Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205

02/09/2018 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
03:30:00 PM Start
03:30:54 PM SB86
03:56:04 PM SB166
04:39:27 PM Overview: Arctic Strategic Transportation & Resources Project (astar)
05:06:43 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
+ Overview: Arctic Strategic Transportation TELECONFERENCED
& Resources Project (ASTAR)
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
        SB 166-MINING: CLAIMS;RIGHTS;RENTAL RATES;LABOR                                                                     
3:56:04 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  GIESSEL  announced consideration  of  SB  166 relating  to                                                               
mining statements of labor. This  bill is from the administration                                                               
and it  is being managed  by the Department of  Natural Resources                                                               
(DNR).  This  committee  held an  informational  hearing  on  the                                                               
subject of the mining claim process on January 22, 2018.                                                                        
ED  KING, Special  Assistant to  the Commissioner,  Department of                                                               
Natural Resources  (DNR), Juneau, Alaska, introduced  himself and                                                               
said the deputy commissioner would start with opening remarks.                                                                  
HEIDI   HANSEN,  Deputy   Commissioner,  Department   of  Natural                                                               
Resources (DNR),  Juneau, Alaska,  said SB 166  is an  attempt to                                                               
help  the  mining  community   solve  an  increasingly  prevalent                                                               
problem of  the unintentional abandonment of  mining claims. This                                                               
bill  provides  one  option  to   begin  the  dialogue,  but  the                                                               
department is happy to work with  the committee and the public to                                                               
find a best outcome for all the parties involved.                                                                               
She noted  that a mining  claim is structurally different  than a                                                               
lease agreement. A mining claim  is a self-initiated right, which                                                               
is perpetuated by the miner's  actions. Failure to meet the legal                                                               
requirements  to  maintain  a  claim  results  in  the  automatic                                                               
termination of the claim by  operation of law not by departmental                                                               
action. The  department has little discretionary  authority under                                                               
the current statute to "forgive"  errors on affidavits or failure                                                               
to  pay rent.  The rights,  themselves, and  the preservation  of                                                               
those rights fall to the claimant.                                                                                              
She explained  that over the  last few years, the  department has                                                               
received   numerous  complaints   that   the  current   statutory                                                               
requirements are too  rigid and punitive, and they  agree in many                                                               
regards.  The department  is  looking for  a  solution that  will                                                               
decrease rather than increase DNR's  administrative burden in the                                                               
face of budget cuts and staff reductions.                                                                                       
3:58:29 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  HANSEN said  the labor  requirement  for a  mining claim  is                                                               
minimal, but the  reality is that the holder of  the mining claim                                                               
is very  likely to  want to  work their  claim to  generate value                                                               
from their  exclusive right  to the  locatable minerals.  A legal                                                               
requirement  to do  that  work is  not  necessary. Meanwhile  the                                                               
requirement to pay rents already  provides an additional economic                                                               
incentive to do that same work.                                                                                                 
As the  options to address  this issue were evaluated,  it became                                                               
clear that  a simple fix was  not available. A waiver  system was                                                               
considered but  administering it would require  additional staff.                                                               
A   grace  period   was  contemplated   along  with   a  required                                                               
notification  but that,  too, would  put an  increased burden  on                                                               
staff, and as did other alternatives.                                                                                           
The  department came  up with  the idea  of repealing  the annual                                                               
labor  requirement as  a win/win  way to  improve miners'  tenure                                                               
security  without increasing  departmental  workload  and SB  166                                                               
begins the dialogue.                                                                                                            
MR. KING said they had received  a lot of feedback since the bill                                                               
was  introduced and  are preparing  a frequently  asked questions                                                               
(FAQ) to supplement the materials early next week.                                                                              
4:00:40 PM                                                                                                                    
Section  1  is  a  conforming   change  since  the  annual  labor                                                               
requirement is being removed throughout the statute.                                                                            
Sections 2  and 3 surround  the idea  of a "bonafide  miner" that                                                               
they  are  recommending   as  a  new  term   in  state  statutes.                                                               
Basically, someone  that is  taking the  exclusive rights  to the                                                               
state's resources  should have a responsibility  to develop those                                                               
resources.  In  many  ways  the   annual  labor  requirement  was                                                               
ensuring that  work was happening,  and the department  wanted to                                                               
be very clear  that their intention is that a  holder of a mining                                                               
claim still has that obligation  to develop those resources. They                                                               
think that  all the miners who  are out there doing  their annual                                                               
labor today by their actions  have already demonstrated that they                                                               
are bonafide miners. This language is  not an intent to take away                                                               
anyone's  claims.  Even  without this  language,  the  department                                                               
believes it is implied. The bonafide  miner in section 2 is added                                                               
to the qualifications to hold a mining claim in good faith.                                                                     
4:02:25 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the definition of "bonafide miner."                                                                  
MR.  KING replied  that  the  definition is  added  in section  3                                                               
subsection (d) as follows:                                                                                                      
     An entity or person who  seeks to acquire, acquires, or                                                                    
     holds exploration  or mining rights under  AS 38.05.185                                                                    
     -  AS  38.05.275  in  good faith  for  the  purpose  of                                                                    
     mineral  exploration and  development and  not for  the                                                                    
     prevention of mineral exploration and development.                                                                         
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI asked  if he  sees  a lot  of instances  of                                                               
people acquiring land not for  the purpose of mineral exploration                                                               
or development.                                                                                                                 
MR.  KING replied  they don't  go through  that exercise  now but                                                               
that doesn't  mean people aren't  doing it. What they  are trying                                                               
to make  clear through this  legislation is that they  don't want                                                               
to open up a  new way for someone to get  this new opportunity to                                                               
withhold minerals from development.                                                                                             
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked him  to cite  some examples  of lands                                                               
where people  are holding  exploration or  mining rights  for the                                                               
prevention of mineral exploration or development.                                                                               
MS.  HANSEN  replied  more  to  the point,  they  are  trying  to                                                               
encourage the development of mineral exploration and production.                                                                
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he took that as a no.                                                                                 
MR.  KING said  that was  correct. In  removing the  annual labor                                                               
requirement,  they  don't  want  to  create  an  opportunity  for                                                               
someone to get those exclusive  rights and deny them indefinitely                                                               
to someone who wants to develop them.                                                                                           
4:05:01 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR GIESSEL  remarked that the  annual labor report is  kind of                                                               
like a plan  of development for an oil lease  by documenting that                                                               
work was  done.  But if  that requirement is to  be removed, they                                                               
want  to make  sure something  is in  place that  says some  work                                                               
still has  to be done  even though  the department is  not asking                                                               
for the written document.                                                                                                       
MR. KING replied that is their expectation.                                                                                     
4:06:02 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  KING  said  section  3  (c)  of  AS  38.05.090  adds  a  new                                                               
subsection   intended  to   address  how   the  department   will                                                               
administer this  bonafide miner  requirement. He  elaborated that                                                               
in applying  for a lease, the  applicant would have to  submit an                                                               
affidavit  that says  they are  intending to  work that  claim. A                                                               
mining claim doesn't  have that requirement, because  a miner has                                                               
self-initiated  rights:  it is  assumed  that  they are  bonafide                                                               
unless the department asks for  verification, which can be in the                                                               
form of a recorded sworn statement.                                                                                             
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if it  is correct that  under current                                                               
law, someone has to provide an  affidavit that they are doing the                                                               
work on the property.                                                                                                           
MR. KING answered yes.                                                                                                          
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remarked that they  are changing that now so                                                               
that someone  doesn't have to do  the work, and he  asked if they                                                               
think that is going to encourage more mining.                                                                                   
MR. KING replied the issue  is that these unintended abandonments                                                               
create a lot of uncertainty about  whether a claim is still under                                                               
claim. If that can be  clarified, they believe it would encourage                                                               
more investment.  The economic  incentives themselves  will drive                                                               
that investment.                                                                                                                
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how much the annual labor costs.                                                                     
MR. KING said the labor requirement amounts to $100 per year.                                                                   
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he  had thought about extending the                                                               
time  someone has  to actually  perform labor  on their  property                                                               
from one to two years. He added  that he just didn't see how this                                                               
encourages people to do more.                                                                                                   
MR. KING  said he  saw his  point, but the  purpose of  this bill                                                               
isn't to  encourage more  development. It's  to secure  a miner's                                                               
tenure  and to  take away  that  uncertainty that  they might  be                                                               
working a claim  that has been invalidated and  that someone else                                                               
can take  away from them (by  going out and staking  that claim).                                                               
He pointed  out that $100  per year  labor is required,  but more                                                               
labor above  that rolls forward into  the next year(s) -  a miner                                                               
don't have to be  out there every year. And if  a miner can't get                                                               
out to  his claim  and actually  perform the  labor, he  can just                                                               
send a check for $100.                                                                                                          
The  current  environment  isn't doing  anything  to  necessarily                                                               
encourage  that investment.  It's the  miners' actions  and their                                                               
motivation  for economic  gain that  is generating  this resource                                                               
development. That isn't  being taken away, but  the department is                                                               
trying to help  secure that tenure to make  them very comfortable                                                               
to continue investing.                                                                                                          
4:10:03 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR BISHOP  asked if  the $100 is  for a  one-quarter quarter                                                               
section  claim and  commented that  adding quarter  sections gets                                                               
expensive really quick.                                                                                                         
CHAIR GIESSEL said  she was trying to interpret  the problem this                                                               
legislation is  trying to solve  and thought it was  the question                                                               
of top-filing.  Someone else  seeing an unintentional error in an                                                               
annual filing, top-files on a miner  and he loses that claim. DNR                                                               
is trying  to fix  that problem by  removing the  requirement for                                                               
that paperwork. Is that close to what they are doing?                                                                           
MR.  KING clarified  when that  erroneous affidavit  is recorded,                                                               
the abandonment already occurred. It's  not the action of someone                                                               
else  staking  over  that claim  that  invalidates  the  previous                                                               
claim,  and it's  not  a notification  from  the department  that                                                               
abandons that  claim either. The  claimant's actions  making that                                                               
error is what abandoned that claim.                                                                                             
CHAIR  GIESSEL  said  she  was   trying  to  drill  down  to  the                                                               
motivation and asked if there  is no grace period or notification                                                               
of the mistake, and are they trying to fix that, too.                                                                           
MR.  KING  said  that  was correct.  Under  current  statute  the                                                               
department doesn't have any leeway  to forgive an error. It's not                                                               
a decision  that the department  makes and therefore, it's  not a                                                               
decision they can rescind.                                                                                                      
If  the requirement  for annual  labor and  the recording  of the                                                               
annual labor  affidavits is  removed, the  problem goes  away. If                                                               
they  don't want  to go  that far,  they could  consider a  grace                                                               
period. However,  in doing  that, one  of the  goals they  had in                                                               
providing this legislation  was not to increase  the state budget                                                               
and they are  worried that a grace period would  create more work                                                               
for the department.                                                                                                             
4:13:43 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR VON IMHOF asked if  a 60-day grace period could alleviate                                                               
some  of  Senator Wielechowski's  concerns.  She  asked how  many                                                               
errors were  made in  the past  and how much  staff time  a grace                                                               
period would take.                                                                                                              
MR. KING  responded because the abandonment  actually occurs when                                                               
the error  occurs, the error may  have happened 10 years  ago. In                                                               
that case,  a 60-day  grace period would  have also  expired. So,                                                               
unless the  grace period is  attached to a notification  that the                                                               
abandonment has occurred,  there would be no  opportunity to cure                                                               
it, but then the department has to provide the staff to do that.                                                                
SENATOR  VON  IMHOF  said  she   thought  paperwork  is  required                                                               
annually and therefore, it should be caught before 10 years.                                                                    
MR. KING indicated no.                                                                                                          
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  asked  how someone  could  have  abandoned                                                               
their claim 10  years ago and still be paying  the annual fee for                                                               
the same  claim. He asked how  many mining claims there  are each                                                               
year and how many are abandoned.                                                                                                
MR. KING answered there are  about 35,000 mining claims today and                                                               
about 5-10  percent per year  are known  to be abandoned,  but he                                                               
would get better figures for him.                                                                                               
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI asked  if people  are checking  the records                                                               
and taking over a claim.                                                                                                        
4:16:38 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.   KING  answered   yes,  people   are  finding   mistakes  on                                                               
affidavits, over-staking  those claims,  and accusing  the senior                                                               
claimant of being in default  or having abandoned their claim and                                                               
claiming ownership of it. He  corrected that his earlier estimate                                                               
was for "known" abandonments. It's  possible other errors haven't                                                               
been detected. It  creates a property rights issue  that needs to                                                               
be settled in  civil court ultimately, because  when these issues                                                               
have been brought to the  department's attention, it doesn't have                                                               
any tools to do anything about it.                                                                                              
MS. HANSEN added  that a number of people  have expressed concern                                                               
to DNR  that when they  believe that their claims  are abandoned,                                                               
they have  to go  back and  re-stake them,  and depending  on the                                                               
number of  claims, that could  cost a lot,  as well. So,  this is                                                               
not only curing the problem that  Mr. King just mentioned, but it                                                               
also cures this re-staking issue.                                                                                               
MR.  KING said  he was  sure some  of the  committee members  had                                                               
heard about this from their constituents.                                                                                       
CHAIR GIESSEL said, yes, many.                                                                                                  
SENATOR VON  IMHOF said she was  eager to get his  FAQs and asked                                                               
him to  put them in layman's  terms and start with  what concerns                                                               
they are  trying to address,  what they  are proposing to  do and                                                               
what the consequences are.                                                                                                      
MS. HANSEN said she would be happy to do that.                                                                                  
4:19:19 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  BISHOP  said  he  would   provide  a  little  historical                                                               
perspective on  why this discussion  is taking place:  his office                                                               
has files  from people  who have  been on a  staked claim  for 10                                                               
years and through  an error on recording the  affidavit of annual                                                               
labor  they were  sent an  abandonment notice.  In the  meantime,                                                               
someone top-filed over them. So,  after 10 years' worth of effort                                                               
and one  mistake, it's  gone. The top-filer  now has  the ground.                                                               
That  is  just one  example  but  there  are more.  Hopefully,  a                                                               
solution can be found, because he thinks this is wrong.                                                                         
4:21:24 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  KING said  if  there is  a problem  with  the definition  of                                                               
"bonafide miner"  in sections 2  and 3 the  rest of the  bill can                                                               
survive without those provisions.                                                                                               
Section 4  is a  conforming change and  removes the  reference to                                                               
"annual labor"  elsewhere in statute.  Section 5 is  the increase                                                               
in the annual rental payment.                                                                                                   
The  fiscal analysis  for  SB 166  indicates  that repealing  the                                                               
annual  labor  requirement would  result  in  an annual  loss  of                                                               
$584,000 to the state. Currently  there are 21,000 quarter claims                                                               
(each  claim   has  four  40-acre  claims   within  them),  which                                                               
calculates  into a  total  of 85,000  40-acre  claims. There  are                                                               
57,975 acres under lease; if  each of those leases were converted                                                               
to 40-acre claims  that would result in  1,449 equivalent claims.                                                               
Then they have 13,294 actual 40-acre  claims; for a total of just                                                               
under 100,000 40-acre equivalent claims.                                                                                        
4:26:52 PM                                                                                                                    
The rental  amount goes from  $20 to $50 on  page 3, line  29, of                                                               
the bill.  It looks like  it's more  than double. But  he pointed                                                               
out that $20 was put in  place in 1989 and adjusted for inflation                                                               
every 10 years. So, today, miners  pay $35 (for that same zero to                                                               
five-year  old 40-acre  claim).  The last  time  this number  was                                                               
adjusted  for  inflation  was  2009,  so next  year  it  will  be                                                               
adjusted again.  Applying that inflation adjustment  today brings                                                               
one to  the numbers on  the fifth line of  that box on  the third                                                               
page of the  fiscal analysis. If this bill were  not to pass, the                                                               
miners would  be paying $40,  $85, and  $200. The correct  way to                                                               
look at  the rental  increase in  this bill is  to compare  it to                                                               
that baseline.                                                                                                                  
4:28:07 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR BISHOP  asked if the  10-year consumer price  index (CPI)                                                               
increment  in the  statute  is  still at  the  discretion of  the                                                               
MR. KING replied yes; the fee  schedule is updated every 10 years                                                               
by regulation:  so, to the  extent that the commissioner  has the                                                               
authority to implement a regulation.                                                                                            
SENATOR  BISHOP said  that  could  be in  the  FAQ  sheet at  the                                                               
chair's prerogative.                                                                                                            
CHAIR GIESSEL indicated that would be fine.                                                                                     
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  asked  if  this  bill  affects  claims  on                                                               
federal property.                                                                                                               
MR.  KING  replied  that  they  talked  to  the  Bureau  of  Land                                                               
Management (BLM)  to make sure  what this measure  doesn't affect                                                               
federal  claims.  There are  state  requirements  that do  govern                                                               
federal  claims, but  a federal  claim must  also follow  federal                                                               
law, and that  is what state law says. The  department thought it                                                               
made  sense   because  they  were   removing  the   annual  labor                                                               
requirement from  state law  that it  got removed  everywhere. If                                                               
that creates  a problem, there  is no requirement that  the Title                                                               
27 references to annual labor should be repealed.                                                                               
4:29:47 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked what the federal  requirements are to                                                               
establish and keep a mining claim.                                                                                              
MR.  KING replied  that  the  federal law  is  still the  General                                                               
Mining  Act  of  1872,  and  it  requires  just  an  annual  work                                                               
assessment that is also $100 for 40 acres.                                                                                      
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if the  state system is  identical to                                                               
the federal system currently.                                                                                                   
MR.  KING  replied prior  to  1989  it  was; Alaska  adopted  the                                                               
federal  law and  the federal  system at  statehood. However,  in                                                               
1989,  the Supreme  Court  ruled against  the  state and  started                                                               
requiring that  the state also  impose annual rental  and royalty                                                               
payments, which  don't exist for  federal claims. The  debate was                                                               
always  if  Alaska  wants  a location  system  like  the  federal                                                               
government  or   a  leasing  system   that  requires   rents  and                                                               
royalties, and right  now, we have both. So,  they are suggesting                                                               
removing that  annual labor  requirement that  is really  kind of                                                               
4:31:08 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. KING said  they have received many questions  about section 5                                                               
and  he hoped  his  answer  is adequate.  He  would  be happy  to                                                               
discuss the fiscal note with the committee at any time.                                                                         
He said  section 6 is  the inflation adjustment, and  because the                                                               
rental payments are being adjusted,  it makes sense to inflation-                                                               
adjust  the  statutory  requirements into  today's  dollars.  So,                                                               
section  6 rebases  the  inflation index  to  the 2018  timeframe                                                               
instead   of  the   1989  timeframe   in   the  original   rental                                                               
Section  7 maintains  definitions  that would  otherwise be  lost                                                               
through repeal and  those are found in the  annual labor chapter,                                                               
AS 38.05.242.  Because most of  those definitions are  related to                                                               
things   associated  with   annual  labor   the  only   surviving                                                               
definition  that   needs  to  be  maintained   is  the  meridian,                                                               
township,  range  section  claim  (MTRSC). So,  that  section  is                                                               
pulled out of section .242 and moved into section .211.                                                                         
Section  8  is a  conforming  change  that removes  the  repealed                                                               
statutes from the abandonment provision in AS 38.05.065.                                                                        
Section  9  is  a  new  subsection  (c)  that  is  added  to  the                                                               
abandonment section.  It is intended  to help existing  errors on                                                               
affidavits  that are  in existing  files. Because  the department                                                               
doesn't have  the discretion  to grant  them immunity,  they were                                                               
trying to figure  out the best way to allow  those cures to occur                                                               
and decided  to waive  the penalty  associated with  curing those                                                               
abandoned claims.  He explained that section  .265 already allows                                                               
one to cure an abandoned claim that  is the result of an error in                                                               
an essential fact, but it requires paying a penalty.                                                                            
SENATOR BISHOP asked the timeline on that.                                                                                      
MR. KING  replied that no time  is defined in statute  to cure an                                                               
abandonment. It is  indefinite. He added that the  only caveat is                                                               
that  the  cure  provision  doesn't apply  whenever  there  is  a                                                               
competing interest. If two people  assert their rights to a claim                                                               
the  cure can't  happen and  it  must be  litigated before  going                                                               
4:36:03 PM                                                                                                                    
Section 10 repeals the annual labor requirement.                                                                                
Section 11  is transition language  that was inserted  to clarify                                                               
what happens  when annual labor  is removed  in the middle  of an                                                               
annual labor  year. It  creates transition  language to  go along                                                               
with an effective date of September 1.                                                                                          
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI asked  if section  10 repeals  a number  of                                                               
statues that are conforming changes.                                                                                            
MR. KING  answered yes.  It is the  annual labor  requirement and                                                               
all the statutes surrounding the enforcement of it.                                                                             
He  said   section  12   clarifies  the   timing  in   which  the                                                               
commissioner can calculate  the changes of rentals  in each year.                                                               
It clarifies  that the next  inflation adjustment will  happen in                                                               
the year 2028.                                                                                                                  
Section  13 authorizes  the department  to adopt  regulations and                                                               
implement changes that are made by this act.                                                                                    
Section 14 authorizes the department  to amend existing leases to                                                               
conform with statutory  changes in this bill. The  reason that is                                                               
important  is because  a  lease,  unlike a  claim,  is an  actual                                                               
contract and has  contract terms, and the  legislature can't just                                                               
strike a term of a  contract. This language allows the department                                                               
to  take  those terms  out  of  the  lease  to conform  with  the                                                               
statutory changes this bill would be making.                                                                                    
Section 15 provides  for an immediate effective  date for section                                                               
13, and section  16 provides for the effective  date of September                                                               
2 for  first day of  the next  annual labor year.  That concluded                                                               
the provisions in SB 166.                                                                                                       
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked him and  finding no further questions, held                                                               
SB 166 in committee.                                                                                                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
Senate Resources - Hearing Agenda - 2 - 9 - 2018 .pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
CSSB86 - Version J - 1 - 30 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
CSSB86- Explanation of Changes from Version A to Version J - 2- 9 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB 86 - Sectional Version J.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB 86 - Sponsor Statement Version J.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB86 - Fiscal Note - Dept of Commerce - 2 - 2 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB86 - Supporting Document - Letter AK Bankers' Association.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB86 - Supporting Document - Letter from Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation - 2- 2 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB 86 - Frequently Asked Questions.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB166 - Version A.PDF SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB166 - Transmittal Letter from Governor - 1 - 26 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB166 - Fiscal Note DNR - 1 - 25 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB 166 - Repealed Statutes.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB 166 - Fiscal Analysis.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
Senate Resources - Presentation of ASTAR Project from Dept. Natural Resources - 2 - 9 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB86 - Supporting Document - Updated Letter of Support from UCM - 2 - 8 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB 86 - Supporting Document - Letter from Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce - 2 - 9 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB166 Fiscal Note.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB86 - Supporting Document - City of Fairbanks Resolution of Support.PDF SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB86 - Supporting Document - Legislative Legal Memorandum.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
SB166 - Comments - Mike Busby - 2 - 9 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166
SB 86 - Supporting Document - Resolution Fairbanks North Star Borough - 2 - 8 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 86
Senate Resources - Response to Committee Questions - 2 - 21 - 2018.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166 FAQ from DNR.pdf SRES 2/9/2018 3:30:00 PM
SB 166