the letters from the Attorney General requesting the reports, the Chief of the Indian Claims Section of the Department of Justice advises the Chief of the Indian Tribal Claims Branch of our Region 3 National Archives and Records Service by telephone which of the accounting reports need expeditious processing on our part. On a few occasions the Department of Justice has requested that as much effort as possible be concentrated on a particular case. As soon as one of the examining groups of our Indian Tribal Claims Branch has completed a requested accounting report the Department of Justice is contacted by telephone to ascertain which report in response to a petition filed before the Indian Claims Commission should be prepared next. In addition, the Indian Claims Commission furnishes our Indian Tribal Claims Branch a copy of the Commission's latest Trial Calendar. This calendar is helpful in that it serves as a guide in determining which accounting reports should have priority over others that are in the process of being prepared. We trust that this information will be of help to you and your Committee and if we may be of further assistance or furnish any additional information please let us know. Sincerely yours, LAWSON B. KNOTT, Jr., |