Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/09/1994 08:15 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 333 - MINING LOCATIONS ON STATE SELECTED LAND CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS advised members there was a draft committee substitute for HB 333 in their folders. JACK PHELPS, AIDE, REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, explained that HB 333 is a simple measure which inserts a definition into Title 38 with respect to selected lands. The definition is important because a large amount of the state is covered by land selections, many which are mineralized. He said there are federal claims on many of the lands. A federal claim, unless it has been patented, is often in question as to whether it is a valid claim. Federal requirements for a valid claim include a marketability standard. When there is a state selection over the top of a federal claim, it is not known if the federal claim is valid. He stated if the claim is valid, it is a federal inholding and has no capability of being conveyed to the state. If it is an invalid federal claim, there is a state selection over the top of it. MR. PHELPS said the Minerals Commission reviewed the problem and felt the way to solve it was to define state selected lands so that a selection is considered a selection for mining claim purposes, regardless of the validity or the effect on any particular piece of the land within that selection. For the purpose of staking a claim, the land is considered selected whether it is validly selected or a topfiled. MR. PHELPS said a person with a federal mine claim might want to convert it to a state claim once the land is patented to the state. That is important to the state because it gets rid of the little pockets of federal inholdings throughout the state selections. He pointed out that the benefits of HB 333 accrue not only to the mining industry but also to the state. Number 080 MR. PHELPS explained the committee substitute was introduced because there were concerns expressed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Native corporations as to how HB 333 will affect their operations. The Native corporations were concerned how HB 333 would affect their Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) topfilings or selections. In many cases, there are state selections and ANCSA selections which overlap. MR. PHELPS explained to solve the problem, subsection (b)(2) was added. It says if there is a pending selection of an ANCSA corporation, it is exempted. This raised new questions. What if a person already has an at-risk claim on land which is both selected by the state and ANCSA? That question led the sponsor to add Section 2 of the bill, which says even though ANCSA selections are exempted from the new definition of state selected lands, any existing at-risk claims lying in those areas are not affected. He said if the ANCSA selection goes away, if the state selection attaches by conveyance, etc. the person who has an at-risk claim becomes the first (indiscernible). Number 108 MR. PHELPS continued that Section l, subsection (c), lines five and six, were added because of legitimate concerns expressed by the Division of Land regarding the division's ability to decide which lands will be tentatively approved to the state. REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN said it was his understanding that in the Statehood Act, land conveyed to the state for the purpose of making the state solvent had to convey land in fee and the state had to maintain the mineral rights. He asked if there is an attachment on the mineral rights through a prior federal claim, can land selected be conveyed with that encumbrance. MR. PHELPS responded that land with a federal claim is not conveyed to the state and continues to be a federal inholding as long as the miner maintains the claim. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN questioned if a person holding a federal mining claim does not want to convert it to a state claim, could there be legal ramifications at a later date. MR. PHELPS responded that could happen. However, the claims being discussed are very small, 1500 by 660 feet. He said realistically it will be a very long time before the state's land selections are settled. He added that the longer it takes, the more likely that the more valuable mineralization areas will be identified. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he was concerned that a judge may rule the land cannot be conveyed as long as it is federal and at some time, the person might lose his claim. MR. PHELPS responded that once a mechanism is provided for a miner to convert from a federal to a state claim, the likelihood for him doing that is increased. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked Mr. Phelps to again speak to Section 2 and questioned the date of April 14, 1966, contained in that section. MR. PHELPS said Section 1, subsection (b)(2) exempts anything which has a pending ANCSA selection over it. If HB 333 passes, there will be no ability for a person to go into an ANCSA selected land until the Native corporation is satisfied. He noted the date April 14, 1966, is used because that is the date AS 38.05.275 was effective. He stressed that under CSHB 333(RES), all land which is under a pending ANCSA selection is protected. Number 220 REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY made a motion to ADOPT the committee substitute for HB 333. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked for objections to the motion and, hearing none, CSHB 333(RES) was ADOPTED. Number 230 REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY made a motion to ADOPT the proposed amendments to CSHB 333(RES). CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS read the proposed amendments: 1. page 1, lines 7-11, delete all material and insert: "(1) means land for which the state has filed a selection application with the United States under Sec. 6 of the Alaska Statehood Act, as amended, regardless of the validity or effect of the application, if the selection described in the application has not been rejected or relinquished;" 2. page 1, line 14 - page 2, line 1, delete all material and insert: "corporation organized under 43 U.S.C. 1607(a), as amended, a Native group corporation that qualifies for a land conveyance under 43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(2), as amended, or a Native urban corporation that qualifies for a land conveyance under 43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(3), as amended, has" 3. page 2, line 11: delete [AS 27.10 or AS 38.05.195] insert "AS 38.05.185 - 38.05.275 or in the manner described in AS 27.10" 4. page 2, line 16: delete [AS 27.10.050 or AS 38.05.195] insert "AS 38.05.185 - 38.05.275 or in the manner described in AS 27.10" Number 245 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the motion. Hearing none, the AMENDMENTS were ADOPTED. Number 257 JERRY GALLAGHER, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, AND DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, stressed HB 333 is simple and straightforward. He expressed support of CSHB 333. It allows a miner who has federal mining claims to change over to state mining claims without having a gap of time in his title. He said currently if a person owns a federal mining claim and the state has topfiled it with a land selection, that land selection is not real because the state can only select vacant, unappropriated land. If a miner has a federal claim and wants to convert it to a state claim, that person has to go to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and give them a relinquish document. Then the person has to go back out in the field and stake a state mining claim. Mr. Gallagher emphasized that CSHB 333(RES) allows a person to stake a state mining claim on a federal claim. Number 308 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON made a motion to MOVE CSHB 333(RES) as amended with INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS and a zero fiscal note. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the motion. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED. ANNOUNCEMENTS CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the committee will meet Friday, February 11 at 8:15 a.m. to take up SB 153. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the House Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 9:25 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|