02/24/2025 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB61 | |
| Presentation(s): Alaska Mining Industry Update | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 61 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 24, 2025
3:30 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Matt Claman
Senator Forrest Dunbar
Senator Scott Kawasaki
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Robert Myers
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 61
"An Act relating to an electronic product stewardship program;
relating to collection, recycling, and disposal of electronic
equipment; establishing the electronics recycling advisory
council; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSSB 61(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINING INDUSTRY UPDATE
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 61
SHORT TITLE: ELECTRONIC DEVICE RECYCLING
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) TOBIN
01/24/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/24/25 (S) RES, FIN
02/05/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/05/25 (S) Heard & Held
02/05/25 (S) MINUTE(RES)
02/17/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/17/25 (S) Heard & Held
02/17/25 (S) MINUTE(RES)
02/24/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
LOUIE FLORA, Staff
Senator Löki Tobin
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the committee substitute for SB 61
on behalf of the sponsor Senator Tobin.
REILLY KOSINSKI, Statewide Coordinator
Backhaul Alaska Program
Zender Environmental
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 61.
ALYSSA MURPHY, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 61.
KAREN MATTHIAS, Executive Director
Alaska Metal Mines
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented Alaska Mining Industry Update.
GRETA SCHUERCH, Senior Advisor
Government and External Affairs
Teck Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented Alaska Mining Industry Update.
DEANTHA SKIBINSKI, Executive Director
Alaska Miners Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented Alaska Mining Industry Update
CHRIS ECKERT, Senior Environmental Coordinator
Donlin Gold
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented Alaska Mining Industry Update
BRONK JORGENSEN, Placer Miner, Fortymile Mining District
Chicken, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented Alaska Mining Industry Update
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:43 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL called the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the call to order were
Senators Hughes, Dunbar, Myers, Wielechowski, Kawasaki, Claman
and Chair Giessel.
SB 61-ELECTRONIC DEVICE RECYCLING
3:31:32 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 61
"An Act relating to an electronic product stewardship program;
relating to collection, recycling, and disposal of electronic
equipment; establishing the electronics recycling advisory
council; and providing for an effective date."
3:31:54 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL solicited a motion.
3:31:58 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to adopt the committee substitute
(CS) for SB 61, work order 34-LS0220\I, as the working document.
3:32:08 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL objected for purposes of discussion.
3:32:17 PM
LOUIE FLORA, Staff, Senator Löki Tobin, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the committee substitute
for SB 61 on behalf of the sponsor Senator Tobin.
3:32:36 PM
MR. FLORA presented the explanation of changes for the committee
substitute for SB 61. He noted the changes reflected:
• feedback from testimony opposing SB 61
• request by a medical association requesting modification
• Senator Dunbar's amendment.
[Original punctuation provided.]
CSSB 61 (RES) explanation of changes Version A to
Version I
Page 10, lines 23-27: provides manufacturers of
electronic devices the ability to propose a lower
number of collection sites or collection events if
they can demonstrate that a community has safe and
adequate storage for recyclable electronic devices.
Page 14, line 15: delete penalty for people who
knowingly mix electronic devices with landfill waste.
Page 17 line 3: Provides the council with the ability
to meet virtually as well as in person.
Page 17, line 29: excludes medical devices regulated
by the FDA from the electronics recycling program.
Page 19, line 25: removes microwave ovens from the
list of items eligible for the electronics recycling
program.
Page 20, line 12: removes "battery containing
electronic" from the definition of "covered electronic
device" or those devices that are part of the
electronic recycling program.
MR. FLORA offered to answer questions. He noted that members of
the Solid Waste Alaska Task Force were available to describe
current and ongoing efforts in Alaska and that there was broad
infrastructure in place and a lot of work currently being done.
3:35:19 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked why microwave ovens and battery-containing
electronic devices had been removed from SB 61.
3:35:37 PM
MR. FLORA explained that battery-containing devices was unclear
and broad and so had been removed. He noted ongoing discussions
about including vape devices, a growing problem, [in SB 61], and
said they might require a separate bill. He said microwave ovens
should not have been included in SB 61 because they were not
recyclable.
3:36:26 PM
SENATOR MYERS asked why medical devices were removed from SB 61.
3:36:36 PM
MR. FLORA explained that medical associations in other states
have sought to remove medical devices from similar legislation.
He said he could provide a more detailed explanation.
3:37:13 PM
SENATOR MYERS affirmed that he would appreciate more
explanation, noting the extensive amount of electronic equipment
in medical settings.
3:37:50 PM
SENATOR HUGHES expressed interest in the invited testimony for
SB 61.
3:38:14 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced invited testimony on SB 61.
3:38:51 PM
REILLY KOSINSKI, Statewide Coordinator, Backhaul Alaska Program,
Zender Environmental, Anchorage, Alaska, introduced himself and
began a presentation on the Backhaul Alaska Program. He said he
intended the presentation to address the concerns about SB 61
expressed by the Consumer Technology Association (CTA). He moved
to slide 2, addressing infrastructure questions about the
backhaul program:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Existing Infrastructure
• Robust infrastructure exists for delivering goods to
& from communities
• Many leveraging opportunities
• Backhaul Alaska and others have been developing
efficiencies
[Slide 2 includes a map of Alaska showing the entire
state and extending south along the Pacific west coast
to northern California, illustrating current backhaul
collections sites and routes and modes of
transportation for items being shipped in to
communities and having the potential to ship recycling
bound items out.]
3:40:17 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to and narrated slide 3:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Ewaste Recycling in Alaska
At least 70% of communities already
Recycle ewaste
Have access to ewaste recycling services, or
Have access to collection events
[Slide 3 includes a map of Alaska showing communities
that have been recycling e-waste for the past five
years.]
3:40:57 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to slide 4 and said Backhaul Alaska was
established in 2018 and has provided the operational aspects of
recycling services described by Senate Bill 61, including
training, conducting collection events and managing the
logistics for around 100 communities. He said they handled not
only e-waste but also other hard-to-manage waste streams.
Despite being a small operation with limited resources, the
program has efficiently removed significant amounts of waste
from rural areas. He expressed strong interest in collaboration
and partnerships to tackle statewide e-waste recycling efforts:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Backhaul Alaska
• Establishing Partnerships
• Bolstering Existing Infrastructure
• Providing Training
• Conducting Collection Events
• Assist Community Backhaul Efforts
• Managing Logistics
• Leveraging Funds
• Coordinating with Recyclers
3:42:08 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to and narrated slide 5. He observed that
there were many organizations [in Alaska] that help with
backhaul and recycling of hard to manage materials like e waste
and many communities that individually manage their own e waste.
He noted that there were established recyclers in the state in
Anchorage, Fairbanks and Kodiak, that accepted e-waste along
with the other products they recycle. He emphasized that there
were many willing partners:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Other Ewaste Recycling Efforts
• Kawerak (Bering Straight Region)
• Maniilaq Association (NW Arctic Borough)
• KANA (Kodiak Island)
• AVCP/Donlin Gold/Delta Backhaul (Y-K Delta)
• Cook Inlet Keeper (Kenai Peninsula Borough)
• Prince of Wales Island Tribal Environmental
Coalition
• Many individual community efforts
• Established recyclers who accept ewaste in
Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Kodiak
3:42:53 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to and narrated slide 6:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Not Starting from Scratch
• A lot of progress has been made over 20+ years
• Many organizations are involved in ewaste recycling
• SB61 borne out of a multiyear stakeholder process
• Many experienced communities and organization
available to help
[Slide 6 includes a map of Alaska illustrating present
e-waste recycling across the state and potential
future sites.]
MR. KOSINSKI noted that the Solid Wate Alaska Taskforce (SWAT)
did reach out and meet with the Consumer Technology Association
(CTA), however CTA was completely opposed to [SB 61] from the
outset, and uninterested in engaging further. He said SB 61
would allow for a more formalized program that all who are
involved can build around, create one program to coordinate e-
waste recycling and make it much more efficient.
3:44:50 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to and narrated slide 7. He expressed pride
in the Backhaul Alaska program's achievements but highlighted
the challenge of limited funding, particularly with federal
funding set to expire in the summer. He mentioned the
possibility of additional funding sources for the next year or
two but warned of the need to scale back operations if further
funding isn't secured. He SB 61 was crucial for maintaining
service levels and stability:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Need for Stable, Long-Term Funding
• Limited Community Funds for Backhaul & Recycling
• Organizations like Backhaul AK rely on Federal
Grants
• Uncertainty is a barrier long term investment and
planning
• SB61 would establish stable long-term funding
3:46:00 PM
MR. KOSINSKI moved to and narrated slide 8. He discussed the
prevalence of extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws across
the U.S.:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Big Picture
In the US
• Over 140 PS Laws
• 33 States
• 20 Product Categories
•
Alaskans have already been paying in
We should also receive some benefit
MR. KOSINSKI said there was no evidence that there has been an
increase in product cost based on product stewardship programs.
He argued that the costs of these programs were distributed
among consumers or integrated into business operations. He said,
instead, Alaskans have been funding other states' EPR programs
without benefit.
3:47:50 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL removed objection; found no further objection and
CSSB 61 was adopted as the working document.
CHAIR GIESSEL [concluded invited testimony on SB 62].
3:48:04 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL opened public testimony on SB 61.
3:49:39 PM
ALYSSA MURPHY, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said she
was an Environmental Specialist for the state of Alaska and also
served as the secretary for the recycling non-profit ReGroup on
the Kenai Peninsula. She said ReGroup and Cook Inletkeeper work
together to facilitate electronics recycling events annually.
She emphasized the huge cost and burden [of these efforts] to
the community. She advocated for SB 61 as a means to shift the
onus from end-users [exclusively].
3:51:03 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL closed public testimony on SB 61.
3:51:07 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL solicited a motion.
3:51:14 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CSSB 61, work order 34-
LS0220/I, from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
3:51:34 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL found no objection and CSSB 61(RES) was reported
from the Senate Resources Standing Committee.
3:51:38 PM
At ease.
^PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINING INDUSTRY UPDATE
PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINING INDUSTRY UPDATE
3:53:47 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL reconvened the meeting and announced the
presentation Alaska Mining Industry Update.
3:54:21 PM
KAREN MATTHIAS, Executive Director, Alaska Metal Mines,
Anchorage, Alaska, introduced herself and said Alaska Metal
Mines represented the six large metal mines in Alaska and some
of the advanced development projects.
3:54:31 PM
GRETA SCHUERCH, Senior Advisor, Government and External Affairs,
Teck Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, introduced herself and said Teck
Alaska was the operator of the Red Dog Mine.
3:54:40 PM
DEANTHA SKIBINSKI, Executive Director, Alaska Miners
Association, Anchorage, Alaska, introduced herself and said
Alaska Metal Mines (AKMM) members were also members of the
Alaska Miners Association and the two work very closely
together. She said the Alaska Miners Association included the
one coal mine in Alaska as well as early-stage exploration
projects, the placer mining community, mid-sized mines, and the
vendors and contractors that provide goods and services to the
mining industry. She said there were eight statewide branches
[of the Alaska Miners Association] as far north as Nome and as
far south as Ketchikan and Prince of Wales Island.
3:55:12 PM
MS. SKIBINSKI moved to slide 2 and emphasized the importance of
domestic mineral production for economic and national security.
She highlighted Alaska's suitability for mining due to its high
standards of safety and environmental responsibility as well as
the potential for mining to benefit Alaskan communities. She
said three representatives from: a large-scale mining operation,
a project in development and a placer mining operation would
share their perspectives:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Overview
Mining in America > Mining in Alaska
Operational excellence:
• Large-scale mining operation
• Mining project in development
• Placer mining operation
The benefits: healthy economy, healthy communities,
healthy Alaskans
3:55:54 PM
MS. SKIBINSKI moved to slide 3, which contains four frames:
• A bar graph with the title: "The United States has the second
longest lead times in the world for developing a new mine" the
graph compared mining lead times for six nations.
• A photo titled, The Importance of Domestic Mining for U.S.
National Security
• A title page for the presidential executive order issued
January 20, 2025, titled Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary
Resource Potential
• A photo of a man kneeling in grasses beside a body of water,
apparently writing on something in his hand
MS. SKIBINSKI highlighted the critical need for U.S. mining
policy reform due to [U.S.] over-reliance on adversarial foreign
countries for minerals. She reported that, even if a sharp
policy shift to attract investment were to occur, the U.S. faces
a significant challenge with long permitting timelines,
averaging 29 years to open a new mine, placing it second to last
globally. She said there was some progress, with policymakers
recognizing the urgency and advocating for regulatory
efficiencies while maintaining environmental and safety
standards. She highlighted a January executive order
specifically addressing Alaska's resource potential as a
positive step, positioning Alaska as a key jurisdiction for
mineral and energy development.
3:57:13 PM
MS. SKIBINSKI moved to slide 4, a map of Alaska showing the
locations of mining activity in the state:
• Advanced Exploration Projects
• Producing Mines
• Community with Mining Industry Employees
MS. SKIBINSKI provided an overview of mining operations and
projects in Alaska, noting that there were about 300 placer
mining operations in the state, which were not included on the
map. She highlighted the Fort Knox and Pogo gold mines in the
interior, Usibelli Coal Mine in Healy, and Mahn Cho in Tetlin.
Southeast Alaska operations include the Kensington gold mine and
Greens Creek. Upcoming projects include Donlin Gold and the
Pebble Project. Advanced exploration projects such as the Upper
Kobuk Mineral Projects, Graphite Creek, Livengood, Golden
Summit, Palmer, and Niblack are also discussed. She emphasized
the significant presence of mining industry employees in over 95
Alaska communities, particularly in rural areas with limited job
opportunities.
3:59:38 PM
SENATOR MYERS noted the 300 placer mines in Alaska and said he
associated placer mining with gold. He asked whether placer
mining was used for other minerals.
3:59:55 PM
MS. SKIBINSKI answered that there had been platinum placer mines
in the past and she could get back to the committee about
whether there was current platinum placer mining. She said gold
was the object of placer mining.
4:00:17 PM
MS. SCHUERCH began a presentation on Red Dog Mine operations.
She said the mine was located about 600 miles north of
Anchorage, approximately 100 miles north of the Arctic Circle,
90 miles north of Kotzebue, which is the hub of the NANA Region.
She said the NANA Region shares the same geographic boundaries
as the Northwest Arctic Borough.
4:00:46 PM
MS. SCHUERCH moved to and narrated slide 6:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Red Dog Operations
World's Largest Zinc Producer
Red Dog Operations
• NANA is the landowner
• Teck is the operator
World Class Operation
• World's Largest Zinc Producer
Red Dog Deposits
• Main (mined out)
• Aqqaluk (2010 start)
• Qanaiyaq (2017 start)
Current Life of Mine 2031
• Aktigiruq deposit could extend mine life (State
of Alaska resource)
4:02:18 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether the Red Dog Mine would be
closing in 2031.
4:02:23 PM
MS. SCHUERCH said Teck had an Advance Exploration Project on
state lands. She said they were working with NANA and other
partners around the region toward mine life extension efforts in
the hope that the Red Dog Mine would not shut down in 2031. She
said five more years of exploration were required prior to
deciding whether the deposits were economic to develop. If they
are, she said, the hope would be to enter an agreement with NANA
to use the existing infrastructure and facilities located on
NANA lands, including the mill and the DeLong Mountain
Transportation System that connects the mine to the port site.
4:03:21 PM
MS. SCHUERCH moved to slide 7 and highlighted the environmental
and subsistence protections in place at Red Dog since its
operations began. She said the subsistence committee,
established under a 1982 agreement between NANA and Cominco,
provided oversight to include consideration for various aspects
[of mine operations] including shipping seasons, caribou
migration, and marine mammal migrations. Comprised of hunters
and elders from nearby communities like Noatak and Kivalina, the
committee focuses on developing policies that incorporate local
and traditional knowledge to ensure sustainable operations:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Red Dog Subsistence Committee
Protecting Subsistence and the Environment
Formed as part of the 1982 NANA/Cominco (Teck)
Operating Agreement
Four hunters and Elders represent each of the nearby
communities of Noatak and Kivalina
[Slide 7 is a photo of the Red Dog Mine with caribou
on the foreground slope. There is also an inset photo
of ten men posing outdoors. The photo is labeled,
First Committee.]
4:04:49 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted the significance of the subsistence
protection committee.
4:05:25 PM
MS. SCHUERCH mentioned that other projects around the state have
followed the example set by the Red Dog Mine to implement
Oversight committees.
4:06:06 PM
MS. SCHUERCH moved to slide 8 and explained that the port site,
located 52 miles from the mine site, operates with a short 100-
day shipping season. During this time, fuel is replenished,
freight barges are used for construction supplies, and
concentrate stored over the winter is transported to market.
Operations must balance with the local Inupiat people's
subsistence hunts. The subsistence committee advises on this
balance. She told about a recent time when Red Dog management
deferred to the committee's recommendation to delay operations,
showing respect for the community's subsistence hunting needs.
She expressed appreciation for this collaborative approach and
its recognition as an effective model in Alaska:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Protecting Subsistence and the Environment
Through Co-design and collaboration
Red Dog Operations and the Committee co-designed a
process and protocols to adapt to marine mammal
hunting activities to minimize interference.
[Slide 8 includes inset photos of a fuel barge, a
freight barge, concentrate loading, and marine
wildlife.]
4:08:32 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked whether there was observably more open sea
as the climate changed.
4:08:41 PM
MS. SCHUERCH said, in general, the arctic was experiencing that,
but there are variations from region to region and from year to
year. She said the changes were being monitored by the
subsistence committee and by the operation as they make
decisions.
4:09:35 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked whether the barges and concentrate vessels
encounter increased traffic through the Bering Strait. She asked
whether it seemed busier with foreign vessels.
4:09:55 PM
MS. SCHUERCH said she would follow up with an answer for the
committee.
4:10:36 PM
CHRIS ECKERT, Senior Environmental Coordinator, Donlin Gold,
Anchorage, Alaska, introduced himself and moved to slide 9, a
satellite photo providing the Project Overview for Donlin Gold.
The image covers the area from Pitkas Point in the west to Cook
Inlet in the east and from Takotna in the north to Port
Allsworth in the south.
4:11:17 PM
MR. ECKERT noted [Donlin Gold's] preference to hire within the
Calista region. He said Donlin also formed a subsistence
committee similar to that at the Red Dog mine and that the newly
formed committee was looking to the experience of the Red Dog
subsistence committee to guide them as they move forward.
4:13:02 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted the natural gas pipeline and asked
whether Donlin had LNG permits or gas sales contract or
prospects for acquiring gas.
4:13:20 PM
MR. ECKERT said Donlin had right of way permits for the gas
pipeline but did not have gas sale contracts in place. He said
Donlin would be giving a presentation to the House Energy
Committee with more details on the natural gas pipeline.
4:13:56 PM
MR. ECKERT moved to slide 10, Aquatic Resources Monitoring,
consisting of photos of stream monitoring activity. He explained
that Donlin was conducting environmental monitoring activities
in the Crooked Creek drainage, which included quarterly baseline
samples to assess water conditions before discharge. They were
also monitoring to determine the impact of barge traffic on the
Kuskokwim River, particularly on the rainbow smelt, by modeling
wake zones to prevent erosion during spawning. He said they were
also sampling the rainbow smelt to establish a baseline for
future monitoring of potential impacts from barge activity. He
said these efforts aimed to maintain the overall health of the
river and its ecosystem.
4:15:18 PM
MR. ECKERT moved to slide 11, Snow Gulch Restoration Project,
consisting of a photo of a pond-like body of water, surrounded
by grasses and trees. He said Donlin had a wetlands impact
mitigation plan to comply with the core permit for the project.
He said the photo was a fines pond from a historic placer mine
which Donlin increased from two to five acres and altered the
slope angle of the pond to provide good rearing habitat for
salmon smolt. He highlighted the outlet of the pond and
described the expectation that natural discharge channels would
form, influenced by beaver activity and ensuring dynamic and
natural habitat changes. He described the plan to restore Snow
Gulch Creek from a straight-line channel to a more natural
sinuous curve, providing more habitat for salmon. He said Donlin
would monitor these efforts to make sure the plan was working
before proceeding to another 200 acres.
4:16:54 PM
MR. ECKERT moved to slide 12, Kuskokwim River Fisheries Projects
Salmon Smolt Monitoring George River Fish Weir. The slide
included several pictures of salmon smolt collection activity.
He said the smolt monitoring project was a community project
designed to resolve a gap in the data for the escapement and
survivability of salmon smolts in the Kuskokwim River. The hope
is to help discover challenges to the salmon population and the
reasons for the decline. He emphasized that Donlin's role was to
work with the village of Napamiute by providing technical
support and some fisheries consultants to build up the local
knowledge so that then [the community] can handle it. He
emphasized that Donlin did not intend to steward the project
indefinitely.
4:19:15 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL commented that Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) would benefit from the data Donlin would be collecting.
4:19:26 PM
MR. ECKERT said there was currently no program to monitor salmon
smolt escapement on the Kuskokwim River. He said there would be
collaboration with ADF&G biologists to gain a wholistic
understanding of salmon in the Kuskokwim.
4:19:54 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted community benefits and asked how the
[ANCSA]7(i) revenue sharing would be affected by Donlin shifting
its mining activity from Native Corporation lands to state land.
4:20:30 PM
MR. ECKERT said the royalties that Calista earned from the gold
would be part of the 7(i) revenues. He did not know what the
projected royalty would be.
4:21:03 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked when the mine was expected to open.
4:21:16 PM
MR. ECKERT said the federal permitting was completed in 2018. He
said there were appeals filed by various environmental groups
for the permits that were issued and he anticipated that the
appeals would take another two years to complete. Following the
appeals and the results of ongoing drilling to firm up the ore
body and the mine plan, he said the project sanctioning and
investment decision would follow. After that would be two to
three years of advanced engineering and three to four years of
construction. He said the mine would operate for 27 years before
closure.
4:22:21 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR concluded that it would be about eight to ten
years before gold would be produced on-site.
4:22:36 PM
MR. ECKERT affirmed his conclusion, provided the [project
sanction] decision was to proceed.
4:22:49 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR noted that if Red Dog stops producing from their
current lands in 2031, there will be a gap of a couple of years
when there will be a significant dip in the 7(i) funds. He hoped
[affected entities] were anticipating [the gap] as they plan
their budgets.
4:23:33 PM
BRONK JORGENSEN, Placer Miner, Fortymile Mining District,
Chicken, Alaska, introduced himself and said reclamation for
family placer mining operations was very challenging. He
compared placer mining with large hard rock mining operations.
He explained that "placer" means "free" and placer mining was
the source of gold nuggets, where hard rock mines must grind up
the rock [to free the gold]. He said placer mining was currently
done the same way it was done a few hundred years ago.
MR. JORGENSEN said over the last 20 years, reclamation and
stream restoration has become a changing and unpredictable part
of placer mining, due to changes in the regulatory environment.
But, he said placer miners have been able to manage it and set
some standards over time that will help things move forward.
MR. JORGENSEN referred to slide 13: Placer mining in Fortymile
Mining District and said the two aerial photos were of Franklin
Gulch in the Fortymile Mining District between Tok and Eagle. He
emphasized that Franklin was where gold was first discovered in
1886, 10 years before the Klondike discovery in the Yukon. The
creek was extensively hand mined by the old timers up until the
1930s when a flood took out most of the handmade dams on the
creek. He described the operations of placer mining and
concurrent preparations for reclamation visible in each aerial
photograph.
4:28:08 PM
MR. JORGENSEN moved to slide 14, a satellite image of Franklin
Creek with extensive highlighting. He said he included the image
to demonstrate how complicated it can get when government
agencies get involved and start turning your mining operation
into a science project.
4:28:45 PM
MR. JORGENSEN moved to slide 15, two photos depicting during and
after conditions of a reclaimed creek. He said in the left
photo, the banks had been sloped and overburden respread with
dirt, trees, shrubs, and any material set aside to help
stabilize them. He pointed out the effort to reconstruct the
stream channel.
MR. JORGENSEN noted that the photo on the right illustrated that
[the banks] were regrowing and the stream was re-established. He
said the government engineers would like to make this more
difficult than it is. He quoted his brother's approach to stream
bank reclamation, "Just build it like a beaver: mix rocks, logs,
sticks and dirt of all different sizes around and get them
placed in there, and Mother Nature will regrow it." He said that
was a success in this Gulch; there were fish before [placer
mining], during, and there were fish there now.
4:30:39 PM
SENATOR MYERS asked how many years elapsed between the two
pictures on slide 15.
4:30:50 PM
MR. JORGENSEN said the picture on the left was taken late in the
fall as evidenced by the low water volume in the creek. He said
the main work was done late in the fall and redivert [the
stream] so in the spring, before any fish are present, the new
channel is established. He said the time between the two photos
was about three years.
4:31:19 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that placer mining began on Franklin
Creek in the late 1800s. He observed that there had likely been
no studies on anadromous fish during that time and asked for
confirmation that there were fish there presently.
4:31:37 PM
MR. JORGENSEN answered that there were no salmon in the
Fortymile Mining District. He said there were graylings,
whitefish, and some other fry. He said the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) did an extensive study on the creek because of
the mining activity and found an amazing [number] of fish.
4:32:15 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI described the mining license fee structure,
which varied based on the net income of the mine. For net
incomes below $50,000, the rate is three percent. Between
$50,000 and $100,000, it's a $1,500 flat fee plus five percent;
Over $100,000, the fee includes a $4,000 fixed amount plus seven
percent of the excess. He asked what Mr. Jorgensen thought of
those fees, which were developed in the 1950s.
4:33:10 PM
MR. JORGENSEN said he pays the tax and felt it was a fair and
reasonable tax. He opined that it did not overburden small
placer miners. He said placer mining was a challenging business.
He clarified that all mines in [Alaska] pay the state mining
license tax. He said the Fortymile Mining District was on
federal property and did not pay state rents or royalties, but
they do pay the mining tax. He opined that everyone who was
pulling minerals out of the state should pay and that [the
formula] developed and in use was a good metric.
4:34:03 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that the fees were developed around 60
years ago.
4:34:31 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked what percentage of the people employed by
Mr. Jorgensen were [Alaska] residents and what percentage of the
employees were seasonal.
4:34:53 PM
MR. JORGENSEN said his business also did mine service work, so
his typical payroll was five to twelve employees and 90-95
percent were local; currently he had six full-time employees,
three of whom were Alaska native.
4:35:35 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked Mr. Jorgenson for his presentation. She
appreciated the opportunity to hear the placer mining
perspective.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked Ms. Schuerch how much Red Dog contributed to
the [ANCSA] 7(i) [revenue sharing].
4:36:13 PM
MS. SCHUERCH answered that a portion of the upcoming
presentation specifically addressed the Red Dog contribution to
7(i).
4:36:32 PM
MS. MATTHIAS moved to slide 19:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Alaska NATIVE CORPORATIONS
All Alaska Native Corporations benefit from mining
through 7(i) and (j) royalty sharing payments
$3.2 billion
in total royalty
payments since 1989
$235 million
in royalty payments to Alaska
Native Corporations in 2023
[Slide 19 includes a map of Alaska illustrating the
regions of the twelve Native Corporations.]
MS. MATTHIAS explained the ANCSA requirement for revenue sharing
of mineral or timber development on native land, specifically
section 7(i), which mandated that 50 percent of royalties to
Native Corporations must be distributed among the 12 regional
corporations, and that 50 percent of each regional corporation's
share must be allocated to village corporations. She noted that
oil development was minimal on [Arctic Slope Regional
Corporation] (ASRC) lands. She emphasized that Red Dog, a
significant contributor since 1989, provided $3.2 billion to
NANA, with $235 million in 2023. The total is sometimes reported
differently due to the split of payments, with NANA receiving
$112 million after distributing 70 percent to the other 12
corporations.
4:38:26 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR commented that 7(i) funds were very useful to
village corporations and to regional corporations. He recalled
recent controversy over whether to include carbon storage in the
accounting for timber development. He said $235 million was a
lot of money, but that when it was divided up so much, it paled
in comparison with the [ANCSA] 8(a) program, which was hundreds
of millions per regional corporation. He noted that the
corporations were now $1 billion or $multi billion revenue
companies and while it was concerning that the [Red Dog] money
might go away, perhaps it was not catastrophic to the
corporations. He invited comments.
4:39:21 PM
MS. MATTHIAS said the Institute for Social and Economic Research
(ISER) at University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) found that two-
thirds of Alaska Native village corporations heavily relied on
the 7(j) share for their survival, and that it was existential
for some villages to receive them. She also said for some
regional corporations, early in their development when
investments didn't go as well as they would have liked, the 7(i)
share was one of their biggest forms of revenue.
4:40:18 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR appreciated the attention to the village
corporations. He said 7(i) funds were a unique funding source
and many of the small villages did not have the personnel to
compete for Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority
(AIDEA) contracts. He concluded that the loss of [Red Dog
revenues] was concerning for them.
4:40:49 PM
MS. SCHUERCH underscored the importance of 7(i) and 7(j) shares
across Alaska. She acknowledged significant planning by the
native corporations in preparation for the anticipated fiscal
cliff.
MS. SCHUERCH pointed out that February 25th, 2025, was Juneau
Mining Day and there would be a panel with representatives from
NANA and the Bristol Bay Native Corporation speaking about 7(i)
and 7(j) sharing. She encouraged the committee to attend.
4:42:23 PM
MS. MATTHIAS moved to slide 16:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Jobs and Training for Alaskans
11,000 Total Jobs
$1.1 billion Annual Wages
72 Percent Average # of AK residents
employed at the 6 large mines
90 + Communities where mining
employees live
$1.5 million Invested in UA and vocational
programs
[Slide 16 includes an inset photo of a poster
promoting an Underground Mine Training Camp.]
MS. MATTHIAS said the mining industry in Alaska, per the August
2024 study by McKinley Research Group, supported 11,800 jobs
with a payroll exceeding $1 billion in 2023. Jobs included
direct, indirect, and induced employment. She said the mining
industry invests $1.5 million in vocational programs to train
Alaskans, offering high-paying jobs averaging $122,000 annually,
double the state average. She said people employed in the mining
industry contributed significantly to local economies, with 90+
communities benefiting. She noted ongoing challenges including a
tight labor market and housing issues, particularly in Southeast
Alaska, which affected industry and communities.
4:47:12 PM
SENATOR MYERS discussed his concern that [Alaskan] ownership of
mining businesses was important as was hiring Alaskans for
mining positions. He related a constituent's difficulty in
securing capital to develop an antimony mine. He noted that
small scale mining operations faced financing difficulty
broadly.
4:48:07 PM
MS. SKIBINSKI concurred and highlighted the challenge of
accessing capital for small miners, noting that traditional
financing is often unavailable due to the high risk and
uncertainty of profitability in small-scale mining projects. She
mentioned a current focus on antimony, with significant interest
in military-grade antimony, particularly a high-profile project
in Northern Idaho and discussions about reserves in Fairbanks
and the West Susitna area. She offered to assist the constituent
whose story Senator Myers related.
4:49:40 PM
SENATOR MYERS expressed appreciation for her offer. He noted the
importance of keeping wages in the state and said it was also
important to local economies to keep [mine/business] ownership
in the state. He said if capital was an issue, it may be
something warranting consideration.
4:50:25 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI said that the Department of Labor published a
recent report which said non-residents accounted for more than
half of the mining worker increase over the last three years. He
acknowledged that different areas had different rates of non-
resident hire. He said solutions to housing challenges had
proven elusive and asked what could be done by the legislature
to ensure that residents were hired first.
4:51:46 PM
MS. MATTHIAS answered that the mining industry in Alaska saw a
0.5 percent increase in non-resident workforce over the past
year, with non-resident workers comprising six percent of the
mining and oil industry workforce combined, compared to seven
percent non-resident employment in local and state government.
She said challenges [to hiring mine workers] include remote
operations, rotational shifts, and the need for workers to
commute long distances. She said Juneau's mines were the largest
private sector employers and were finding it necessary to
implement creative recruitment strategies. Efforts include
collaborations with UAS, the Juneau School District, and Alaska
Resource Education (ARE) to raise local awareness and provide
incentives like stipends and job guarantees. She noted that
there's a struggle in all industries to fill positions.
4:55:21 PM
MS. MATTHIAS moved to and narrated slide 17:
[Original punctuation provided.]
STATE GOVERNMENT REVENUES
$136 million
to State of Alaska
$53 million in Mining License Tax
$6 million in Corporate Income Tax
$16 million in rents and royalties
$30 million net to AIDEA for DeLong Mountain Regional
Transportation System
$15 million to Alaska Railroad (coal, sand & gravel)
$17 million in material sales, other fees and taxes
4:55:48 PM
MS. MATTHIAS moved to and narrated slide 18. She noted that
mining entities were the largest single taxpayers in each of the
three major boroughs in Alaska, contributing significantly to
economic stability in those communities:
[Original punctuation provided.]
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES
$49.8 million
to local governments
$34.8 million to Northwest Arctic Borough
$10.6 million to Fairbanks North Star Borough
$4.2 million to City and Borough of Juneau
$200,000 to all other local jurisdictions
4:56:12 PM
MS. MATTHIAS returned to slide 17. She emphasized that Alaska's
mining industry pays various taxes and fees beyond the mining
license tax, notably mines paid corporate income tax, rents,
royalties, and contribute to state agencies including the Alaska
Railroad and the Alaska Mental Health Trust. Additionally, the
mining license tax is a percentage applied to net income
exceeding $100,000, so the big mines were paying in the
millions. She observed that Alaska's corporate income tax
remains consistently high at 9.4 percent, unaffected by
inflation, suggesting stability in the state's revenue
collection despite fluctuating market conditions.
4:58:09 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked how many [mining entities] were paying
corporate tax versus those which were non-taxable entities, for
example LLCs or S corporations.
4:58:26 PM
MS. MATTHIAS said all the [large] mines paid [state] corporate
taxes and none were S corporations. She said she did not know
about placer mines.
4:58:43 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR observed that placer mines probably were LLCs or
S corporations. He pointed out that $6 million in Corporate
Income tax, [reported on slide 17] implied that the mines made
only $60 million. He said that did not seem possible given that
wages were $1.1 billion, and it had been reported that billions
of dollars in gold were produced. He asked why the [net revenue
and corporate tax] numbers were so small.
4:59:22 PM
MS. MATTHIAS said the net benefit study by the Institute for
Social and Economic Research (ISER) covered a five-year average
to mitigate fluctuations in commodity prices, inflation and
operating costs and the differences between fiscal years and
calendar years. She said [the data for the presentation] was
from the year 2023 during which there were lower prices,
especially for zinc and lead, inflation pressure was strong and
there were higher operating costs for many mines. There were
also one-time impacts of refiling fiscal year 2024 [taxes],
which she pointed out was 2023 [calendar year] data. She said
the numbers for 2024 were not yet available and it may be
difficult to obtain meaningful numbers until we have moved
beyond the pandemic years.
5:01:39 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked all the presenters. She particularly
commended the three women leading the presentation. She pointed
out that in the 1960's they would not have been allowed at the
table, because it was not believed then that women could
comprehend complex issues.
5:02:29 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Giessel adjourned the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting at 5:02 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CSSB 61 Explanation of Changes.pdf |
SRES 2/24/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SB 61 |
| I.pdf |
SRES 2/24/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SB 61 |
| SB 61 Zender Environmental Presentation.pdf |
SRES 2/24/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SB 61 |
| 2.24.25 Senate Resource Committee Mining Update.pdf |
SRES 2/24/2025 3:30:00 PM |
Mining Update |
| Mining Update Handout.pdf |
SRES 2/24/2025 3:30:00 PM |
Mining Update |