## Facts

- The United States and Canada agreed by treaty to develop equal shares of Niagara River waters for hydropower, subject to specific congressional authorization for U.S. redevelopment projects.
- After a major power shortage and congressional action, Congress directed the Federal Power Commission (FPC) to license the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) to build a large hydroelectric project near Lewiston, New York.
- The project required a storage reservoir that would inundate roughly 1,383 acres owned in fee simple by the Tuscarora Indian Nation, purchased in the nineteenth century and adjacent to the project site.
- PASNY sought and obtained an FPC license under the Federal Power Act (FPA) and authority to acquire needed lands through eminent domain under FPA § 21.
- The FPC concluded the Tuscarora lands were not “reservation” lands under the FPA because the United States held no ownership interest in them.
- The D.C. Circuit reversed, treating the lands as within a “reservation” and concluding condemnation was unauthorized absent additional statutory protections and in light of 25 U.S.C. § 177 (Nonintercourse Act).
- The Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether Tuscarora-owned fee simple lands qualify as “reservation” lands under FPA § 3(2), triggering FPA § 4(e)’s requirement that the licensed project not interfere with the reservation’s purposes.
2. Whether FPA § 21 authorizes an FPC licensee to condemn Indian-owned fee simple lands for a licensed project, notwithstanding 25 U.S.C. § 177 and the absence of a treaty authorizing transfer.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the D.C. Circuit and upheld the FPC’s license and the licensee’s condemnation authority.
- The Court held the Tuscarora lands were not “reservation” lands under FPA § 3(2) because the United States owned no interest in them; therefore, FPA § 4(e) did not apply.
- The Court held FPA § 21 authorizes condemnation of lands needed for a licensed project, including Indian-owned fee simple lands, upon payment of just compensation.
- The Court held 25 U.S.C. § 177 does not bar federal eminent domain or condemnation conducted by a federal licensee acting under congressional authorization.
- A concurrence agreed with the judgment while expressing caution about broad statements on the application of general statutes to tribes.
- A dissent would have required a clear statement of congressional intent before permitting condemnation of tribal property.

## Legal Principles

- Under the FPA, land is a “reservation” for purposes of §§ 3(2) and 4(e) only if it falls within the statutory definition, including the requirement that the United States own a relevant interest in the land.
- FPA § 21’s eminent-domain grant, stated in general terms and without an Indian-land exception, authorizes a licensee to condemn property needed for an FPC-licensed project, including Indian-owned fee simple land, with just compensation.
- Statutes of general application ordinarily apply to Indians and Indian lands within U.S. jurisdiction unless Congress clearly provides otherwise.
- The Nonintercourse Act restricts certain nonfederal, consensual transfers of Indian lands; it does not prevent the United States, or a federally authorized condemnor, from taking such lands by eminent domain with just compensation.
- Absent specific treaty protection for the land at issue, congressional authorization and just compensation suffice to permit condemnation for a public power project.

## Conclusion

The Court held that Tuscarora fee lands were not “reservation” lands under the Federal Power Act and that the Act’s eminent-domain provision authorized an FPC licensee to condemn those lands for a congressionally directed hydroelectric project, with just compensation, notwithstanding the Nonintercourse Act.


Fed. Power Comm'n v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99 (1960)