Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/12/2000 01:55 PM House JUD
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 359 - DEPARTMENT NAT RES ADMIN APPEALS/OIL & GAS Number 0530 CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 359, "An Act relating to notice requirements for certain final findings concerning the disposal of an interest in state land or resources for oil and gas; relating to administrative appeals and petitions for reconsideration of decisions of the Department of Natural Resources; and providing for an effective date." Number 0580 BOB LOEFFLER, Director, Central Office, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), came before the committee to present HB 359. The bill would create a uniform appeals process for DNR and would fix a public notice problem with respect to DNR's Division of Oil & Gas. Currently, he explained, as an "artifact" of different laws passed at different times, DNR has a couple of appeals tracks. For some decisions there is a 30-day appeals process, while for other decisions there is a 15-day or 20-day appeals process. There can also be multiple appeals for some types of decisions; for example, in some cases an appeal can be made to him, if his staff has made the decision, then to the commissioner and then to the commissioner again. Therefore, HB 359 would create a uniform appeals process so that the public is not confused and so that staff don't "blow it," as they occasionally do. MR. LOEFFLER noted that it would be a one-shot appeals process in that if a person does not like a decision made by staff, that decision can be appealed to the commissioner; the person then has a right to go to court. A simple process, it would not take any rights away from the public, except for the chance of a multiple appeal in some cases. He believes the bill would help people understand the process, which would be quicker. Number 0722 MR. LOEFFLER pointed out that HB 359 would also fix a notice-related problem. The Division of Oil & Gas has to notice a lease sale three times: once for the preliminary finding; once for the final finding; and, as an "artifact," the division has to notice that it is going to notice the final finding - a "notice of a notice." The consequence is confusion and expense. It costs a certain amount of money to place a legal notice in a newspaper, especially oil and gas lease notices that must go statewide. He believes that the "fix" would not change the rights of either citizens or governments. All it would do is make government a little more efficient and less confusing. Number 0784 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Loeffler whether [the state] is in any jeopardy of having set a precedent in relation to the "notice of a notice." MR. LOEFFLER replied that he doesn't think so. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Loeffler whether that has been checked with the Office of the Attorney General. MR. LOEFFLER responded that the bill has been reviewed by the Office of the Attorney General; they believe that the "notice of a notice" is an "artifact." In reply to a further comment from Representative Green about a precedent, Mr. Loeffler stated, "I don't believe that's a problem, sir." Number 0818 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked Mr. Loeffler whether a person can request a reconsideration if a decision has not been appealed to the commissioner. MR. LOEFFLER answered that if the commissioner makes the decision, it is no longer called an appeal; it is called a reconsideration. If somebody other than the commissioner makes the decision, it is called an appeal. For example, the commissioner signs decisions made for very important decisions in relation to oil and gas leases. However, appeals of decisions made by his staff go to the commissioner, and under current law a person can ask the commissioner again for a decision under reconsideration. Number 0900 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether anyone else wished to testify, then closed the meeting to public testimony. Number 0921 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated that he is in favor of anything that can streamline government without jeopardizing public notice. He pointed out that the bill is coming directly from the Office of the Commissioner [DNR]. CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated three DNR representatives in the audience were nodding their heads in agreement. Number 0943 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move HB 359 from the committee with individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, HB 359 was moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|