+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    maksutaSTAR Guest

    HR 699 New Mining Law

    [111th CONGRESS House Bills]
    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
    [DOCID: h699ih.txt]
    [Introduced in House]






    111th CONGRESS
    1st Session
    H. R. 699

    To modify the requirements applicable to locatable minerals on public
    domain lands, consistent with the principles of self-initiation of
    mining claims, and for other purposes.


    _______________________________________________________________________


    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    January 27, 2009

    Mr. Rahall (for himself, Mr. George Miller of California, Mr. Waxman,
    Mr. Markey of Massachusetts, Mr. Berman, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Costa, Mrs.
    Christensen, Mr. Holt, Mr. Stark, Mr. Kildee, Mr. Hinchey, Ms. Eshoo,
    Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kind, Mrs. Capps, Mr. Schiff, Mr.
    Honda, Mr. Salazar, and Ms. Tsongas) introduced the following bill;
    which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

    _______________________________________________________________________

    A BILL



    To modify the requirements applicable to locatable minerals on public
    domain lands, consistent with the principles of self-initiation of
    mining claims, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
    United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Hardrock Mining
    and Reclamation Act of 2009''.
    (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
    follows:

    Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
    Sec. 2. Definitions and references.
    Sec. 3. Application rules.
    TITLE I--MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

    Sec. 101. Limitation on patents.
    Sec. 102. Royalty.
    Sec. 103. Hardrock mining claim maintenance fee.
    Sec. 104. Effect of payments for use and occupancy of claims.
    TITLE II--PROTECTION OF SPECIAL PLACES

    Sec. 201. Lands open to location.
    Sec. 202. Withdrawal petitions by States, political subdivisions, and
    Indian tribes.
    TITLE III--ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS OF MINERAL EXPLORATION AND
    DEVELOPMENT

    Sec. 301. General standard for hardrock mining on Federal land.
    Sec. 302. Permits.
    Sec. 303. Exploration permit.
    Sec. 304. Operations permit.
    Sec. 305. Persons ineligible for permits.
    Sec. 306. Financial assurance.
    Sec. 307. Operation and reclamation.
    Sec. 308. State law and regulation.
    Sec. 309. Limitation on the issuance of permits.
    TITLE IV--MINING MITIGATION

    Subtitle A--Locatable Minerals Fund

    Sec. 401. Establishment of Fund.
    Sec. 402. Contents of Fund.
    Sec. 403. Subaccounts.
    Subtitle B--Use of Hardrock Reclamation Account

    Sec. 411. Use and objectives of the Account.
    Sec. 412. Eligible lands and waters.
    Sec. 413. Expenditures.
    Sec. 414. Authorization of appropriations.
    Subtitle C--Use of Hardrock Community Impact Assistance Account

    Sec. 421. Use and objectives of the Account.
    Sec. 422. Allocation of funds.
    TITLE V--ADMINISTRATIVE AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

    Subtitle A--Administrative Provisions

    Sec. 501. Policy functions.
    Sec. 502. User fees.
    Sec. 503. Inspection and monitoring.
    Sec. 504. Citizens suits.
    Sec. 505. Administrative and judicial review.
    Sec. 506. Enforcement.
    Sec. 507. Regulations.
    Sec. 508. Effective date.
    Subtitle B--Miscellaneous Provisions

    Sec. 511. Oil shale claims.
    Sec. 512. Purchasing power adjustment.
    Sec. 513. Savings clause.
    Sec. 514. Availability of public records.
    Sec. 515. Miscellaneous powers.
    Sec. 516. Multiple mineral development and surface resources.
    Sec. 517. Mineral materials.

    SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS AND REFERENCES.

    (a) In General.--As used in this Act:
    (1) The term ``affiliate'' means with respect to any
    person, any of the following:
    (A) Any person who controls, is controlled by, or
    is under common control with such person.
    (B) Any partner of such person.
    (C) Any person owning at least 10 percent of the
    voting shares of such person.
    (2) The term ``applicant'' means any person applying for a
    permit under this Act or a modification to or a renewal of a
    permit under this Act.
    (3) The term ``beneficiation'' means the crushing and
    grinding of locatable mineral ore and such processes as are
    employed to free the mineral from other constituents, including
    but not necessarily limited to, physical and chemical
    separation techniques.
    (4) The term ``casual use''--
    (A) subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), means
    mineral activities that do not ordinarily result in any
    disturbance of public lands and resources;
    (B) includes collection of geochemical, rock, soil,
    or mineral specimens using handtools, hand panning, or
    nonmotorized sluicing; and
    (C) does not include--
    (i) the use of mechanized earth-moving
    equipment, suction dredging, or explosives;
    (ii) the use of motor vehicles in areas
    closed to off-road vehicles;
    (iii) the construction of roads or drill
    pads; and
    (iv) the use of toxic or hazardous
    materials.
    (5) The term ``claim holder'' means a person holding a
    mining claim, millsite claim, or tunnel site claim located
    under the general mining laws and maintained in compliance with
    such laws and this Act. Such term may include an agent of a
    claim holder.
    (6) The term ``control'' means having the ability, directly
    or indirectly, to determine (without regard to whether
    exercised through one or more corporate structures) the manner
    in which an entity conducts mineral activities, through any
    means, including without limitation, ownership interest,
    authority to commit the entity's real or financial assets,
    position as a director, officer, or partner of the entity, or
    contractual arrangement.
    (7) The term ``exploration''--
    (A) subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), means
    creating surface disturbance other than casual use, to
    evaluate the type, extent, quantity, or quality of
    minerals present;
    (B) includes mineral activities associated with
    sampling, drilling, and analyzing locatable mineral
    values; and
    (C) does not include extraction of mineral material
    for commercial use or sale.
    (8) The term ``Federal land'' means any land, and any
    interest in land, that is owned by the United States and open
    to location of mining claims under the general mining laws and
    title II of this Act.
    (9) The term ``Indian lands'' means lands held in trust for
    the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual or held by an
    Indian tribe or individual subject to a restriction by the
    United States against alienation.
    (10) The term ``Indian tribe'' means any Indian tribe,
    band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or community,
    including any Alaska Native village or regional corporation as
    defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims
    Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), that is recognized as
    eligible for the special programs and services provided by the
    United States to Indians because of their status as Indians.
    (11) The term ``locatable mineral''--
    (A) subject to subparagraph (B), means any mineral,
    the legal and beneficial title to which remains in the
    United States and that is not subject to disposition
    under any of--
    (i) the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181
    et seq.);
    (ii) the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30
    U.S.C. 1001 et seq.);
    (iii) the Act of July 31, 1947, commonly
    known as the Materials Act of 1947 (30 U.S.C.
    601 et seq.); or
    (iv) the Mineral Leasing for Acquired Lands
    Act (30 U.S.C. 351 et seq.); and
    (B) does not include any mineral that is subject to
    a restriction against alienation imposed by the United
    States and is--
    (i) held in trust by the United States for
    any Indian or Indian tribe, as defined in
    section 2 of the Indian Mineral Development Act
    of 1982 (25 U.S.C. 2101); or
    (ii) owned by any Indian or Indian tribe,
    as defined in that section.
    (12) The term ``mineral activities'' means any activity on
    a mining claim, millsite claim, or tunnel site claim for,
    related to, or incidental to, mineral exploration, mining,
    beneficiation, processing, or reclamation activities for any
    locatable mineral.
    (13) The term ``National Conservation System unit'' means
    any unit of the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge
    System, National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, or National
    Trails System, or a National Conservation Area, a National
    Recreation Area, a National Monument, or any unit of the
    National Wilderness Preservation System.
    (14) The term ``operator'' means any person proposing or
    authorized by a permit issued under this Act to conduct mineral
    activities and any agent of such person.
    (15) The term ``person'' means an individual, Indian tribe,
    partnership, association, society, joint venture, joint stock
    company, firm, company, corporation, cooperative, or other
    organization and any instrumentality of State or local
    government including any publicly owned utility or publicly
    owned corporation of State or local government.
    (16) The term ``processing'' means processes downstream of
    beneficiation employed to prepare locatable mineral ore into
    the final marketable product, including but not limited to
    smelting and electrolytic refining.
    (17) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
    Interior, unless otherwise specified.
    (18) The term ``temporary cessation'' means a halt in mine-
    related production activities for a continuous period of no
    longer than 5 years.
    (19) The term ``undue degradation'' means irreparable harm
    to significant scientific, cultural, or environmental resources
    on public lands that cannot be effectively mitigated.
    (b) Valid Existing Rights.--As used in this Act, the term ``valid
    existing rights'' means a mining claim or millsite claim located on
    lands described in section 201(b), that--
    (1) was properly located and maintained under the general
    mining laws prior to the date of enactment of this Act;
    (2) was supported by a discovery of a valuable mineral
    deposit within the meaning of the general mining laws on the
    date of enactment of this Act, or satisfied the limitations
    under existing law for millsite claims; and
    (3) continues to be valid under this Act.
    (c) References to Other Laws.--(1) Any reference in this Act to the
    term general mining laws is a reference to those Acts that generally
    comprise chapters 2, 12A, and 16, and sections 161 and 162, of title
    30, United States Code.
    (2) Any reference in this Act to the Act of July 23, 1955, is a
    reference to the Act entitled ``An Act to amend the Act of July 31,
    1947 (61 Stat. 681) and the mining laws to provide for multiple use of
    the surface of the same tracts of the public lands, and for other
    purposes'' (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

    SEC. 3. APPLICATION RULES.

    (a) In General.--This Act applies to any mining claim, millsite
    claim, or tunnel site claim located under the general mining laws,
    before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act, except as
    provided in subsection (b).
    (b) Preexisting Claims.--(1) Any unpatented mining claim or
    millsite claim located under the general mining laws before the date of
    enactment of this Act for which a plan of operation has not been
    approved or a notice filed prior to the date of enactment shall, upon
    the effective date of this Act, be subject to the requirements of this
    Act, except as provided in paragraph (2).
    (2)(A) If a plan of operations is approved for mineral activities
    on any claim or site referred to in paragraph (1) prior to the date of
    enactment of this Act but such operations have not commenced prior to
    the date of enactment of this Act--
    (i) during the 10-year period beginning on the date of
    enactment of this Act, mineral activities at such claim or site
    shall be subject to such plan of operations;
    (ii) during such 10-year period, modifications of any such
    plan may be made in accordance with the provisions of law
    applicable prior to the enactment of this Act if such
    modifications are deemed minor by the Secretary concerned; and
    (iii) the operator shall bring such mineral activities into
    compliance with this Act by the end of such 10-year period.
    (B) Where an application for modification of a plan of operations
    referred to in subparagraph (A)(ii) has been timely submitted and an
    approved plan expires prior to Secretarial action on the application,
    mineral activities and reclamation may continue in accordance with the
    terms of the expired plan until the Secretary makes an administrative
    decision on the application.
    (c) Federal Lands Subject to Existing Permit.--(1) Any Federal land
    shall be subject to the requirements of section 102(a)(2) if the land
    is--
    (A) subject to an operations permit; and
    (B) producing valuable locatable minerals in commercial
    quantities prior to the date of enactment of this Act.
    (2) Any Federal land added through a plan modification to an
    operations permit on Federal land that is submitted after the date of
    enactment of this Act shall be subject to the terms of section
    102(a)(3).
    (d) Application of Act to Beneficiation and Processing of Non-
    Federal Minerals on Federal Lands.--The provisions of this Act
    (including the environmental protection requirements of title III)
    shall apply in the same manner and to the same extent to mining claims,
    millsite claims, and tunnel site claims used for beneficiation or
    processing activities for any mineral without regard to whether or not
    the legal and beneficial title to the mineral is held by the United
    States. This subsection applies only to minerals that are locatable
    minerals or minerals that would be locatable minerals if the legal and
    beneficial title to such minerals were held by the United States.

    TITLE I--MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

    SEC. 101. LIMITATION ON PATENTS.

    (a) Mining Claims.--
    (1) Determinations required.--After the date of enactment
    of this Act, no patent shall be issued by the United States for
    any mining claim located under the general mining laws unless
    the Secretary determines that, for the claim concerned--
    (A) a patent application was filed with the
    Secretary on or before September 30, 1994; and
    (B) all requirements established under sections
    2325 and 2326 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 29 and
    30) for vein or lode claims and sections 2329, 2330,
    2331, and 2333 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 35,
    36, and 37) for placer claims were fully complied with
    by that date.
    (2) Right to patent.--If the Secretary makes the
    determinations referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
    paragraph (1) for any mining claim, the holder of the claim
    shall be entitled to the issuance of a patent in the same
    manner and degree to which such claim holder would have been
    entitled to prior to the enactment of this Act, unless and
    until such determinations are withdrawn or invalidated by the
    Secretary or by a court of the United States.
    (b) Millsite Claims.--
    (1) Determinations required.--After the date of enactment
    of this Act, no patent shall be issued by the United States for
    any millsite claim located under the general mining laws unless
    the Secretary determines that for the millsite concerned--
    (A) a patent application for such land was filed
    with the Secretary on or before September 30, 1994; and
    (B) all requirements applicable to such patent
    application were fully complied with by that date.
    (2) Right to patent.--If the Secretary makes the
    determinations referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
    paragraph (1) for any millsite claim, the holder of the claim
    shall be entitled to the issuance of a patent in the same
    manner and degree to which such claim holder would have been
    entitled to prior to the enactment of this Act, unless and
    until such determinations are withdrawn or invalidated by the
    Secretary or by a court of the United States.

    SEC. 102. ROYALTY.

    (a) Reservation of Royalty.--
    (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) and
    subject to paragraph (3), production of all locatable minerals
    from any mining claim located under the general mining laws and
    maintained in compliance with this Act, or mineral concentrates
    or products derived from locatable minerals from any such
    mining claim, as the case may be, shall be subject to a royalty
    of 8 percent of the gross income from mining. The claim holder
    or any operator to whom the claim holder has assigned the
    obligation to make royalty payments under the claim and any
    person who controls such claim holder or operator shall be
    liable for payment of such royalties.
    (2) Royalty for federal lands subject to existing permit.--
    The royalty under paragraph (1) shall be 4 percent in the case
    of any Federal land that--
    (A) is subject to an operations permit on the date
    of the enactment of this Act; and
    (B) produces valuable locatable minerals in
    commercial quantities on the date of enactment of this
    Act.
    (3) Federal land added to existing operations permit.--Any
    Federal land added through a plan modification to an operations
    permit that is submitted after the date of enactment of this
    Act shall be subject to the royalty that applies to Federal
    land under paragraph (1).
    (4) Deposit.--Amounts received by the United States as
    royalties under this subsection shall be deposited into the
    account established under section 401.
    (b) Duties of Claim Holders, Operators, and Transporters.--(1) A
    person--
    (A) who is required to make any royalty payment under this
    section shall make such payments to the United States at such
    times and in such manner as the Secretary may by rule
    prescribe; and
    (B) shall notify the Secretary, in the time and manner as
    may be specified by the Secretary, of any assignment that such
    person may have made of the obligation to make any royalty or
    other payment under a mining claim.
    (2) Any person paying royalties under this section shall file a
    written instrument, together with the first royalty payment, affirming
    that such person is responsible for making proper payments for all
    amounts due for all time periods for which such person has a payment
    responsibility. Such responsibility for the periods referred to in the
    preceding sentence shall include any and all additional amounts billed
    by the Secretary and determined to be due by final agency or judicial
    action. Any person liable for royalty payments under this section who
    assigns any payment obligation shall remain jointly and severally
    liable for all royalty payments due for the claim for the period.
    (3) A person conducting mineral activities shall--
    (A) develop and comply with the site security provisions in
    the operations permit designed to protect from theft the
    locatable minerals, concentrates or products derived therefrom
    which are produced or stored on a mining claim, and such
    provisions shall conform with such minimum standards as the
    Secretary may prescribe by rule, taking into account the
    variety of circumstances on mining claims; and
    (B) not later than the 5th business day after production
    begins anywhere on a mining claim, or production resumes after
    more than 90 days after production was suspended, notify the
    Secretary, in the manner prescribed by the Secretary, of the
    date on which such production has begun or resumed.
    (4) The Secretary may by rule require any person engaged in
    transporting a locatable mineral, concentrate, or product derived
    therefrom to carry on his or her person, in his or her vehicle, or in
    his or her immediate control, documentation showing, at a minimum, the
    amount, origin, and intended destination of the locatable mineral,
    concentrate, or product derived therefrom in such circumstances as the
    Secretary determines is appropriate.
    (c) Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements.--(1) A claim holder,
    operator, or other person directly involved in developing, producing,
    processing, transporting, purchasing, or selling locatable minerals,
    concentrates, or products derived therefrom, subject to this Act,
    through the point of royalty computation shall establish and maintain
    any records, make any reports, and provide any information that the
    Secretary may reasonably require for the purposes of implementing this
    section or determining compliance with rules or orders under this
    section. Such records shall include, but not be limited to, periodic
    reports, records, documents, and other data. Such reports may also
    include, but not be limited to, pertinent technical and financial data
    relating to the quantity, quality, composition volume, weight, and
    assay of all minerals extracted from the mining claim. Upon the request
    of any officer or employee duly designated by the Secretary conducting
    an audit or investigation pursuant to this section, the appropriate
    records, reports, or information that may be required by this section
    shall be made available for inspection and duplication by such officer
    or employee. Failure by a claim holder, operator, or other person
    referred to in the first sentence to cooperate with such an audit,
    provide data required by the Secretary, or grant access to information
    may, at the discretion of the Secretary, result in involuntary
    forfeiture of the claim.
    (2) Records required by the Secretary under this section shall be
    maintained for 7 years after release of financial assurance under
    section 306 unless the Secretary notifies the operator that the
    Secretary has initiated an audit or investigation involving such
    records and that such records must be maintained for a longer period.
    In any case when an audit or investigation is underway, records shall
    be maintained until the Secretary releases the operator of the
    obligation to maintain such records.
    (d) Audits.--The Secretary is authorized to conduct such audits of
    all claim holders, operators, transporters, purchasers, processors, or
    other persons directly or indirectly involved in the production or
    sales of minerals covered by this Act, as the Secretary deems necessary
    for the purposes of ensuring compliance with the requirements of this
    section. For purposes of performing such audits, the Secretary shall,
    at reasonable times and upon request, have access to, and may copy, all
    books, papers and other documents that relate to compliance with any
    provision of this section by any person.
    (e) Cooperative Agreements.--(1) The Secretary is authorized to
    enter into cooperative agreements with the Secretary of Agriculture to
    share information concerning the royalty management of locatable
    minerals, concentrates, or products derived therefrom, to carry out
    inspection, auditing, investigation, or enforcement (not including the
    collection of royalties, civil or criminal penalties, or other
    payments) activities under this section in cooperation with the
    Secretary, and to carry out any other activity described in this
    section.
    (2) Except as provided in paragraph (3)(A) of this subsection
    (relating to trade secrets), and pursuant to a cooperative agreement,
    the Secretary of Agriculture shall, upon request, have access to all
    royalty accounting information in the possession of the Secretary
    respecting the production, removal, or sale of locatable minerals,
    concentrates, or products derived therefrom from claims on lands open
    to location under this Act.
    (3) Trade secrets, proprietary, and other confidential information
    protected from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States
    Code, popularly known as the Freedom of Information Act, shall be made
    available by the Secretary to other Federal agencies as necessary to
    assure compliance with this Act and other Federal laws. The Secretary,
    the Secretary of Agriculture, the Administrator of the Environmental
    Protection Agency, and other Federal officials shall ensure that such
    information is provided protection in accordance with the requirements
    of that section.
    (f) Interest and Substantial Underreporting Assessments.--(1) In
    the case of mining claims where royalty payments are not received by
    the Secretary on the date that such payments are due, the Secretary
    shall charge interest on such underpayments at the same interest rate
    as the rate applicable under section 6621(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue
    Code of 1986. In the case of an underpayment, interest shall be
    computed and charged only on the amount of the deficiency and not on
    the total amount.
    (2) If there is any underreporting of royalty owed on production
    from a claim for any production month by any person liable for royalty
    payments under this section, the Secretary shall assess a penalty of
    not greater than 25 percent of the amount of that underreporting.
    (3) For the purposes of this subsection, the term
    ``underreporting'' means the difference between the royalty on the
    value of the production that should have been reported and the royalty
    on the value of the production which was reported, if the value that
    should have been reported is greater than the value that was reported.
    (4) The Secretary may waive or reduce the assessment provided in
    paragraph (2) of this subsection if the person liable for royalty
    payments under this section corrects the underreporting before the date
    such person receives notice from the Secretary that an underreporting
    may have occurred, or before 90 days after the date of the enactment of
    this section, whichever is later.
    (5) The Secretary shall waive any portion of an assessment under
    paragraph (2) of this subsection attributable to that portion of the
    underreporting for which the person responsible for paying the royalty
    demonstrates that--
    (A) such person had written authorization from the
    Secretary to report royalty on the value of the production on
    basis on which it was reported;
    (B) such person had substantial authority for reporting
    royalty on the value of the production on the basis on which it
    was reported;
    (C) such person previously had notified the Secretary, in
    such manner as the Secretary may by rule prescribe, of relevant
    reasons or facts affecting the royalty treatment of specific
    production which led to the underreporting; or
    (D) such person meets any other exception which the
    Secretary may, by rule, establish.
    (6) All penalties collected under this subsection shall be
    deposited in the Locatable Minerals Fund established under title IV.
    (g) Delegation.--For the purposes of this section, the term
    ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the Interior acting through the
    Director of the Minerals Management Service.
    (h) Expanded Royalty Obligations.--Each person liable for royalty
    payments under this section shall be jointly and severally liable for
    royalty on all locatable minerals, concentrates, or products derived
    therefrom lost or wasted from a mining claim located under the general
    mining laws and maintained in compliance with this Act when such loss
    or waste is due to negligence on the part of any person or due to the
    failure to comply with any rule, regulation, or order issued under this
    section.
    (i) Gross Income From Mining Defined.--For the purposes of this
    section, for any locatable mineral, the term ``gross income from
    mining'' has the same meaning as the term ``gross income'' in section
    613(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
    (j) Effective Date.--The royalty under this section shall take
    effect with respect to the production of locatable minerals after the
    enactment of this Act, but any royalty payments attributable to
    production during the first 12 calendar months after the enactment of
    this Act shall be payable at the expiration of such 12-month period.
    (k) Failure To Comply With Royalty Requirements.--Any person who
    fails to comply with the requirements of this section or any regulation
    or order issued to implement this section shall be liable for a civil
    penalty under section 109 of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management
    Act (30 U.S.C. 1719) to the same extent as if the claim located under
    the general mining laws and maintained in compliance with this Act were
    a lease under that Act.

    SEC. 103. HARDROCK MINING CLAIM MAINTENANCE FEE.

    (a) Fee.--
    (1) Except as provided in section 2511(e)(2) of the Energy
    Policy Act of 1992 (relating to oil shale claims), for each
    unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site on federally owned
    lands, whether located before, on, or after enactment of this
    Act, each claimant shall pay to the Secretary, on or before
    August 31 of each year, a claim maintenance fee of $150 per
    claim to hold such unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site
    for the assessment year beginning at noon on the next day,
    September 1. Such claim maintenance fee shall be in lieu of the
    assessment work requirement contained in the Mining Law of 1872
    (30 U.S.C. 28 et seq.) and the related filing requirements
    contained in section 314(a) and (c) of the Federal Land Policy
    and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744(a) and (c)).
    (2)(A) The claim maintenance fee required under this
    subsection shall be waived for a claimant who certifies in
    writing to the Secretary that on the date the payment was due,
    the claimant and all related parties--
    (i) held not more than 10 mining claims, mill
    sites, or tunnel sites, or any combination thereof, on
    public lands; and
    (ii) have performed assessment work required under
    the Mining Law of 1872 (30 U.S.C. 28 et seq.) to
    maintain the mining claims held by the claimant and
    such related parties for the assessment year ending on
    noon of September 1 of the calendar year in which
    payment of the claim maintenance fee was due.
    (B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), with respect to any
    claimant, the term ``all related parties'' means--
    (i) the spouse and dependent children (as defined
    in section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986),
    of the claimant; or
    (ii) a person affiliated with the claimant,
    including--
    (I) a person controlled by, controlling, or
    under common control with the claimant; or
    (II) a subsidiary or parent company or
    corporation of the claimant.
    (3)(A) The Secretary shall adjust the fees required by this
    subsection to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index
    published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department
    of Labor every 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act,
    or more frequently if the Secretary determines an adjustment to
    be reasonable.
    (B) The Secretary shall provide claimants notice of any
    adjustment made under this paragraph not later than July 1 of
    any year in which the adjustment is made.
    (C) A fee adjustment under this paragraph shall begin to
    apply the calendar year following the calendar year in which it
    is made.
    (4) Moneys received under this subsection that are not
    otherwise allocated for the administration of the mining laws
    by the Department of the Interior shall be deposited in the
    Locatable Minerals Fund established by this Act.
    (b) Location.--
    (1) Notwithstanding any provision of law, for every
    unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site located after the
    date of enactment of this Act and before September 30, 1998,
    the locator shall, at the time the location notice is recorded
    with the Bureau of Land Management, pay to the Secretary a
    location fee, in addition to the fee required by subsection (a)
    of $50 per claim.
    (2) Moneys received under this subsection that are not
    otherwise allocated for the administration of the mining laws
    by the Department of the Interior shall be deposited in the
    Locatable Minerals Fund established by this Act.
    (c) Co-Ownership.--The co-ownership provisions of the Mining Law of
    1872 (30 U.S.C. 28 et seq.) will remain in effect except that the
    annual claim maintenance fee, where applicable, shall replace
    applicable assessment requirements and expenditures.
    (d) Failure To Pay.--Failure to pay the claim maintenance fee as
    required by subsection (a) shall conclusively constitute a forfeiture
    of the unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site by the claimant and
    the claim shall be deemed null and void by operation of law.
    (e) Other Requirements.--
    (1) Nothing in this section shall change or modify the
    requirements of section 314(b) of the Federal Land Policy and
    Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744(b)), or the requirements
    of section 314(c) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
    of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744(c)) related to filings required by
    section 314(b), which remain in effect.
    (2) Section 2324 of the Revised Statutes of the United
    States (30 U.S.C. 28) is amended by inserting ``or section
    103(a) of the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009''
    after ``Act of 1993''.

    SEC. 104. EFFECT OF PAYMENTS FOR USE AND OCCUPANCY OF CLAIMS.

    Timely payment of the claim maintenance fee required by section 103
    of this Act or any related law relating to the use of Federal land,
    asserts the claimant's authority to use and occupy the Federal land
    concerned for prospecting and exploration, consistent with the
    requirements of this Act and other applicable law.

    TITLE II--PROTECTION OF SPECIAL PLACES

    SEC. 201. LANDS OPEN TO LOCATION.

    (a) Lands Open to Location.--Except as provided in subsection (b),
    mining claims may be located under the general mining laws only on such
    lands and interests as were open to the location of mining claims under
    the general mining laws immediately before the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Lands Not Open to Location.--Notwithstanding any other
    provision of law and subject to valid existing rights, each of the
    following shall not be open to the location of mining claims under the
    general mining laws on or after the date of enactment of this Act:
    (1) Wilderness study areas.
    (2) Areas of critical environmental concern.
    (3) Areas designated for inclusion in the National Wild and
    Scenic Rivers System pursuant to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
    (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.), areas designated for potential
    addition to such system pursuant to section 5(a) of that Act
    (16 U.S.C. 1276(a)), and areas determined to be eligible for
    inclusion in such system pursuant to section 5(d) of such Act
    (16 U.S.C. 1276(d)).
    (4) Any area identified in the set of inventoried roadless
    areas maps contained in the Forest Service Roadless Area
    Conservation Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2,
    dated November 2000.
    (c) Existing Authority Not Affected.--Nothing in this Act limits
    the authority granted the Secretary in section 204 of the Federal Land
    Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1714) to withdraw public
    lands.

    SEC. 202. WITHDRAWAL PETITIONS BY STATES, POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS, AND
    INDIAN TRIBES.

    (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, any State or
    political subdivision of a State or an Indian tribe may submit a
    petition to the Secretary for the withdrawal of a specific tract of
    Federal land from the operation of the general mining laws, in order to
    protect specific values identified in the petition that are important
    to the State or political subdivision or Indian tribe. Such values may
    include the value of a watershed to supply drinking water, wildlife
    habitat value, cultural or historic resources, or value for scenic
    vistas important to the local economy, and other similar values. In the
    case of an Indian tribe, the petition may also identify religious or
    cultural values that are important to the Indian tribe. The petition
    shall contain the information required by section 204 of the Federal
    Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1714).
    (b) Consideration of Petition.--The Secretary--
    (1) shall solicit public comment on the petition;
    (2) shall make a final decision on the petition within 180
    days after receiving it; and
    (3) shall grant the petition subject to valid existing
    rights, unless the Secretary makes and publishes in the Federal
    Register specific findings why a decision to grant the petition
    would be against the national interest.

    TITLE III--ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS OF MINERAL EXPLORATION AND
    DEVELOPMENT

    SEC. 301. GENERAL STANDARD FOR HARDROCK MINING ON FEDERAL LAND.

    Notwithstanding section 302(b) of the Federal Land Policy and
    Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1732(b)), the first section of the
    Act of June 4, 1897 (chapter 2; 30 Stat. 36 16 U.S.C. 478), and the
    National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.), and in
    accordance with this title and applicable law, unless expressly stated
    otherwise in this Act, the Secretary--
    (1) shall ensure that mineral activities on any Federal
    land that is subject to a mining claim, millsite claim, or
    tunnel site claim is carefully controlled to prevent undue
    degradation of public lands and resources; and
    (2) shall not grant permission to engage in mineral
    activities if the Secretary, after considering the evidence,
    makes and publishes in the Federal Register a determination
    that undue degradation would result from such activities.

    SEC. 302. PERMITS.

    (a) Permits Required.--No person may engage in mineral activities
    on Federal land that may cause a disturbance of surface resources,
    including but not limited to land, air, ground water and surface water,
    and fish and wildlife, unless--
    (1) the claim was properly located under the general mining
    laws and maintained in compliance with such laws and this Act;
    and
    (2) a permit was issued to such person under this title
    authorizing such activities.
    (b) Negligible Disturbance.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2), a
    permit under this title shall not be required for mineral activities
    that are a casual use of the Federal land.
    (c) Coordination With NEPA Process.--To the extent practicable, the
    Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture shall conduct the permit
    processes under this Act in coordination with the timing and other
    requirements under section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act
    of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).

    SEC. 303. EXPLORATION PERMIT.

    (a) Authorized Exploration Activity.--Any claim holder may apply
    for an exploration permit for any mining claim authorizing the claim
    holder to remove a reasonable amount of the locatable minerals from the
    claim for analysis, study and testing. Such permit shall not authorize
    the claim holder to remove any mineral for sale nor to conduct any
    activities other than those required for exploration for locatable
    minerals and reclamation.
    (b) Permit Application Requirements.--An application for an
    exploration permit under this section shall be submitted in a manner
    satisfactory to the Secretary or, for National Forest System lands, the
    Secretary of Agriculture, and shall contain an exploration plan, a
    reclamation plan for the proposed exploration, and such documentation
    as necessary to ensure compliance with applicable Federal and State
    environmental laws and regulations.
    (c) Reclamation Plan Requirements.--The reclamation plan required
    to be included in a permit application under subsection (b) shall
    include such provisions as may be jointly prescribed by the Secretary
    and the Secretary of Agriculture.
    (d) Permit Issuance or Denial.--The Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands, the Secretary of Agriculture, shall issue an
    exploration permit pursuant to an application under this section unless
    such Secretary makes any of the following determinations:
    (1) The permit application, the exploration plan and
    reclamation plan are not complete and accurate.
    (2) The applicant has not demonstrated that proposed
    reclamation can be accomplished.
    (3) The proposed exploration activities and condition of
    the land after the completion of exploration activities and
    final reclamation would not conform with the land use plan
    applicable to the area subject to mineral activities.
    (4) The area subject to the proposed permit is included
    within an area not open to location under section 201.
    (5) The applicant has not demonstrated that the exploration
    plan and reclamation plan will be in compliance with the
    requirements of this Act and all other applicable Federal
    requirements, and any State requirements agreed to by the
    Secretary of the Interior (or Secretary of Agriculture, as
    appropriate).
    (6) The applicant has not demonstrated that the
    requirements of section 306 (relating to financial assurance)
    will be met.
    (7) The applicant is eligible to receive a permit under
    section 305.
    (e) Term of Permit.--An exploration permit shall be for a stated
    term. The term shall be no greater than that necessary to accomplish
    the proposed exploration, and in no case for more than 10 years.
    (f) Permit Modification.--During the term of an exploration permit
    the permit holder may submit an application to modify the permit. To
    approve a proposed modification to the permit, the Secretary concerned
    shall make the same determinations as are required in the case of an
    original permit, except that the Secretary and the Secretary of
    Agriculture may specify by joint rule the extent to which requirements
    for initial exploration permits under this section shall apply to
    applications to modify an exploration permit based on whether such
    modifications are deemed significant or minor.
    (g) Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Rights.--(1) No transfer,
    assignment, or sale of rights granted by a permit issued under this
    section shall be made without the prior written approval of the
    Secretary or for National Forest System lands, the Secretary of
    Agriculture.
    (2) Such Secretary shall allow a person holding a permit to
    transfer, assign, or sell rights under the permit to a successor, if
    the Secretary finds, in writing, that the successor--
    (A) is eligible to receive a permit in accordance with
    section 304(d);
    (B) has submitted evidence of financial assurance
    satisfactory under section 306; and
    (C) meets any other requirements specified by the
    Secretary.
    (3) The successor in interest shall assume the liability and
    reclamation responsibilities established by the existing permit and
    shall conduct the mineral activities in full compliance with this Act,
    and the terms and conditions of the permit as in effect at the time of
    transfer, assignment, or sale.
    (4) Each application for approval of a permit transfer, assignment,
    or sale pursuant to this subsection shall be accompanied by a fee
    payable to the Secretary of the Interior in such amount as may be
    established by such Secretary. Such amount shall be equal to the actual
    or anticipated cost to the Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture,
    as appropriate, of reviewing and approving or disapproving such
    transfer, assignment, or sale, as determined by the Secretary of the
    Interior.

    SEC. 304. OPERATIONS PERMIT.

    (a) Operations Permit.--(1) Any claim holder that is in compliance
    with the general mining laws and section 103 of this Act may apply to
    the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands, the Secretary of
    Agriculture, for an operations permit authorizing the claim holder to
    carry out mineral activities, other than casual use, on--
    (A) any valid mining claim, valid millsite claim, or valid
    tunnel site claim; and
    (B) such additional Federal land as the Secretary may
    determine is necessary to conduct the proposed mineral
    activities, if the operator obtains a right-of-way permit for
    use of such additional lands under title V of the Federal Land
    Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1761 et seq.) and
    agrees to pay all fees required under that title for the permit
    under that title.
    (2) If the Secretary decides to issue such permit, the permit shall
    include such terms and conditions as prescribed by such Secretary to
    carry out this title.
    (b) Permit Application Requirements.--An application for an
    operations permit under this section shall be submitted in a manner
    satisfactory to the Secretary concerned and shall contain site
    characterization data, an operations plan, a reclamation plan,
    monitoring plans, long-term maintenance plans, to the extent necessary,
    and such documentation as necessary to ensure compliance with
    applicable Federal and State environmental laws and regulations. If the
    proposed mineral activities will be carried out in conjunction with
    mineral activities on adjacent non-Federal lands, information on the
    location and nature of such operations may be required by the
    Secretary.
    (c) Permit Issuance or Denial.--(1) After providing for public
    participation pursuant to subsection (i), the Secretary, or for
    National Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, shall issue
    an operations permit if such Secretary makes each of the following
    determinations in writing, and shall deny a permit if such Secretary
    finds that the application and applicant do not fully meet the
    following requirements:
    (A) The permit application, including the site
    characterization data, operations plan, and reclamation plan,
    are complete and accurate and sufficient for developing a good
    understanding of the anticipated impacts of the mineral
    activities and the effectiveness of proposed mitigation and
    control.
    (B) The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed
    reclamation in the operation and reclamation plan can be and is
    likely to be accomplished by the applicant and will not cause
    undue degradation.
    (C) The condition of the land, including the fish and
    wildlife resources and habitat contained thereon, after the
    completion of mineral activities and final reclamation, will
    conform to the land use plan applicable to the area subject to
    mineral activities and are returned to a productive use.
    (D) The area subject to the proposed plan is open to
    location for the types of mineral activities proposed.
    (E) The proposed operation has been designed to prevent
    material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit
    area.
    (F) The applicant will fully comply with the requirements
    of section 306 (relating to financial assurance) prior to the
    initiation of operations.
    (G) Neither the applicant nor operator, nor any subsidiary,
    affiliate, or person controlled by or under common control with
    the applicant or operator, is ineligible to receive a permit
    under section 305.
    (H) The reclamation plan demonstrates that 10 years
    following mine closure, no treatment of surface or ground water
    for carcinogens or toxins will be required to meet water
    quality standards at the point of discharge.
    (2) With respect to any activities specified in the reclamation
    plan referred to in subsection (b) that constitutes a removal or
    remedial action under section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental
    Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et
    seq.), the Secretary shall consult with the Administrator of the
    Environmental Protection Agency prior to the issuance of an operations
    permit. The Administrator shall ensure that the reclamation plan does
    not require activities that would increase the costs or likelihood of
    removal or remedial actions under the Comprehensive Environmental
    Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et
    seq.) or corrective actions under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42
    U.S.C. 6901 et seq.).
    (d) Term of Permit; Renewal.--
    (1) An operations permit--
    (A) shall be for a term that is no longer than the
    shorter of--
    (i) the period necessary to accomplish the
    proposed mineral activities subject to the
    permit; and
    (ii) 20 years; and
    (B) shall be renewed for an additional 20-year
    period if the operation is in compliance with the
    requirements of this Act and other applicable law.
    (2) Failure by the operator to commence mineral activities
    within 2 years of the date scheduled in an operations permit
    shall require a modification of the permit if the Secretary
    concerned determines that modifications are necessary to comply
    with section 201.
    (e) Permit Modification.--
    (1) During the term of an operations permit the operator
    may submit an application to modify the permit (including the
    operations plan or reclamation plan, or both).
    (2) The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, may, at any time, require reasonable
    modification to any operations plan or reclamation plan upon a
    determination that the requirements of this Act cannot be met
    if the plan is followed as approved. Such determination shall
    be based on a written finding and subject to public notice and
    hearing requirements established by the Secretary concerned.
    (3) A permit modification is required before changes are
    made to the approved plan of operations, or if unanticipated
    events or conditions exist on the mine site, including in the
    case of--
    (A) development of acid or toxic drainage;
    (B) loss of springs or water supplies;
    (C) water quantity, water quality, or other
    resulting water impacts that are significantly
    different than those predicted in the application;
    (D) the need for long-term water treatment;
    (E) significant reclamation difficulties or
    reclamation failure;
    (F) the discovery of significant scientific,
    cultural, or biological resources that were not
    addressed in the original plan; or
    (G) the discovery of hazards to public safety.
    (f) Temporary Cessation of Operations.--(1) An operator conducting
    mineral activities under an operations permit in effect under this
    title may not temporarily cease mineral activities for a period greater
    than 180 days unless the Secretary concerned has approved such
    temporary cessation or unless the temporary cessation is permitted
    under the original permit. Any operator temporarily ceasing mineral
    activities for a period greater than 90 days under an operations permit
    issued before the date of the enactment of this Act shall submit,
    before the expiration of such 90-day period, a complete application for
    temporary cessation of operations to the Secretary concerned for
    approval unless the temporary cessation is permitted under the original
    permit.
    (2) An application for approval of temporary cessation of
    operations shall include such information required under subsection (b)
    and any other provisions prescribed by the Secretary concerned to
    minimize impacts on the environment. After receipt of a complete
    application for temporary cessation of operations such Secretary shall
    conduct an inspection of the area for which temporary cessation of
    operations has been requested.
    (3) To approve an application for temporary cessation of
    operations, the Secretary concerned shall make each of the following
    determinations:
    (A) A determination that the methods for securing surface
    facilities and restricting access to the permit area, or
    relevant portions thereof, will effectively ensure against
    hazards to the health and safety of the public and fish and
    wildlife.
    (B) A determination that reclamation is in compliance with
    the approved reclamation plan, except in those areas
    specifically designated in the application for temporary
    cessation of operations for which a delay in meeting such
    standards is necessary to facilitate the resumption of
    operations.
    (C) A determination that the amount of financial assurance
    filed with the permit application is sufficient to assure
    completion of the reclamation activities identified in the
    approved reclamation plan in the event of forfeiture.
    (D) A determination that any outstanding notices of
    violation and cessation orders incurred in connection with the
    plan for which temporary cessation is being requested are
    either stayed pursuant to an administrative or judicial appeal
    proceeding or are in the process of being abated to the
    satisfaction of the Secretary concerned.
    (g) Permit Reviews.--The Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, shall review each permit issued
    under this section every 10 years during the term of such permit, shall
    provide public notice of the permit review, and, based upon a written
    finding, such Secretary shall require the operator to take such actions
    as the Secretary deems necessary to assure that mineral activities
    conform to the permit, including adjustment of financial assurance
    requirements.
    (h) Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Rights.--(1) No transfer,
    assignment, or sale of rights granted by a permit under this section
    shall be made without the prior written approval of the Secretary, or
    for National Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture.
    (2) The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands, the
    Secretary of Agriculture, may allow a person holding a permit to
    transfer, assign, or sell rights under the permit to a successor, if
    such Secretary finds, in writing, that the successor--
    (A) has submitted information required and is eligible to
    receive a permit in accordance with section 305;
    (B) has submitted evidence of financial assurance
    satisfactory under section 306; and
    (C) meets any other requirements specified by such
    Secretary.
    (3) The successor in interest shall assume the liability and
    reclamation responsibilities established by the existing permit and
    shall conduct the mineral activities in full compliance with this Act,
    and the terms and conditions of the permit as in effect at the time of
    transfer, assignment, or sale.
    (4) Each application for approval of a permit transfer, assignment,
    or sale pursuant to this subsection shall be accompanied by a fee
    payable to the Secretary of the Interior, or for National Forest System
    lands, the Secretary of Agriculture, in such amount as may be
    established by such Secretary, or for National Forest System lands, by
    the Secretary of Agriculture. Such amount shall be equal to the actual
    or anticipated cost to the Secretary or, for National Forest System
    lands, to the Secretary of Agriculture, of reviewing and approving or
    disapproving such transfer, assignment, or sale, as determined by such
    Secretary.
    (i) Public Participation.--The Secretary of the Interior and the
    Secretary of Agriculture shall jointly promulgate regulations to ensure
    transparency and public participation in permit decisions required
    under this Act, consistent with any requirements that apply to such
    decisions under section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of
    1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).

    SEC. 305. PERSONS INELIGIBLE FOR PERMITS.

    (a) Current Violations.--Unless corrective action has been taken in
    accordance with subsection (c), no permit under this title shall be
    issued or transferred to an applicant if the applicant or any agent of
    the applicant, the operator (if different than the applicant) of the
    claim concerned, any claim holder (if different than the applicant) of
    the claim concerned, or any affiliate or officer or director of the
    applicant is currently in violation of any of the following:
    (1) A provision of this Act or any regulation under this
    Act.
    (2) An applicable State or Federal toxic substance, solid
    waste, air, water quality, or fish and wildlife conservation
    law or regulation at any site where mining, beneficiation, or
    processing activities are occurring or have occurred.
    (3) The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
    (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) or any regulation implementing that
    Act at any site where surface coal mining operations have
    occurred or are occurring.
    (b) Suspension.--The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands
    the Secretary of Agriculture, shall suspend an operations permit, in
    whole or in part, if such Secretary determines that any of the entities
    described in subsection (a) were in violation of any requirement listed
    in subsection (a) at the time the permit was issued.
    (c) Correction.--(1) The Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, may issue or reinstate a permit
    under this title if the applicant submits proof that the violation
    referred to in subsection (a) or (b) has been corrected or is in the
    process of being corrected to the satisfaction of such Secretary and
    the regulatory authority involved or if the applicant submits proof
    that the violator has filed and is presently pursuing, a direct
    administrative or judicial appeal to contest the existence of the
    violation. For purposes of this section, an appeal of any applicant's
    relationship to an affiliate shall not constitute a direct
    administrative or judicial appeal to contest the existence of the
    violation.
    (2) Any permit which is issued or reinstated based upon proof
    submitted under this subsection shall be conditionally approved or
    conditionally reinstated, as the case may be. If the violation is not
    successfully abated or the violation is upheld on appeal, the permit
    shall be suspended or revoked.
    (d) Pattern of Willful Violations.--No permit under this Act may be
    issued to any applicant if there is a demonstrated pattern of willful
    violations of the environmental protection requirements of this Act by
    the applicant, any affiliate of the applicant, or the operator or claim
    holder if different than the applicant.

    SEC. 306. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE.

    (a) Financial Assurance Required.--(1) After a permit is issued
    under this title and before any exploration or operations begin under
    the permit, the operator shall file with the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, evidence of financial
    assurance payable to the United States. The financial assurance shall
    be provided in the form of a surety bond, a trust fund, letters of
    credits, government securities, certificates of deposit, cash, or an
    equivalent form approved by such Secretary.
    (2) The financial assurance shall cover all lands within the
    initial permit area and all affected waters that may require
    restoration, treatment, or other management as a result of mineral
    activities, and shall be extended to cover all lands and waters added
    pursuant to any permit modification made under section 303(f) (relating
    to exploration permits) or section 304(e) (relating to operations
    permits), or affected by mineral activities.
    (b) Amount.--The amount of the financial assurance required under
    this section shall be sufficient to assure the completion of
    reclamation and restoration satisfying the requirements of this Act if
    the work were to be performed by the Secretary concerned in the event
    of forfeiture, including the construction and maintenance costs for any
    treatment facilities necessary to meet Federal and State environmental
    requirements. The calculation of such amount shall take into account
    the maximum level of financial exposure which shall arise during the
    mineral activity and administrative costs associated with a government
    agency reclaiming the site.
    (c) Duration.--The financial assurance required under this section
    shall be held for the duration of the mineral activities and for an
    additional period to cover the operator's responsibility for
    reclamation, restoration, and long-term maintenance, and effluent
    treatment as specified in subsection (g).
    (d) Adjustments.--The amount of the financial assurance and the
    terms of the acceptance of the assurance may be adjusted by the
    Secretary concerned from time to time as the area requiring coverage is
    increased or decreased, or where the costs of reclamation or treatment
    change, or pursuant to section 304(f) (relating to temporary cessation
    of operations), but the financial assurance shall otherwise be in
    compliance with this section. The Secretary concerned shall review the
    financial guarantee every 3 years and as part of the permit application
    review under section 304(c).
    (e) Release.--Upon request, and after notice and opportunity for
    public comment, and after inspection by the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands, the Secretary of Agriculture, such Secretary may,
    after consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental
    Protection Agency, release in whole or in part the financial assurance
    required under this section if the Secretary makes both of the
    following determinations:
    (1) A determination that reclamation or restoration covered
    by the financial assurance has been accomplished as required by
    this Act.
    (2) A determination that the terms and conditions of any
    other applicable Federal requirements, and State requirements
    applicable pursuant to cooperative agreements under section
    308, have been fulfilled.
    (f) Release Schedule.--The release referred to in subsection (e)
    shall be according to the following schedule:
    (1) After the operator has completed any required
    backfilling, regrading, and drainage control of an area subject
    to mineral activities and covered by the financial assurance,
    and has commenced revegetation on the regraded areas subject to
    mineral activities in accordance with the approved plan, that
    portion of the total financial assurance secured for the area
    subject to mineral activities attributable to the completed
    activities may be released except that sufficient assurance
    must be retained to address other required reclamation and
    restoration needs and to assure the long-term success of the
    revegetation.
    (2) After the operator has completed successfully all
    remaining mineral activities and reclamation activities and all
    requirements of the operations plan and the reclamation plan,
    and all other requirements of this Act have been fully met, the
    remaining portion of the financial assurance may be released.
    During the period following release of the financial assurance as
    specified in paragraph (1), until the remaining portion of the
    financial assurance is released as provided in paragraph (2), the
    operator shall be required to comply with the permit issued under this
    title.
    (g) Effluent.--Notwithstanding section 307(b)(4), where any
    discharge or other water-related condition resulting from the mineral
    activities requires treatment in order to meet the applicable effluent
    limitations and water quality standards, the financial assurance shall
    include the estimated cost of maintaining such treatment for the
    projected period that will be needed after the cessation of mineral
    activities. The portion of the financial assurance attributable to such
    estimated cost of treatment shall not be released until the discharge
    has ceased for a period of 5 years, as determined by ongoing monitoring
    and testing, or, if the discharge continues, until the operator has met
    all applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards for 5
    full years without treatment.
    (h) Environmental Hazards.--If the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands, the Secretary of Agriculture, determines, after
    final release of financial assurance, that an environmental hazard
    resulting from the mineral activities exists, or the terms and
    conditions of the explorations or operations permit of this Act were
    not fulfilled in fact at the time of release, such Secretary shall
    issue an order under section 506 requiring the claim holder or operator
    (or any person who controls the claim holder or operator) to correct
    the condition such that applicable laws and regulations and any
    conditions from the plan of operations are met.

    SEC. 307. OPERATION AND RECLAMATION.

    (a) General Rule.--(1) The operator shall restore lands subject to
    mineral activities carried out under a permit issued under this title
    to a condition capable of supporting--
    (A) the uses which such lands were capable of supporting
    prior to surface disturbance by the operator, or
    (B) other beneficial uses which conform to applicable land
    use plans as determined by the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands, the Secretary of Agriculture.
    (2) Reclamation shall proceed as contemporaneously as practicable
    with the conduct of mineral activities. In the case of a cessation of
    mineral activities beyond that provided for as a temporary cessation
    under this Act, reclamation activities shall begin immediately.
    (b) Operation and Reclamation Standards.--The Secretary of the
    Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall jointly promulgate
    regulations that establish operation and reclamation standards for
    mineral activities permitted under this Act. The Secretaries may
    determine whether outcome-based performance standards or technology-
    based design standards are most appropriate. The regulations shall
    address the following:
    (1) Segregation, protection, and replacement of topsoil or
    other suitable growth medium, and the prevention, where
    possible, of soil contamination.
    (2) Maintenance of the stability of all surface areas.
    (3) Control of sediments to prevent erosion and manage
    drainage.
    (4) Minimization of the formation and migration of acidic,
    alkaline, metal-bearing, or other deleterious leachate.
    (5) Reduction of the visual impact of mineral activities to
    the surrounding topography, including as necessary pit
    backfill.
    (6) Establishment of a diverse, effective, and permanent
    vegetative cover of the same seasonal variety native to the
    area affected by mineral activities, and equal in extent of
    cover to the natural vegetation of the area.
    (7) Design and maintenance of leach operations,
    impoundments, and excess waste according to standard
    engineering standards to achieve and maintain stability and
    reclamation of the site.
    (8) Removal of structures and roads and sealing of drill
    holes.
    (9) Restoration of, or mitigation for, fish and wildlife
    habitat disturbed by mineral activities.
    (10) Preservation of cultural, paleontological, and cave
    resources.
    (11) Prevention and suppression of fire in the area of
    mineral activities.
    (c) Surface or Groundwater Withdrawals.--The Secretary shall work
    with State and local governments with authority over the allocation and
    use of surface and groundwater in the area around the mine site as
    necessary to ensure that any surface or groundwater withdrawals made as
    a result of mining activities approved under this section do not cause
    undue degradation.
    (d) Special Rule.--Reclamation activities for a mining claim that
    has been forfeited, relinquished, or lapsed, or a plan that has expired
    or been revoked or suspended, shall continue subject to review and
    approval by the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture.

    SEC. 308. STATE LAW AND REGULATION.

    (a) State Law.--(1) Any reclamation, land use, environmental, or
    public health protection standard or requirement in State law or
    regulation that meets or exceeds the requirements of this Act shall not
    be construed to be inconsistent with any such standard.
    (2) Any bonding standard or requirement in State law or regulation
    that meets or exceeds the requirements of this Act shall not be
    construed to be inconsistent with such requirements.
    (3) Any inspection standard or requirement in State law or
    regulation that meets or exceeds the requirements of this Act shall not
    be construed to be inconsistent with such requirements.
    (b) Applicability of Other State Requirements.--(1) Nothing in this
    Act shall be construed as affecting any toxic substance, solid waste,
    or air or water quality, standard or requirement of any State, county,
    local, or tribal law or regulation, which may be applicable to mineral
    activities on lands subject to this Act.
    (2) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting in any way
    the right of any person to enforce or protect, under applicable law,
    such person's interest in water resources affected by mineral
    activities on lands subject to this Act.
    (c) Cooperative Agreements.--(1) Any State may enter into a
    cooperative agreement with the Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, for the purposes of such Secretary
    applying such standards and requirements referred to in subsection (a)
    and subsection (b) to mineral activities or reclamation on lands
    subject to this Act.
    (2) In such instances where the proposed mineral activities would
    affect lands not subject to this Act in addition to lands subject to
    this Act, in order to approve a plan of operations the Secretary
    concerned shall enter into a cooperative agreement with the State that
    sets forth a common regulatory framework consistent with the
    requirements of this Act for the purposes of such plan of operations.
    Any such common regulatory framework shall not negate the authority of
    the Federal Government to independently inspect mines and operations
    and bring enforcement actions for violations.
    (3) The Secretary concerned shall not enter into a cooperative
    agreement with any State under this section until after notice in the
    Federal Register and opportunity for public comment and hearing.
    (d) Prior Agreements.--Any cooperative agreement or such other
    understanding between the Secretary concerned and any State, or
    political subdivision thereof, relating to the management of mineral
    activities on lands subject to this Act that was in existence on the
    date of enactment of this Act may only continue in force until 1 year
    after the date of enactment of this Act. During such 1-year period, the
    State and the Secretary shall review the terms of the agreement and
    make changes that are necessary to be consistent with this Act.

    SEC. 309. LIMITATION ON THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS.

    No permit shall be issued under this title that authorizes mineral
    activities that would impair the land or resources of a National Park
    or a National Monument. For purposes of this section, the term
    ``impair'' shall include any diminution of the affected land including
    wildlife, scenic assets, water resources, air quality, and acoustic
    qualities, or other changes that would impair a citizen's experience at
    the National Park or National Monument.

    TITLE IV--MINING MITIGATION

    Subtitle A--Locatable Minerals Fund

    SEC. 401. ESTABLISHMENT OF FUND.

    (a) Establishment.--There is established on the books of the
    Treasury of the United States a separate account to be known as the
    Locatable Minerals Fund (hereinafter in this subtitle referred to as
    the ``Fund'').
    (b) Investment.--The Secretary shall notify the Secretary of the
    Treasury as to what portion of the Fund is not, in the Secretary's
    judgment, required to meet current withdrawals. The Secretary of the
    Treasury shall invest such portion of the Fund in public debt
    securities with maturities suitable for the needs of such Fund and
    bearing interest at rates determined by the Secretary of the Treasury,
    taking into consideration current market yields on outstanding
    marketplace obligations of the United States of comparable maturities.

    SEC. 402. CONTENTS OF FUND.

    The following amounts shall be credited to the Fund:
    (1) All moneys collected pursuant to section 506 (relating
    to enforcement) and section 504 (relating to citizens suits).
    (2) All fees received under section 304(a)(1)(B).
    (3) All donations by persons, corporations, associations,
    and foundations for the purposes of this subtitle.
    (4) All amounts deposited in the Fund under section 102
    (relating to royalties and penalties for underreporting).
    (5) All amounts received by the United States pursuant to
    section 101 from issuance of patents.
    (6) All amounts received by the United States pursuant to
    section 103 as claim maintenance and location fees minus the
    moneys allocated for administration of the mining laws by the
    Department of the Interior.
    (7) All income on investments under section 401(b).

    SEC. 403. SUBACCOUNTS.

    There shall be in the Fund 2 subaccounts, as follows:
    (1) The Hardrock Reclamation Account, which shall consist
    of two-thirds of the amounts credited to the Fund under section
    402 and which shall be administered by the Secretary acting
    through the Director of the Office of Surface Mining and
    Enforcement.
    (2) The Hardrock Community Impact Assistance Account, which
    shall consist of one-third of the amounts credited to the Fund
    under section 402 and which shall be administered by the
    Secretary acting through the Director of the Bureau of Land
    Management.

    Subtitle B--Use of Hardrock Reclamation Account

    SEC. 411. USE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ACCOUNT.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized, subject to
    appropriations, to use moneys in the Hardrock Reclamation Account for
    the reclamation and restoration of land and water resources adversely
    affected by past mineral activities on lands the legal and beneficial
    title to which resides in the United States, land within the exterior
    boundary of any national forest system unit, or other lands described
    in subsection (d) or section 412, including any of the following:
    (1) Protecting public health and safety.
    (2) Preventing, abating, treating, and controlling water
    pollution created by abandoned mine drainage, including in
    river watershed areas.
    (3) Reclaiming and restoring abandoned surface and
    underground mined areas.
    (4) Reclaiming and restoring abandoned milling and
    processing areas.
    (5) Backfilling, sealing, or otherwise controlling,
    abandoned underground mine entries.
    (6) Revegetating land adversely affected by past mineral
    activities in order to prevent erosion and sedimentation, to
    enhance wildlife habitat, and for any other reclamation
    purpose.
    (7) Controlling of surface subsidence due to abandoned
    underground mines.
    (b) Allocation.--Of the amounts deposited into the Hardrock
    Reclamation Account, 50 percent shall be allocated by the Secretary
    among the States within the boundaries of which occurs production of
    locatable minerals from mining claims located under the general mining
    laws and maintained in compliance with this Act, or mineral
    concentrates or products derived from locatable minerals from mining
    claims located under the general mining laws and maintained in
    compliance with this Act, as the case may be, in proportion to the
    amount of such production in each such State. Expenditures of the
    remainder of such amounts shall reflect the following priorities in the
    order stated:
    (1) The protection of public health and safety, from
    extreme danger from the adverse effects of past mineral
    activities, especially as relates to surface water and
    groundwater contaminants.
    (2) The protection of public health and safety, from the
    adverse effects of past mineral activities.
    (3) The restoration of land, water, and fish and wildlife
    resources previously degraded by the adverse effects of past
    mineral activities, which may include restoration activities in
    river watershed areas.
    (c) Habitat.--Reclamation and restoration activities under this
    subtitle, particularly those identified under subsection (a)(4), shall
    include appropriate mitigation measures to provide for the continuation
    of any established habitat for wildlife in existence prior to the
    commencement of such activities.
    (d) Other Affected Lands.--Where mineral exploration, mining,
    beneficiation, processing, or reclamation activities have been carried
    out with respect to any mineral which would be a locatable mineral if
    the legal and beneficial title to the mineral were in the United
    States, if such activities directly affect lands managed by the Bureau
    of Land Management as well as other lands and if the legal and
    beneficial title to more than 50 percent of the affected lands resides
    in the United States, the Secretary is authorized, subject to
    appropriations, to use moneys in the Hardrock Reclamation Account for
    reclamation and restoration under subsection (a) for all directly
    affected lands.
    (e) Response or Removal Actions.--Reclamation and restoration
    activities under this subtitle which constitute a removal or remedial
    action under section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
    Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601), shall be
    conducted with the concurrence of the Administrator of the
    Environmental Protection Agency. The Secretary and the Administrator
    shall enter into a Memorandum of Understanding to establish procedures
    for consultation, concurrence, training, exchange of technical
    expertise and joint activities under the appropriate circumstances,
    that provide assurances that reclamation or restoration activities
    under this subtitle shall not be conducted in a manner that increases
    the costs or likelihood of removal or remedial actions under the
    Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
    of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), and that avoid oversight by multiple
    agencies to the maximum extent practicable.

    SEC. 412. ELIGIBLE LANDS AND WATERS.

    (a) Eligibility.--Reclamation expenditures under this subtitle may
    only be made with respect to Federal lands or Indian lands or water
    resources that traverse or are contiguous to Federal lands or Indian
    lands where such lands or water resources have been affected by past
    mineral activities, including any of the following:
    (1) Lands and water resources which were used for, or
    affected by, mineral activities and abandoned or left in an
    inadequate reclamation status before the effective date of this
    Act.
    (2) Lands for which the Secretary makes a determination
    that there is no continuing reclamation responsibility of a
    claim holder, operator, or other person who abandoned the site
    prior to completion of required reclamation under State or
    other Federal laws.
    (3) Lands for which it can be established that such lands
    do not contain locatable minerals which could economically be
    extracted through the reprocessing or remining of such lands,
    unless such considerations are in conflict with the priorities
    set forth under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 302(b).
    (b) Specific Sites and Areas Not Eligible.--The provisions of
    section 411(d) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
    1977 (30 U.S.C. 1240a(d)) shall apply to expenditures made from the
    Hardrock Reclamation Account.
    (c) Inventory.--The Secretary shall prepare and maintain a publicly
    available inventory of abandoned locatable minerals mines on public
    lands and any abandoned mine on Indian lands that may be eligible for
    expenditures under this subtitle, and shall deliver a yearly report to
    the Congress on the progress in cleanup of such sites.

    SEC. 413. EXPENDITURES.

    Moneys available from the Hardrock Reclamation Account may be
    expended for the purposes specified in section 411 directly by the
    Director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
    The Director may also make such money available for such purposes to
    the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, the Chief of the United
    States Forest Service, the Director of the National Park Service, or
    Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, to any other
    agency of the United States, to an Indian tribe, or to any public
    entity that volunteers to develop and implement, and that has the
    ability to carry out, all or a significant portion of a reclamation
    program under this subtitle.

    SEC. 414. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Amounts credited to the Hardrock Reclamation Account are authorized
    to be appropriated for the purpose of this subtitle without fiscal year
    limitation.

    Subtitle C--Use of Hardrock Community Impact Assistance Account

    SEC. 421. USE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ACCOUNT.

    Amounts in the Hardrock Community Impact Assistance Account shall
    be available to the Secretary, subject to appropriations, to provide
    assistance for the planning, construction, and maintenance of public
    facilities and the provision of public services to States, political
    subdivisions and Indian tribes that are socially or economically
    impacted by mineral activities conducted under the general mining laws.

    SEC. 422. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.

    Moneys deposited into the Hardrock Community Impact Assistance
    Account shall be allocated by the Secretary for purposes of section 421
    among the States within the boundaries of which occurs production of
    locatable minerals from mining claims located under the general mining
    laws and maintained in compliance with this Act, or mineral
    concentrates or products derived from locatable minerals from mining
    claims located under the general mining laws and maintained in
    compliance with this Act, as the case may be, in proportion to the
    amount of such production in each such State.

    TITLE V--ADMINISTRATIVE AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

    Subtitle A--Administrative Provisions

    SEC. 501. POLICY FUNCTIONS.

    (a) Minerals Policy.--Section 101 of the Mining and Minerals Policy
    Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 21a) is amended--
    (1) in the first sentence by inserting before the period at
    the end the following: ``and to ensure that mineral extraction
    and processing not cause undue degradation of the natural and
    cultural resources of the public lands''; and
    (2) by adding at the end thereof the following: ``It shall
    also be the responsibility of the Secretary of Agriculture to
    carry out the policy provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) of
    this section.''.
    (b) Mineral Data.--Section 5(e)(3) of the National Materials and
    Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act of 1980 (30 U.S.C.
    1604(e)(3)) is amended by inserting before the period the following:
    ``, except that for National Forest System lands the Secretary of
    Agriculture shall promptly initiate actions to improve the availability
    and analysis of mineral data in public land use decisionmaking''.

    SEC. 502. USER FEES.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture may
    each establish and collect from persons subject to the requirements of
    this Act such user fees as may be necessary to reimburse the United
    States for the expenses incurred in administering such requirements.
    Fees may be assessed and collected under this section only in such
    manner as may reasonably be expected to result in an aggregate amount
    of the fees collected during any fiscal year which does not exceed the
    aggregate amount of administrative expenses referred to in this
    section.
    (b) Adjustment.--(1) The Secretary shall adjust the fees required
    by this section to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index
    published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor
    every 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, or more
    frequently if the Secretary determines an adjustment to be reasonable.
    (2) The Secretary shall provide claimants notice of any adjustment
    made under this subsection not later than July 1 of any year in which
    the adjustment is made.
    (3) A fee adjustment under this subsection shall begin to apply the
    calendar year following the calendar year in which it is made.

    SEC. 503. INSPECTION AND MONITORING.

    (a) Inspections.--(1) The Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, shall make inspections of mineral
    activities so as to ensure compliance with the requirements of this
    Act.
    (2) The Secretary concerned shall establish a frequency of
    inspections for mineral activities conducted under a permit issued
    under title III, but in no event shall such inspection frequency be
    less than one complete inspection per calendar quarter or, two per
    calendar quarter in the case of a permit for which the Secretary
    concerned approves an application under section 304(f) (relating to
    temporary cessation of operations). After revegetation has been
    established in accordance with a reclamation plan, such Secretary shall
    conduct annually 2 complete inspections. Such Secretary shall have the
    discretion to modify the inspection frequency for mineral activities
    that are conducted on a seasonal basis. Inspections shall continue
    under this subsection until final release of financial assurance.
    (3)(A) Any person who has reason to believe he or she is or may be
    adversely affected by mineral activities due to any violation of the
    requirements of a permit approved under this Act may request an
    inspection. The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, shall determine within 10 working days of
    receipt of the request whether the request states a reason to believe
    that a violation exists. If the person alleges and provides reason to
    believe that an imminent threat to the environment or danger to the
    health or safety of the public exists, the 10-day period shall be
    waived and the inspection shall be conducted immediately. When an
    inspection is conducted under this paragraph, the Secretary concerned
    shall notify the person requesting the inspection, and such person
    shall be allowed to accompany the Secretary concerned or the
    Secretary's authorized representative during the inspection. The
    Secretary shall not incur any liability for allowing such person to
    accompany an authorized representative. The identity of the person
    supplying information to the Secretary relating to a possible violation
    or imminent danger or harm shall remain confidential with the Secretary
    if so requested by that person, unless that person elects to accompany
    an authorized representative on the inspection.
    (B) The Secretaries shall, by joint rule, establish procedures for
    the review of (i) any decision by an authorized representative not to
    inspect; or (ii) any refusal by such representative to ensure that
    remedial actions are taken with respect to any alleged violation. The
    Secretary concerned shall furnish such persons requesting the review a
    written statement of the reasons for the Secretary's final disposition
    of the case.
    (b) Monitoring.--(1) The Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, shall require all operators to
    develop and maintain a monitoring and evaluation system that shall
    identify compliance with all requirements of a permit approved under
    this Act. The Secretary concerned may require additional monitoring to
    be conducted as necessary to assure compliance with the reclamation and
    other environmental standards of this Act. Such plan must be reviewed
    and approved by the Secretary and shall become a part of the
    explorations or operations permit.
    (2) The operator shall file reports with the Secretary, or for
    National Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, on a
    frequency determined by the Secretary concerned, on the results of the
    monitoring and evaluation process, except that if the monitoring and
    evaluation show a violation of the requirements of a permit approved
    under this Act, it shall be reported immediately to the Secretary
    concerned. The Secretary shall evaluate the reports submitted pursuant
    to this paragraph, and based on those reports and any necessary
    inspection shall take enforcement action pursuant to this section. Such
    reports shall be maintained by the operator and by the Secretary and
    shall be made available to the public.
    (3) The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, shall determine what information shall be
    reported by the operator pursuant to paragraph (3). A failure to report
    as required by the Secretary concerned shall constitute a violation of
    this Act and subject the operator to enforcement action pursuant to
    section 506.

    SEC. 504. CITIZENS SUITS.

    (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), any person
    may commence a civil action on his or her own behalf to compel
    compliance--
    (1) against any person (including the Secretary or the
    Secretary of Agriculture) who is alleged to be in violation of
    any of the provisions of this Act or any regulation promulgated
    pursuant to title III of this Act or any term or condition of
    any permit issued under title III of this Act; or
    (2) against the Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture
    where there is alleged a failure of such Secretary to perform
    any act or duty under this Act, or to promulgate any regulation
    under this Act, which is not within the discretion of the
    Secretary concerned.
    The United States district courts shall have jurisdiction over actions
    brought under this section, without regard to the amount in controversy
    or the citizenship of the parties, including actions brought to apply
    any civil penalty under this Act. The district courts of the United
    States shall have jurisdiction to compel agency action unreasonably
    delayed, except that an action to compel agency action reviewable under
    section 505 may only be filed in a United States district court within
    the circuit in which such action would be reviewable under section 505.
    (b) Exceptions.--(1) No action may be commenced under subsection
    (a) before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date the
    plaintiff has given notice in writing of such alleged violation to the
    alleged violator and the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands
    the Secretary of Agriculture, except that any such action may be
    brought immediately after such notification if the violation complained
    of constitutes an imminent threat to the environment or to the health
    or safety of the public.
    (2) No action may be brought against any person other than the
    Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture under subsection (a)(1) if
    such Secretary has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil or
    criminal action in a court of the United States to require compliance.
    (3) No action may be commenced under paragraph (2) of subsection
    (a) against either Secretary to review any rule promulgated by, or to
    any permit issued or denied by such Secretary if such rule or permit
    issuance or denial is judicially reviewable under section 505 or under
    any other provision of law at any time after such promulgation,
    issuance, or denial is final.
    (c) Venue.--Venue of all actions brought under this section shall
    be determined in accordance with section 1391 of title 28, United
    States Code.
    (d) Costs.--The court, in issuing any final order in any action
    brought pursuant to this section may award costs of litigation
    (including attorney and expert witness fees) to any party whenever the
    court determines such award is appropriate. The court may, if a
    temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is sought,
    require the filing of a bond or equivalent security in accordance with
    the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
    (e) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section shall restrict any
    right which any person (or class of persons) may have under chapter 7
    of title 5, United States Code, under this section, or under any other
    statute or common law to bring an action to seek any relief against the
    Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture or against any other person,
    including any action for any violation of this Act or of any regulation
    or permit issued under this Act or for any failure to act as required
    by law. Nothing in this section shall affect the jurisdiction of any
    court under any provision of title 28, United States Code, including
    any action for any violation of this Act or of any regulation or permit
    issued under this Act or for any failure to act as required by law.

    SEC. 505. ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.

    (a) Review by Secretary.--(1)(A) Any person issued a notice of
    violation or cessation order under section 506, or any person having an
    interest which is or may be adversely affected by such notice or order,
    may apply to the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, for review of the notice or order within 30
    days after receipt thereof, or as the case may be, within 30 days after
    such notice or order is modified, vacated, or terminated.
    (B) Any person who is subject to a penalty assessed under section
    506 may apply to the Secretary concerned for review of the assessment
    within 45 days of notification of such penalty.
    (C) Any person may apply to such Secretary for review of the
    decision within 30 days after it is made.
    (D) Pending a review by the Secretary or resolution of an
    administrative appeal, final decisions (except enforcement actions
    under section 506) shall be stayed.
    (2) The Secretary concerned shall provide an opportunity for a
    public hearing at the request of any party to the proceeding as
    specified in paragraph (1). The filing of an application for review
    under this subsection shall not operate as a stay of any order or
    notice issued under section 506.
    (3) For any review proceeding under this subsection, the Secretary
    concerned shall make findings of fact and shall issue a written
    decision incorporating therein an order vacating, affirming, modifying,
    or terminating the notice, order, or decision, or with respect to an
    assessment, the amount of penalty that is warranted. Where the
    application for review concerns a cessation order issued under section
    506 the Secretary concerned shall issue the written decision within 30
    days of the receipt of the application for review or within 30 days
    after the conclusion of any hearing referred to in paragraph (2),
    whichever is later, unless temporary relief has been granted by the
    Secretary concerned under paragraph (4).
    (4) Pending completion of any review proceedings under this
    subsection, the applicant may file with the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, a written request
    that the Secretary grant temporary relief from any order issued under
    section 506 together with a detailed statement giving reasons for such
    relief. The Secretary concerned shall expeditiously issue an order or
    decision granting or denying such relief. The Secretary concerned may
    grant such relief under such conditions as he or she may prescribe only
    if such relief shall not adversely affect the health or safety of the
    public or cause imminent environmental harm to land, air, or water
    resources.
    (5) The availability of review under this subsection shall not be
    construed to limit the operation of rights under section 504 (relating
    to citizen suits).
    (b) Judicial Review.--(1) Any final action by the Secretaries of
    the Interior and Agriculture in promulgating regulations to implement
    this Act, or any other final actions constituting rulemaking to
    implement this Act, shall be subject to judicial review only in the
    United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Any action
    subject to judicial review under this subsection shall be affirmed
    unless the court concludes that such action is arbitrary, capricious,
    or otherwise inconsistent with law. A petition for review of any action
    subject to judicial review under this subsection shall be filed within
    60 days from the date of such action, or after such date if the
    petition is based solely on grounds arising after the 60th day. Any
    such petition may be made by any person who commented or otherwise
    participated in the rulemaking or any person who may be adversely
    affected by the action of the Secretaries.
    (2) Final agency action under this subsection, including such final
    action on those matters described under subsection (a), shall be
    subject to judicial review in accordance with paragraph (4) and
    pursuant to section 1391 of title 28, United States Code, on or before
    60 days from the date of such final action. Any action subject to
    judicial review under this subsection shall be affirmed unless the
    court concludes that such action is arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise
    inconsistent with law.
    (3) The availability of judicial review established in this
    subsection shall not be construed to limit the operations of rights
    under section 504 (relating to citizens suits).
    (4) The court shall hear any petition or complaint filed under this
    subsection solely on the record made before the Secretary or
    Secretaries concerned. The court may affirm or vacate any order or
    decision or may remand the proceedings to the Secretary or Secretaries
    for such further action as it may direct.
    (5) The commencement of a proceeding under this section shall not,
    unless specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the
    action, order, or decision of the Secretary or Secretaries concerned.
    (c) Costs.--Whenever a proceeding occurs under subsection (a) or
    (b), at the request of any person, a sum equal to the aggregate amount
    of all costs and expenses (including attorney fees) as determined by
    the Secretary or Secretaries concerned or the court to have been
    reasonably incurred by such person for or in connection with
    participation in such proceedings, including any judicial review of the
    proceeding, may be assessed against either party as the court, in the
    case of judicial review, or the Secretary or Secretaries concerned in
    the case of administrative proceedings, deems proper if it is
    determined that such party prevailed in whole or in part, achieving
    some success on the merits, and that such party made a substantial
    contribution to a full and fair determination of the issues.

    SEC. 506. ENFORCEMENT.

    (a) Orders.--(1) If the Secretary, or for National Forest System
    lands the Secretary of Agriculture, or an authorized representative of
    such Secretary, determines that any person is in violation of any
    environmental protection requirement under title III or any regulation
    issued by the Secretaries to implement this Act, such Secretary or
    authorized representative shall issue to such person a notice of
    violation describing the violation and the corrective measures to be
    taken. The Secretary concerned, or the authorized representative of
    such Secretary, shall provide such person with a period of time not to
    exceed 30 days to abate the violation. Such period of time may be
    extended by the Secretary concerned upon a showing of good cause by
    such person. If, upon the expiration of time provided for such
    abatement, the Secretary concerned, or the authorized representative of
    such Secretary, finds that the violation has not been abated he or she
    shall immediately order a cessation of all mineral activities or the
    portion thereof relevant to the violation.
    (2) If the Secretary concerned, or the authorized representative of
    the Secretary concerned, determines that any condition or practice
    exists, or that any person is in violation of any requirement under a
    permit approved under this Act, and such condition, practice or
    violation is causing, or can reasonably be expected to cause--
    (A) an imminent danger to the health or safety of the
    public; or
    (B) significant, imminent environmental harm to land, air,
    water, or fish or wildlife resources,
    such Secretary or authorized representative shall immediately order a
    cessation of mineral activities or the portion thereof relevant to the
    condition, practice, or violation.
    (3)(A) A cessation order pursuant to paragraphs (1) or (2) shall
    remain in effect until such Secretary, or authorized representative,
    determines that the condition, practice, or violation has been abated,
    or until modified, vacated or terminated by the Secretary or authorized
    representative. In any such order, the Secretary or authorized
    representative shall determine the steps necessary to abate the
    violation in the most expeditious manner possible and shall include the
    necessary measures in the order. The Secretary concerned shall require
    appropriate financial assurances to ensure that the abatement
    obligations are met.
    (B) Any notice or order issued pursuant to paragraphs (1) or (2)
    may be modified, vacated, or terminated by the Secretary concerned or
    an authorized representative of such Secretary. Any person to whom any
    such notice or order is issued shall be entitled to a hearing on the
    record.
    (4) If, after 30 days of the date of the order referred to in
    paragraph (3)(A) the required abatement has not occurred, the Secretary
    concerned shall take such alternative enforcement action against the
    claim holder or operator (or any person who controls the claim holder
    or operator) as will most likely bring about abatement in the most
    expeditious manner possible. Such alternative enforcement action may
    include, but is not necessarily limited to, seeking appropriate
    injunctive relief to bring about abatement. Nothing in this paragraph
    shall preclude the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, from taking alternative enforcement action
    prior to the expiration of 30 days.
    (5) If a claim holder or operator (or any person who controls the
    claim holder or operator) fails to abate a violation or defaults on the
    terms of the permit, the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands
    the Secretary of Agriculture, shall forfeit the financial assurance for
    the plan as necessary to ensure abatement and reclamation under this
    Act. The Secretary concerned may prescribe conditions under which a
    surety may perform reclamation in accordance with the approved plan in
    lieu of forfeiture.
    (6) The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the
    Secretary of Agriculture, shall not cause forfeiture of the financial
    assurance while administrative or judicial review is pending.
    (7) In the event of forfeiture, the claim holder, operator, or any
    affiliate thereof, as appropriate as determined by the Secretary by
    rule, shall be jointly and severally liable for any remaining
    reclamation obligations under this Act.
    (b) Compliance.--The Secretary, or for National Forest System lands
    the Secretary of Agriculture, may request the Attorney General to
    institute a civil action for relief, including a permanent or temporary
    injunction or restraining order, or any other appropriate enforcement
    order, including the imposition of civil penalties, in the district
    court of the United States for the district in which the mineral
    activities are located whenever a person--
    (1) violates, fails, or refuses to comply with any order
    issued by the Secretary concerned under subsection (a); or
    (2) interferes with, hinders, or delays the Secretary
    concerned in carrying out an inspection under section 503.
    Such court shall have jurisdiction to provide such relief as may be
    appropriate. Any relief granted by the court to enforce an order under
    paragraph (1) shall continue in effect until the completion or final
    termination of all proceedings for review of such order unless the
    district court granting such relief sets it aside.
    (c) Delegation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
    Secretary may utilize personnel of the Office of Surface Mining
    Reclamation and Enforcement to ensure compliance with the requirements
    of this Act.
    (d) Penalties.--(1) Any person who fails to comply with any
    requirement of a permit approved under this Act or any regulation
    issued by the Secretaries to implement this Act shall be liable for a
    penalty of not more than $25,000 per violation. Each day of violation
    may be deemed a separate violation for purposes of penalty assessments.
    (2) A person who fails to correct a violation for which a cessation
    order has been issued under subsection (a) within the period permitted
    for its correction shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than
    $1,000 per violation for each day during which such failure continues.
    (3) Whenever a corporation is in violation of a requirement of a
    permit approved under this Act or any regulation issued by the
    Secretaries to implement this Act or fails or refuses to comply with an
    order issued under subsection (a), any director, officer, or agent of
    such corporation who knowingly authorized, ordered, or carried out such
    violation, failure, or refusal shall be subject to the same penalties
    as may be imposed upon the person referred to in paragraph (1).
    (e) Suspensions or Revocations.--The Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, shall suspend or
    revoke a permit issued under title III, in whole or in part, if the
    operator--
    (1) knowingly made or knowingly makes any false,
    inaccurate, or misleading material statement in any mining
    claim, notice of location, application, record, report, plan,
    or other document filed or required to be maintained under this
    Act;
    (2) fails to abate a violation covered by a cessation order
    issued under subsection (a);
    (3) fails to comply with an order of the Secretary
    concerned;
    (4) refuses to permit an audit pursuant to this Act;
    (5) fails to maintain an adequate financial assurance under
    section 306;
    (6) fails to pay claim maintenance fees or other moneys due
    and owing under this Act; or
    (7) with regard to plans conditionally approved under
    section 305(c)(2), fails to abate a violation to the
    satisfaction of the Secretary concerned, or if the validity of
    the violation is upheld on the appeal which formed the basis
    for the conditional approval.
    (f) False Statements; Tampering.--Any person who knowingly--
    (1) makes any false material statement, representation, or
    certification in, or omits or conceals material information
    from, or unlawfully alters, any mining claim, notice of
    location, application, record, report, plan, or other documents
    filed or required to be maintained under this Act; or
    (2) falsifies, tampers with, renders inaccurate, or fails
    to install any monitoring device or method required to be
    maintained under this Act,
    shall upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000,
    or by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or by both. If a
    conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first
    conviction of such person under this subsection, punishment shall be by
    a fine of not more than $20,000 per day of violation, or by
    imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both. Each day of continuing
    violation may be deemed a separate violation for purposes of penalty
    assessments.
    (g) Knowing Violations.--Any person who knowingly--
    (1) engages in mineral activities without a permit required
    under title III; or
    (2) violates any other requirement of a permit issued under
    this Act, or any condition or limitation thereof,
    shall upon conviction be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
    more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not more
    than 3 years, or both. If a conviction of a person is for a violation
    committed after the first conviction of such person under this
    subsection, punishment shall be a fine of not less than $10,000 per day
    of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 6 years, or both.
    (h) Knowing and Willful Violations.--Any person who knowingly and
    willfully commits an act for which a civil penalty is provided in
    paragraph (1) of subsection (g) shall, upon conviction, be punished by
    a fine of not more than $50,000, or by imprisonment for not more than 2
    years, or both.
    (i) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``person''
    includes any officer, agent, or employee of a person.

    SEC. 507. REGULATIONS.

    The Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture shall issue such
    regulations as are necessary to implement this Act. The regulations
    implementing title II, title III, title IV, and title V that affect the
    Forest Service shall be joint regulations issued by both Secretaries,
    and shall be issued no later than 180 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act.

    SEC. 508. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act,
    except as otherwise provided in this Act.

    Subtitle B--Miscellaneous Provisions

    SEC. 511. OIL SHALE CLAIMS.

    Section 2511(f) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
    486) is amended--
    (1) by striking ``as prescribed by the Secretary''; and
    (2) by inserting before the period the following: ``in the
    same manner as required by title II and title III of the
    Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009''.

    SEC. 512. PURCHASING POWER ADJUSTMENT.

    The Secretary shall adjust all location fees, claim maintenance
    rates, penalty amounts, and other dollar amounts established in this
    Act for changes in the purchasing power of the dollar no less
    frequently than every 5 years following the date of enactment of this
    Act, employing the Consumer Price Index for All-Urban Consumers
    published by the Department of Labor as the basis for adjustment, and
    rounding according to the adjustment process of conditions of the
    Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (104 Stat.
    890).

    SEC. 513. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

    (a) Special Application of Mining Laws.--Nothing in this Act shall
    be construed as repealing or modifying any Federal law, regulation,
    order, or land use plan, in effect prior to the date of enactment of
    this Act that prohibits or restricts the application of the general
    mining laws, including laws that provide for special management
    criteria for operations under the general mining laws as in effect
    prior to the date of enactment of this Act, to the extent such laws
    provide for protection of natural and cultural resources and the
    environment greater than required under this Act, and any such prior
    law shall remain in force and effect with respect to claims located (or
    proposed to be located) or converted under this Act. Nothing in this
    Act shall be construed as applying to or limiting mineral
    investigations, studies, or other mineral activities conducted by any
    Federal or State agency acting in its governmental capacity pursuant to
    other authority. Nothing in this Act shall affect or limit any
    assessment, investigation, evaluation, or listing pursuant to the
    Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
    of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), or the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42
    U.S.C. 3251 et seq.).
    (b) Effect on Other Federal Laws.--The provisions of this Act shall
    supersede the general mining laws, except for those parts of the
    general mining laws respecting location of mining claims that are not
    expressly modified by this Act. Except for the general mining laws,
    nothing in this Act shall be construed as superseding, modifying,
    amending, or repealing any provision of Federal law not expressly
    superseded, modified, amended, or repealed by this Act. Nothing in this
    Act shall be construed as altering, affecting, amending, modifying, or
    changing, directly or indirectly, any law which refers to and provides
    authorities or responsibilities for, or is administered by, the
    Environmental Protection Agency or the Administrator of the
    Environmental Protection Agency, including the Federal Water Pollution
    Control Act, title XIV of the Public Health Service Act (the Safe
    Drinking Water Act), the Clean Air Act, the Pollution Prevention Act of
    1990, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Federal Insecticide,
    Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
    Act, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, the Federal
    Hazardous Substances Act, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the
    Atomic Energy Act, the Noise Control Act of 1972, the Solid Waste
    Disposal Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
    and Liability Act of 1980, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
    Act of 1986, the Ocean Dumping Act, the Environmental Research,
    Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act, the Pollution
    Prosecution Act of 1990, and the Federal Facilities Compliance Act of
    1992, or any statute containing an amendment to any of such Acts.
    Nothing in this Act shall be construed as modifying or affecting any
    provision of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
    (Public Law 101-601) or any provision of the American Indian Religious
    Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 1996), the National Historic Preservation Act
    (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of
    1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.).
    (c) Protection of Conservation Areas.--In order to protect the
    resources and values of National Conservation System units, the
    Secretary, as appropriate, shall utilize authority under this Act and
    other applicable law to the fullest extent necessary to prevent mineral
    activities that could have an adverse impact on the resources or values
    for which such units were established.
    (d) Sovereign Immunity of Indian Tribes.--Nothing in this section
    shall be construed so as to waive the sovereign immunity of any Indian
    tribe.

    SEC. 514. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC RECORDS.

    Copies of records, reports, inspection materials, or information
    obtained by the Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture under this
    Act shall be made immediately available to the public, consistent with
    section 552 of title 5, United States Code, in central and sufficient
    locations in the county, multicounty, and State area of mineral
    activity or reclamation so that such items are conveniently available
    to residents in the area proposed or approved for mineral activities
    and on the Internet.

    SEC. 515. MISCELLANEOUS POWERS.

    (a) In General.--In carrying out his or her duties under this Act,
    the Secretary, or for National Forest System lands the Secretary of
    Agriculture, may conduct any investigation, inspection, or other
    inquiry necessary and appropriate and may conduct, after notice, any
    hearing or audit, necessary and appropriate to carrying out his or her
    duties.
    (b) Ancillary Powers.--In connection with any hearing, inquiry,
    investigation, or audit under this Act, the Secretary, or for National
    Forest System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, is authorized to take
    any of the following actions:
    (1) Require, by special or general order, any person to
    submit in writing such affidavits and answers to questions as
    the Secretary concerned may reasonably prescribe, which
    submission shall be made within such reasonable period and
    under oath or otherwise, as may be necessary.
    (2) Administer oaths.
    (3) Require by subpoena the attendance and testimony of
    witnesses and the production of all books, papers, records,
    documents, matter, and materials, as such Secretary may
    request.
    (4) Order testimony to be taken by deposition before any
    person who is designated by such Secretary and who has the
    power to administer oaths, and to compel testimony and the
    production of evidence in the same manner as authorized under
    paragraph (3) of this subsection.
    (5) Pay witnesses the same fees and mileage as are paid in
    like circumstances in the courts of the United States.
    (c) Enforcement.--In cases of refusal to obey a subpoena served
    upon any person under this section, the district court of the United
    States for any district in which such person is found, resides, or
    transacts business, upon application by the Attorney General at the
    request of the Secretary concerned and after notice to such person,
    shall have jurisdiction to issue an order requiring such person to
    appear and produce documents before the Secretary concerned. Any
    failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court
    as contempt thereof and subject to a penalty of up to $10,000 a day.
    (d) Entry and Access.--Without advance notice and upon presentation
    of appropriate credentials, the Secretary, or for National Forest
    System lands the Secretary of Agriculture, or any authorized
    representative thereof--
    (1) shall have the right of entry to, upon, or through the
    site of any claim, mineral activities, or any premises in which
    any records required to be maintained under this Act are
    located;
    (2) may at reasonable times, and without delay, have access
    to records, inspect any monitoring equipment, or review any
    method of operation required under this Act;
    (3) may engage in any work and do all things necessary or
    expedient to implement and administer the provisions of this
    Act;
    (4) may, on any mining claim located under the general
    mining laws and maintained in compliance with this Act, and
    without advance notice, stop and inspect any motorized form of
    transportation that such Secretary has probable cause to
    believe is carrying locatable minerals, concentrates, or
    products derived therefrom from a claim site for the purpose of
    determining whether the operator of such vehicle has
    documentation related to such locatable minerals, concentrates,
    or products derived therefrom as required by law, if such
    documentation is required under this Act; and
    (5) may, if accompanied by any appropriate law enforcement
    officer, or an appropriate law enforcement officer alone, stop
    and inspect any motorized form of transportation which is not
    on a claim site if he or she has probable cause to believe such
    vehicle is carrying locatable minerals, concentrates, or
    products derived therefrom from a claim site on Federal lands
    or allocated to such claim site. Such inspection shall be for
    the purpose of determining whether the operator of such vehicle
    has the documentation required by law, if such documentation is
    required under this Act.

    SEC. 516. MULTIPLE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT AND SURFACE RESOURCES.

    The provisions of sections 4 and 6 of the Act of August 13, 1954
    (30 U.S.C. 524 and 526), commonly known as the Multiple Minerals
    Development Act, and the provisions of section 4 of the Act of July 23,
    1955 (30 U.S.C. 612), shall apply to all mining claims located under
    the general mining laws and maintained in compliance with such laws and
    this Act.

    SEC. 517. MINERAL MATERIALS.

    (a) Determinations.--Section 3 of the Act of July 23, 1955 (30
    U.S.C. 611), is amended--
    (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before the first sentence;
    (2) by inserting ``mineral materials, including but not
    limited to'' after ``varieties of'' in the first sentence;
    (3) by striking ``or cinders'' and inserting in lieu
    thereof ``cinders, and clay''; and
    (4) by adding the following new subsection at the end
    thereof:
    ``(b)(1) Subject to valid existing rights, after the date of
    enactment of the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009,
    notwithstanding the reference to common varieties in subsection (a) and
    to the exception to such term relating to a deposit of materials with
    some property giving it distinct and special value, all deposits of
    mineral materials referred to in such subsection, including the block
    pumice referred to in such subsection, shall be subject to disposal
    only under the terms and conditions of the Materials Act of 1947.
    ``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the term `valid existing
    rights' means that a mining claim located for any such mineral
    material--
    ``(A) had and still has some property giving it the
    distinct and special value referred to in subsection (a), or as
    the case may be, met the definition of block pumice referred to
    in such subsection;
    ``(B) was properly located and maintained under the general
    mining laws prior to the date of enactment of the Hardrock
    Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009;
    ``(C) was supported by a discovery of a valuable mineral
    deposit within the meaning of the general mining laws as in
    effect immediately prior to the date of enactment of the
    Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009; and
    ``(D) that such claim continues to be valid under this
    Act.''.
    (b) Mineral Materials Disposal Clarification.--Section 4 of the Act
    of July 23, 1955 (30 U.S.C. 612), is amended--
    (1) in subsection (b) by inserting ``and mineral material''
    after ``vegetative''; and
    (2) in subsection (c) by inserting ``and mineral material''
    after ``vegetative''.
    (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1 of the Act of July 31, 1947,
    entitled ``An Act to provide for the disposal of materials on the
    public lands of the United States'' (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended
    by striking ``common varieties of'' in the first sentence.
    (d) Short Titles.--
    (1) Surface resources.--The Act of July 23, 1955, is
    amended by inserting after section 7 the following new section:
    ``Sec. 8. This Act may be cited as the `Surface Resources Act of
    1955'.''.
    (2) Mineral materials.--The Act of July 31, 1947, entitled
    ``An Act to provide for the disposal of materials on the public
    lands of the United States'' (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended
    by inserting after section 4 the following new section:
    ``Sec. 5. This Act may be cited as the `Materials Act of 1947'.''.
    (e) Repeals.--(1) Subject to valid existing rights, the Act of
    August 4, 1892 (27 Stat. 348; 30 U.S.C. 161), commonly known as the
    Building Stone Act, is hereby repealed.
    (2) Subject to valid existing rights, the Act of January 31, 1901
    (30 U.S.C. 162), commonly known as the Saline Placer Act, is hereby
    repealed.

  2. #2
    maksutaSTAR Guest
    The Survival of a “Relic of Pioneer Days”:
    The Political Economy of Mining Law “Reform”
    Andrew P. Morriss, Roger E. Meiners and Andres Dorchak
    Abstract
    The Mining Law of 1872 has been under attack for more than a century. It is consistently
    derided as a giveaway to mining companies. In this paper we use public choice theory to
    discuss the primary reasons the law has been attacked and chipped away at over the
    years. Numerous special interests have attacked the law and the incentives of Congress
    and Administrations have differed over time. We explain why the law has not been
    abolished despite wide support for “protecting” federal assets by maintaining political
    control. As discussed in earlier works, we find the law to be a desirable way to transfer
    politically controlled resources to the private sector.
    2
    Draft Working Paper – Do Not Circulate without Permission
    The Survival of a “Relic of Pioneer Days”:1
    The Political Economy of Mining Law “Reform”
    Andrew P. Morriss,* Roger E. Meiners,** and Andrew Dorchak***
    Years after the discovery of gold at Sutter’s Mill triggered the California gold
    rush, Congress established a comprehensive statute governing mineral resources on
    federal land. The General Mining Law of 18722 ratified two key principles derived from
    the customary mining law that applied to mining on public lands from 1848 to the late
    1860s, and which have remained at the heart of American mining law ever since: (1) selfinitiated
    free access to mineral resources on the public domain; and (2) fee simple title to
    the resources for the claimant.3
    Almost immediately, interest groups began to seek changes to the Mining Law, at
    first primarily extension of deadlines but eventually including the withdrawal of
    particular resources and lands from the law’s coverage. The development of petroleum
    1 David Alberswerth, The Mining Law: Time to Pull the Plug, in Subcommittee on Mineral Resources
    Development and Production, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Mining Laws of
    1872 and 1989 (101st Congress, 2nd Session, 1991) (hereafter “1991 Senate Hearings”) at 253.
    * H. Ross & Helen Workman Professor of Law and Professor of Business, University of Illinois; Galen J.
    Roush Professor of Business Law and Regulation and Co-Director, Center for Business Law & Regulation,
    Case Western Reserve University School of Law and Senior Associate, PERC (Property and Environment
    Research Center), Bozeman, Montana. A.B. 1981, Princeton; J.D., M. Pub. Aff. 1984, University of Texas
    at Austin; Ph.D. (Economics) 1994, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This paper shortens the
    historical development of mining law in the U.S. For a copy of the longer version, contact the author.
    Support from the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America and from PERC is gratefully
    acknowledged. Comments from ___ improved the paper; of course, we remain responsible for all errors.
    ** Goolsby Distinguished Professor of Economics and Law, University of Texas at Arlington, and Senior
    Associate, PERC, Bozeman, Montana. B.A. 1970, Washington State University; M.A., 1972, University of
    Arizona; Ph.D. (Economics) 1977, Virginia Tech; J.D. 1978, University of Miami.
    *** Head of Reference and Foreign/International Law Specialist, Case Western Reserve University School
    of Law; M.L.S. 1994, Kent State University; Honors B.A., 1988, Xavier University.
    2 CITE TO STATUTE
    3 We discuss the General Mining Law’s provisions in greater detail in Andrew P. Morriss, Roger E.
    Meiners, & Andrew Dorchak, Homesteading Rock: A Defense of Free Access Under the General Mining
    Law of 1872, 34 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 745 (2004). See also Andrew P. Morriss, Roger E. Meiners, &
    Andrew Dorchak, Hard Rock Homesteads: Free Access & the General Mining Law of 1872, __ J. ENERGY
    & NAT. RES. L. __ (2006).
    3
    led to major changes in how oil resources were privatized, partly in response to national
    security concerns. More recently, the politics of the environmental movement produced
    repeated, and thus far unsuccessful, assaults on the free access principle and efforts to
    restrict the rights granted claimants. These efforts continue today, with bills introduced in
    virtually every recent Congress to require mineral rights claimants to pay royalties,
    purchase limited rights at auction, or otherwise limit the access and form of title
    available.
    In this Article we examine the history of these attempts and provide an institutionbased
    account of how the General Mining Law came into existence and why the General
    Mining Law’s core has remained unchanged since 1872. In Part I we describe how the
    free access principle became enshrined in the General Mining Law of 1872. Part II
    surveys the various “reform” efforts since 1872. Part III concludes with an assessment of
    the future of the General Mining Law.
    I. Creating a Free Access Regime
    The General Mining Law of 1872 offers prospectors a deal: find a valuable resource on
    federal land, invest in developing the resource, and the resource, and the land containing
    it, becomes yours (after payment of a small fee, to cover administrative costs), with a fee
    simple title and without any requirement to pay royalties on the mineral resources
    removed. The deal was attractive to quite a few prospectors: from 1867 to 2000, 3.3
    million acres of public land became private land under the Mining Law’s provisions.4
    4 Marc Humphries and Carol Hardy Vincent, Mining on Federal Lands (CRS Issue Brief 89130) (2001).
    This amounts to only 1.5% of all federal land privatized under all land disposal laws, however. Id.
    4
    This process is regularly attacked as a “giveaway” of federal land and resources by
    Mining Law opponents.5
    A. Creating the General Mining Law
    The California gold rush produced enormous wealth. The first reliable numbers
    came well after the boom in 1870 and show that even this late, mining in California
    involved over $20 million in capital, almost $4 million annually in wages, and produced
    over $8 million in annual output, respectively approximately 10, 5, and 5 percent of the
    1870 totals in U.S. mining.6 This wealth, derived in large measure from nominally public
    lands, continued to attract attention in Washington, D.C. even after California’s
    admission as a state. From the late 1840s until the mid-1860s, Congress regularly debated
    different approaches to mining on public lands, including proposals to require sales of
    gold to the government at fixed rates, taxes on production, military seizure of the gold
    fields, and leasing arrangements. Until 1866, however, Congress did not succeed in
    addressing the western mineral claims, leaving mining interests in possession through
    customary miners’ law.
    An important reason was that California’s 1850 entry as a state gave mining
    interests a presence in the Congress, limiting the ability of the rest of the states to
    redistribute California’s mineral wealth. In this endeavor, California was aided by strong
    connections between important figures in California and powerful politicians in
    Washington. For example, Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton’s son-in-law was
    California Senator John C. Fremont. Benton served in the Senate from 1821 to 1851 and
    5 See Morriss, Meiners, & Dorchak, Homesteading Rock, supra note 3, at __ (discussing opposition to the
    Mining Law); Morriss, Meiners & Dorchak, Hard Rock Homesteads, supra note 3, at __ (same).
    6 The totals include all forms of mining and so the percentages understate the contribution to total gold
    mining. Pennsylvania’s coal mines were the major other source of mining wealth.
    5
    in the House from 1853-1855.7 Although Fremont served in the Senate only in 1850 and
    1851, the ties between Californians and powerful Washington figures like Benton were
    mutually beneficial.8 Moreover, during this time Congress was partially paralyzed by the
    pre-Civil War sectional conflict or focused on the war itself, distracting it from legislating
    on mineral rights.
    California did not wait to put its stamp on mining law. Its legislature adopted
    provisions recognizing customary claims and attempted to restrict the activities of foreign
    miners (through exclusionary taxes aimed at Chinese miners, for example). California
    politicians appear to have understood that the prosperity created by mining created wealth
    worth more than the rents available from attempting to tax the mines. California’s
    aggressive legitimation of miners’ property rights helped secure them against
    expropriation by the national government.
    The discovery of mineral resources elsewhere in the west also boosted mining
    interests’ ability to influence Congress. The vast silver deposits in Nevada such as the
    Comstock Lode caused a boom that led that territory to statehood in 1864.
    When Congress finally acted, it chose the free access approach. In 1866, Congress
    passed the Mining Law of 1866, which first gave explicit federal approval to free access
    to lode deposits on federal land.9 “The 1866 law was drafted primarily by [Nevada]
    Senator Stewart, who made his career as a mining lawyer on the Comstock Lode and
    7 Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774-Present, “Thomas Hart Benton,”
    http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts...?index=B000398 (last visited July 10, 2006).
    8 DISCUSS LAND CLAIMS.
    9 14 STAT. AT LARGE 251 (1866). Stephen D. Alfers, Randall E. Hubbard, and Christopher Hayes, Coping
    with Mining Law Reform. 37 ROCKY MTN.MINERAL LAW INSTITUTE 12-13 (1991) (“The chief
    significance of the 1866 law was that it was the first congressional declaration that the mineral lands of the
    United States were to be free and open to exploration and occupation for mining.”)
    6
    represented the interests of the lode miners.”10 He had been a prominent lawyer,
    including serving as attorney general, in California from 1850 until he moved to Nevada
    in 1860.11 The law provided that “the mineral lands of the public domain, both surveyed
    and unsurveyed,” are “to be free and open to exploration and occupation by all citizens of
    the United States, and those declaring their intention to become citizens, subject to such
    regulations as may be prescribed by law,” and “subject also to the local customs or rules
    of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same may not be in conflict with
    the laws of the United States.”12 The 1866 law was followed by the Placer Act in 1870,13
    which provided free access to placer deposits.
    The two statutes were consolidated into the General Mining Law of 1872, which
    “corrected some of the deficiencies” in the two earlier statutes and “codified and defined
    the tenure system under which mining was to be conducted on public lands.”14
    It made the standards of the early mining camps, priority, possession and diligent
    development, the tests of validity of a claim. It imposed its own test, discovery, on
    claimants. Congress had made a policy statement that the proper method of
    alienation of mineral lands was to be through entry and exploration, with title (in
    the form of as patent) to be granted only after a discovery was proved and a
    minimum amount of development work performed.15
    Why would Congress ratify a “giveaway” of resources under its control? By the
    time Congress acted, the mineral interests in the West were well established and wealthy
    10 Alfers, et al., supra note 9, at 12-13
    11 Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774-Present, “William Morris Stewart,”
    http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts...?index=S000922 (Last visited July 10, 2006).
    12 GLC Rep. 1866, 386
    13 Act of July 9, 1870, ch. 235, 16 Stat. 217, (1870),
    14 Alfers, et al., supra note 9, at 12-14.
    15 Alfers, et al., supra note 9, at 12-14.
    7
    and able to protect themselves politically. Together with strong support from western
    politicians, including not only California and Nevada’s congressional delegations but the
    territorial delegates from mineral rich territories like Montana, Idaho, Colorado, and
    Dakota, Westerners had some clout in Congress. The Congresses that adopted these three
    statutes were dominated by radical Republicans.16 California interests were prominently
    represented by Republican John C. Fremont.17
    The establishment of free access and fee simple title as the primary underpinnings
    of American mining law grew out of a combination of the experience with alternatives
    which weakened their appeal, frontier conditions which allowed the establishment of
    property rights based on customary law, and the rapid establishment of mineral claims
    holders as a powerful interest group with representation in Congress through California’s
    immediate statehood. The initial success of the western mineral rights holders in gaining
    recognition of their property rights did not mean that other interests would abandon
    efforts to obtain a share of the wealth. We now turn to the efforts to “reform” the Mining
    Law.
    II. Efforts at “Reform”
    Our framework for analyzing “reform” proposals relies on an interest group-based
    analysis. That is, we ask who the winners and losers were from proposed changes. There
    are undoubtedly sincere proponents of both change and the status quo who do not
    perceive their positions as rooted in self-interest. Ideological positions in favor of
    16 In 1866 the Senate had 39 Republicans out of 54 members and the House 136 of 193. In 1870, the Senate
    had 62 Republicans out of 74 members and the House 171 out of 243. In 1872, the Senate had 56
    Republicans out of 74 members and the House 136 out of 253.
    17 Fremont briefly served as a candidate for the Radicals in the 1864 presidential election before
    withdrawing. CITE. As a general in the Civil War he issued a proclamation freeing slaves in Missouri in
    1861, which was later rescinded by President Lincoln. CITE.
    8
    “national security,” “development,” or “the environment” may shape the debate over
    proposals, but we contend that the results of the political process are more directly related
    to the interest groups involved.
    A. Understanding the “Reform” Agenda
    The first thirty five years of the General Mining Law saw only minor changes to
    its provisions. Most of these were temporary extensions of time to conduct the required
    work on claims during economic depressions (1893,18 189419) and war (189820). The
    Supreme Court resolved several minor points concerning mineral property rights, holding
    there was no right of dower in 189621 and clarifying issues concerning extralateral
    rights22 and the surface form of locations.23 Lands in Oklahoma were exempted from the
    Mining Law several times, apparently in ignorance of the existence of oil and gas
    reserves and to facilitate homesteading.24 After the turn of the century, however, the rise
    of the conservation movement and the increasing importance of petroleum created the
    first significant movements to modify the General Mining Law. As federal land policy
    increasingly shifted from disposal to management, more broad-based assaults on the
    General Mining Law also began to appear. Here we review the evolution of opposition to
    the General Mining Law through the history of both the successful and unsuccessful
    attempts to alter it.
    18 28 Stat. 6
    19 28 Stat. 114
    20 30 Stat. 651
    21 Black v. Elkhorn Mining Co., 163 U.S. 445 (1896)
    22 Del Monte Mining & Milling Co. v. Last Chance Co., 171 U.S. 55 (1898)
    23 Walrath v. Champion, 171 U.S. 293 (1898). Congress modified the Court’s resolution in the later case in
    1898. 30 U.S.C. 23 (1934) FIX TO STAT CITE. EXPLAIN BRIEFLY.
    24 See Oklahoma v. Texas, 258 U.S. 574, 600-601, 42 S.Ct. 406, 416 (1922) (discussing history of
    agricultural designation of lands in Oklahoma and tracing it to an 1891 statute.)
    9
    Understanding the evolution of this opposition requires consideration of the
    broader context of federal land policy. Three issues shape the political contours of federal
    land management disputes. First, federal lands lie almost exclusively west of the
    Mississippi. Approximately 55% is in the western continental United States and an
    additional 36% is in Alaska and Hawaii, leaving under 9% spread across the North East
    (0.2%), North Central (2.9%), South Central (2.9%), and South Atlantic (2.2%) states.25
    Even within the west, states vary considerably in the percentages of their territory that is
    federal land. For example, the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service
    manage 43% of Arizona land, 45% of California, 27% of Montana, 80% of Nevada, and
    50% of Wyoming.26
    Disputes over federal land generally and over mining in particular thus have a
    strongly regional flavor. States with large bodies of federal land have a strong interest in
    continuing the General Mining Law’s privatization of valuable portions of that land,
    whether for mining or for other purposes, because it increases the amount of land
    available for state taxation and subject to state authority.27 States without large bodies of
    federal land (or without significant mineral deposits) have a strong interest in federalizing
    the value of mineral deposits on federal land, since that would increase the resources
    available to them through the federal treasury at little cost to their residents.
    Second, there is a larger political dispute between those favoring extractive
    industries and those seeking to halt what they view as environmentally destructive land
    25 General Services Administration, Federal Real Property Profile (2003, Figure 11, available at
    http://www.gsa.gov/gsa/cm_attachment...R2-ogp_R2Mn11_
    0Z5RDZ-i34K-pR.doc (last visited July 24, 2006).
    26 National Research Council, HARDROCK MINING ON FEDERAL LANDS Table 1-1 at 18 (1999).
    27 One indication that this is the case is that western states tend to follow different policies with respect to
    mineral deposits on state lands, using leases for example, to capture a portion of the revenue from the
    mineral rights rather than allowing free access.
    10
    uses and to restrict development of public lands. This conflict includes disputes over
    leases of federal land for ranching, water rights disputes, establishment of national
    monuments, and other management conflicts. Changing the Mining Law is an important
    political goal for the opponents of extractive industries generally because mining is a
    highly visible extractive use and because the Law has often been successfully used by
    developers to privatize federal land for non-mining purposes. Thus on top of the regional
    debate there is also a development-preservation debate.28
    Third, the debate over the control of some mineral resources is related to national
    security issues. For mineral resources which play a major role in weapons systems (e.g.
    uranium) or are otherwise seen as critical (e.g. oil), the military and its political
    supporters often favor preserving and controlling supplies derived from American
    territory and retaining federal ownership.
    These three issues overlap in different ways, making different coalitions possible
    with respect to specific proposed “reforms” of the General Mining Law. It is our
    contention that the various waves of proposed and successful amendments to the statute
    are best understood through an analysis that centers on the interest groups involved in
    these issues. Next we describe proposed and successful changes to the Law using this
    interest group framework.
    B. Limits, 1909-1964
    The first comprehensive assault on the General Mining Law appears to have been
    a 1914 address to the New York meeting of the American Institute of Mining Engineers
    28 This, of course, overlaps with the regional analysis in many dimensions. Preservation values are
    “cheaper” to hold in states where economic activity is not reduced by restrictions on federal land use,
    making senators and congressmen from the east able to hold these values with lower political costs.
    11
    by mining engineer Horace Winchell.29 He gave nine major reasons why the law needed
    an overhaul. Three of his reasons concerned technical legal doctrines (the apex rule,30
    inconsistent rules for placer and lode claims limiting challenges to claims,31 and the lack
    of a central registry of claims32) that do not relate to the free access, self-initiated award
    of property rights and so need not concern us further here.
    However, three of Winchell’s complaints centered on his contention that the law
    was technically inappropriate for the wider range of minerals being claimed and the new
    techniques used. Winchell argued that the law had been written for the relatively rich
    deposits of gold and silver found in the early mineral rushes and was inappropriate for
    lower grade deposits of minerals.33 He made similar claims concerning its application to
    coal and petroleum34 and to new substances “either not known to exist or not considered
    as valuable minerals in 1872” including “radium-bearing minerals, phosphates, potash
    and other salts, rare earths and similar products.”35 As we shall see, Congress agreed with
    Winchell in part and eventually withdrew several minerals from the Mining Law’s
    coverage, including oil and potash.36
    Winchell also argued that the Law was flawed because it gave too little protection
    to mining interests. He objected to the inability to appeal to the courts from some
    administrative decisions37 and he objected to the discovery requirement. He contended
    29 Horace V. Winchell, “Why Mining Laws Should Be Revised” American Institute of Mining Engineers,
    NY meeting (1914). FULL CITE
    30 Winchell, supra note 29, at 652-658.
    31 Winchell, supra note 29, at 663.
    32 Winchell, supra note 29, at 662-663.
    33 Winchell, supra note 29, at 645-648.
    34 Winchell, supra note 29, at 659-661.
    35 Winchell, supra note 29, at 661-662.
    36 CROSS REFERENCE
    37 Winchell, supra note 29, at 658-659.
    12
    that the law “discourages prospecting and the discovery and development of new mines”
    because
    the discovery of mineral deposits is no longer an incident of a summer vacation.
    The prospector of the future must possess more expensive equipment, greater
    technical knowledge, and a larger exchequer, and his operations must perforce be
    conducted through shafts, tunnels, and drill holes, in some instances taking years
    of diligent and well-directed effort. The requirement of a discovery before
    location and antecedent to the granting of any exclusive possessory title is
    therefore not only irksome and deterrent of results in practice, but wrong in
    principle.38
    Finally he argued that the law was deficient because it failed to require development of
    claims patented.39
    Winchell’s complaints are significant because they reflect a sense that the law as
    administered gave too little protection to miners. Not surprisingly for an address to an
    association of mining engineers, Winchell argued for “improvements” that would benefit
    mining interests by eliminating the discovery requirement, expanding appeals, and
    increasing mining on claimed land. His analysis suggests two divisions among interest
    groups over the operation of the Mining Law: the applicability of it to “new” resources
    such as oil and the security of the title provided as discovery increasingly required more
    substantial investment.
    For most mineral deposits, Western interests were aligned in support of
    application of free access and fee simple title. Western states’ economies generally
    38 Winchell, supra note 29, at 648-652.
    39 Winchell, supra note 29, at 663-664.
    13
    benefited from the economic activity mining produced, mining interests benefited from
    lower costs, and Western state governments received tax revenues from the increase in
    economic activity associated with mining. The opponents of free access and fee simple
    title, who generally advocated leases, auctions or royalties, would have been from eastern
    states that would prefer that mineral resources generate federal revenue in which they
    could share. The benefit of a change to any particular eastern state, however, was
    relatively small compared to the benefit of maintaining the status quo for western states.
    Given the power to block change given to strong regional interests by the rules of the
    U.S. Senate, the maintenance of the overall status quo was to be expected.
    Two major changes occurred in this period. First, the Pickett Act of 1910 gave the
    president authority to withdraw land from coverage under the Mining Law. Second, the
    Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 withdrew several fertilizer and fuel minerals from the
    Mining Law’s coverage. How did these limitations come about?
    In 1906, President Roosevelt withdrew from the Mining Law’s coverage 66
    million acres of land likely to contain coal and oil deposits, using asserted presidential
    authority to do so.40 His successor, President Taft, also withdrew 4.5 million acres of oil
    lands in Wyoming and California. These withdrawals were controversial assertions of
    presidential power,41 and were resolved through the Pickett Act,42 which settled the
    question in favor of allowing withdrawals of land.43 The withdrawals were of lands with
    40 Leigh Raymond & Sally K. Fairfax, Fragmentation of Public Domain Law and Policy: An Alternative to
    the ‘Shift to Retention’ Thesis, 39 NAT. RES. J. 649, 730 (1999).
    41 William E. Colby, Mining Law in Recent Years, 33 CAL. L. REV. 368, 375 (1945). See United States v.
    Midwest Oil Co., 236 U.S. 459 (1915) (upholding authority of the president).
    42 Pub. L. No. 61-303, 36 Stat. 847 (1910),
    43 EXPAND THIS SECTION A BIT.
    14
    fuel mineral deposits (or likely to have them). We thus turn to the larger question of the
    withdrawal of those minerals from coverage.
    The withdrawal of oil and gas from the Mining Law, however, occurred as a
    result of a change in interest group alignments brought about by two changes in the oil
    market. Until 1900, the primary use for oil was to produce kerosene for lighting. Gasoline
    was originally “the portion of crude petroleum too volatile to be included in kerosene.
    The first refiners had no use for it and often dumped an accumulation of gasoline into the
    creek or river that was always nearby.” 44 After 1900, demand generated by the growing
    automobile industry,45 transformed gasoline into a highly valued commodity.46 Oil began
    to be used in naval vessels as well and by the end of World War I, national security
    concerns became an issue.47 Compounding the concerns were the application of wartime
    price controls and government allocations efforts, which caused supply problems.48
    The close cooperation between oil companies and the government during the war
    taught the companies that influencing government policy was lucrative.
    The newly organized trade associations remained a prominent part of the postwar
    economy. Business leaders, especially those who had worked in Washington, had
    44 JAMES G. SPEIGHT, THE CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY OF PETROLEUM (3rd ed. 1999) at 567.
    45 Some early automobiles, such as the Stanley Steamer, ran on kerosene but by 1890 gasoline-powered
    cars were on the scene. WILLIAM L. LEFFLER, PETROLEUM REFINING IN NONTECHNICAL LANGUAGE (2000)
    at 4. U.S. auto sales doubled “approximately every two years” between 1900 and 1916. YVETTE TAMINIAU,
    ROOM FOR MANEUVRE (2001) at 57.
    46 U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Domestic Commerce, United States Petroleum Refining: War
    and Postwar (Industrial Series No. 73) (1947) at 14 (“Demand for gasoline arising from the increased use
    of the automobile was the principal force behind the increasingly complicated refining technology and
    larger percentage conversion of crude oil to gasoline.”).
    47 Subcommittee on Mineral Resources Development and Production, Committee on Energy and Natural
    Resources, U.S. Senate, Mining Laws of 1872 and 1989 (101st Congress, 2nd Session, 1991) at 35 (“The
    1920 Mineral Leasing Act . . . was passed in 1920 after the United States had fought the great war in which
    oil powered ships and other vehicles had played a vital role.”); CARL J.MAYER & GEORGE A. RILEY,
    PUBLIC DOMAIN, PRIVATE DOMINION (1985) at 169 (Oil lands policy after war “met the needs of a
    powerful official constituency, the American military.”)
    48 ROBERT L. BRADLEY, JR., 1 OIL, GAS, AND GOVERNMENT: THE U.S. EXPERIENCE 223-229, 633-635
    (1996).
    15
    caught a new vision of what could be done by economic planning and businessgovernment
    cooperation. A new breed of public administrators, skilled in the
    techniques of wartime control, were more prone to reject competitive values and
    stress the goal of a planned economy.49
    The wartime experience also created new players in energy regulation debates in the form
    of oil trade associations organized to lobby for industry favors in Washington.50
    In 1920, Congress passed the Mineral Leasing Act,51 which withdrew fuel and
    fertilizer minerals (coal, phosphate, oil, oil shale, gas, and sodium) from the General
    Mining Law. This withdrawal was the result of a coalition between military interests and
    energy companies. The military’s interest is straightforward - it wanted to ensure that
    domestic reserves of fuel resources were available to it.
    The oil companies’ interest is not as obvious. Two factors favored removal of fuel
    minerals from their point of view. First, a primary concern of energy companies during
    this period was over-production. From the Standard Oil trust through the 1930s, the
    dominant concern of the energy industry in the United States was limiting production to
    keep prices high.52 Discoveries of new fields and antitrust efforts by the federal
    government threatened each effort to keep prices high by limiting production. Removing
    fuel minerals from the Mining Law would allow oil companies to work with the
    government to control the entry of new supplies from federal land. For coal, existing
    49 ELLIS W. HAWLEY, THE NEW DEAL AND THE PROBLEM OF MONOPOLY: A STUDY IN ECONOMIC
    AMBIVALENCE 10 (1995).
    50 2 BRADLEY, supra note 48, at 1114 (World War I experience “mellowed” industry concerns about
    regulation).
    51 41 Stat. 437 (1920).
    52 See Andrew P. Morriss & Nathaniel Stewart, Why Does Gasoline Cost So Much? (and Why It’s Going to
    Cost More): Paying the Price for Fragmented Markets and Regulation, Working Paper (2006) at __.
    16
    suppliers in the eastern coal regions benefited from limiting competition from new
    sources of coal on government land.
    Second, because oil and gas flowed under the earth, a well on one plot could
    easily pull oil from a reservoir larger than the surface plot with the well. Overdrilling
    reduced recovery, the rule of capture threatened a tragedy of the commons, and, again,
    the problem of “excessive” production loomed. Oil states began to consider and
    rimplement mandatory conservation measures such as pooling and unitization.53
    Removing federal lands from the Mining Law allowed larger, more technically efficient
    tracts to be leased without the concern that another prospector might drill a well into a
    pool already being exploited. That this played a role can be seen by the later refusal of the
    Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for drilling to reduce supply.54
    Removing these minerals also did not threaten the hard rock interests in the West.
    Since most oil supplies were located in the Midwest and East at this time, there was little
    reason for western hard rock interests to object to the removal of them from the Mining
    Law.
    Why were potash and the other fertilizer minerals withdrawn? Partially due to the
    same concerns for national security. Potash was withdrawn from the Mining Law in a
    1917 statute due to “the urgent need of making potash available for war purposes.”55
    NEED SOMETHING ON WHY FERTILIZER INCLUDED
    Additional minerals were also withdrawn and added to the Mineral Leasing Act,
    including sulfur (in Louisiana),56 chlorides, sulphates, carbonates, borates, silicates,
    nitrates of potassium57
    53 See Morriss & Stewart, supra note 52, at __.
    54 Colby, supra note 41, at 377.
    55 Colby, supra note 41, at 376. 40 Stat. 297.
    17
    Finally, there continued to be various extensions of deadlines for mineral rights
    holders during World War I58 and the Depression.59 Mineral lease deadlines were also
    extended repeatedly.60 Other minor changes were also made.61
    C. Wilderness and Mining, 1955-1976
    Beginning in the mid-1950s and continuing through the 1970s, the major conflict
    over the Mining Law was restricting its application to lands with recreational value. As
    the West opened to greater tourism, wilderness advocates sought to limit the ability of
    miners to privatize western land. With the Multiple Use Mining Act in 1955,62 the
    government withdrew “common variety” minerals such as gravel from the Mining Act.
    This withdrawal was an important limit on the General Mining Law, for the common
    variety minerals made most land vulnerable to privatization. The 1955 Act also expanded
    federal authority over other uses of unpatented claims. Interest groups favoring
    wilderness preservation began to persuade land agencies to restrict mining, timbering,
    and other economic activities on public lands.63
    The growing success of the environmental movement in the 1960s prompted a
    Public Land Law Review Commission in 1964,64 the brainchild of Colorado Democratic
    Congressman Wayne Aspinall.65 Because he chaired the House Interior Committee,
    56 47 Stat. 401 (1932)
    57 44 Stat. 1057 (1927)
    58 40 Stat. 243, 343 (1917); 41 Stat. 279, 354 (1919)
    59 47 Stat. 290 (1932); 48 Stat. 72 (1933); 48 Stat. 777 (1934); 49 Stat. 1238 (1936);
    60 42 Stat. 159 (1922); 44 Stat. 922 (1927); 45 Stat. 252 (1928); 47 Stat. 445 (1932); 49 Stat. 674 (1935);
    61 47 Stat. 140 (1932) (clarified that did not apply to lands earlier disposed of by states); 48 Stat. 1185
    (1934) (same); Multiple Mineral Development Act, 30 USC 521 (1955 statute that allows mining claims
    and mineral leases on same land, resolves conflicts)
    62 30 USC 601-603, 611-15.
    63 Mark B. Lambert, Public Lands Commissions: Historical Lessons and Future Considerations (M.S.
    thesis, University of Montana, 2003) at 38-39.
    64 78 Stat. 982 (1964).
    65 Lambert, supra note 63, at 39.
    18
    which he had enormous leverage as he was able to keep the proposed Wilderness Act
    from the House floor.66 Environmental groups agreed to the Commission as the price of
    getting the Wilderness Act released.67 Aspinall controlled the commission by giving it a
    majority of members appointed by Congress, assuming the chairmanship, and appointing
    one of his staff as the Commission’s chief of staff.68 Only four of seventeen
    Congressional appointees came from east of the Mississippi.69
    The Commission’s final report, One Third of the Nation’s Land, was issued in
    1970 and reflected Aspinall’s preference for economic uses over wilderness.
    The commission advocated a policy of “dominant use” over “multiple use,” the
    latter described by the commission as having “little practical meaning as a
    planning concept or principle.” In the commission’s view, “public lands should be
    zoned for the particular use for which they are most suited,” and that use, being
    the dominant use, would take precedence over any other use in land-use planning
    and allocation processes. This theme was alarming to environmental interests
    because the report clearly states that “mineral exploration and development
    should have a preference over some or all other uses on much of our public
    lands.” Other general themes include provisions for clarifying the conflicting
    mandates and directives contained in public land law, and, of course, permeating
    the entire report is an emphasis on the need for Congress to “assert its
    constitutional authority by enacting legislation reserving unto itself exclusive
    66 Lambert, supra note 63, at 40-43.
    67 Lambert, supra note 63, at 42-43.
    68 Lambert, supra note 63, at 43-46.
    69 Lambert, supra note 63, at 95 (listing members).
    19
    authority” over the majority of affairs associated with the management of the
    public lands.70
    Environmentalists rejected the report and its recommendations, however, and its impact
    was ambiguous.71 The Wilderness Act,72 the quid for the quo of the Commission, had a
    major impact, reducing the land subject to the General Mining Law.73
    One of Apsinall’s errors was to attempt to micro-manage land policy from
    Congress. By making a claim for almost complete control over public lands policy,
    Aspinall drove the executive branch into the arms of the environmentalists, for it would
    not have served executive interests to yield to congressional authority.
    The environmentalists also won the battle for the ultimate reform of the public
    land laws, with the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA),74 not only
    endorsing the multiple use management concept that Aspinall had opposed but again
    reducing the Mining Law’s coverage.75
    The gradual erosion of the Mining Law from 1955 to 1976 reflected the growing
    interest in preservation of federal lands. From a regional point of view, the battleground
    first shifted to federal agencies where western interests had less leverage than they did in
    Congress. Although the environmental groups initially seemed to have been outmaneuvered
    by Aspinall, they succeeded in limiting the Mining Law by allying with the
    executive branch in pursuit of expanding executive discretion.
    70 Lambert, supra note 63, at 47 (notes omitted).
    71 Lambert, supra note 63, at 50-51.
    72 78 Stat. 890 (1964).
    73 STATISTICS
    74 30 Stat. 2743 (1976).
    75 STATISTICS
    20
    Their success was due to three differences with prior criticisms of the Mining
    Law. First, they did not attempt to eliminate the statute, only to reduce its scope. By
    working on the margin, they undercut the defenders’ ability to mobilize western interests
    by lowering the stakes. Second, the critics linked the issue to larger questions of federal
    land management, which mobilized other interest groups concerned with federal lands
    (recreational users, businesses, agriculture, and timber) and not necessarily sympathetic
    to mining interests, dividing the western regional political coalition. Third, the critics
    were able to enlist executive branch agencies against the western Congressional coalition,
    broadening support for changes.
    D. Environmentalism and Mining, 1976-2006
    Since the 1970s, there have been regular attacks on the free access and fee simple
    title provisions of the Mining Law. John Leshy, author of the leading anti-Mining Law
    book and former Department of Interior Solicitor General, notes that “reform” bills that
    changed these aspects of the statute were regularly introduced through the 1970s.76
    Similar proposals for a leasing system have been regularly introduced since the 1990s.
    These proposals have been unsuccessful in Congress.
    The most significant changes to the Mining Law came from Department of
    Interior regulations introduced in the closing weeks of the Clinton Administration.77
    Under the FLPMA, the Secretary of Interior has expanded powers over the surface
    impacts of hard rock mining. Although the initial regulations did little more than codify
    then-current practices and require miners to comply with generally applicable
    76 JOHN D. LESHY, THE MINING LAW: A STUDY IN PERPETUAL MOTION 196 (1987).
    77 See generally Andrew P. Morriss, Roger E. Meiners, & Andrew Dorchak, Between a Hard Rock and a
    Hard Place: Politics, Midnight Regulations, and Mining, 55 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW REVIEW 551 (2003).
    21
    environmental laws and rules, the key was that the statute opened the door to more
    substantial regulations. Perhaps anticipating this, the opposition to the FLPMA in the
    Senate came entirely from western senators.78
    By broadening the scope of the federal government’s involvement in mining, the
    FLPMA made mining regulation of interest to a broader community. In particular, the
    Secretary of Interior’s regulatory powers under the FLPMA were available to interest
    groups opposed to mining and privatization of public lands, something which was not
    possible before under the Mining Law’s exclusive focus on disposing of mineral
    resources located on federal land.
    The FLPMA left many important terms undefined. This created a politically
    valuable authority in the Secretary of the Interior, whose definitions would affect the
    direction of public lands policy.79 Interior has a broad set of responsibilities, individual
    industries, such as the mining industry, were left in a poor position to compete for control
    of the Department.
    The mining industry’s ability to resist attacks on the Mining Law is ultimately
    dependent upon the design of the United States Senate, whose rules magnify the ability of
    a few senators to block actions of the majority, and so to protect vulnerable minorities.80
    This is particularly important for mining interests, since there is a majority coalition of
    eastern states willing to redistribute the federally controlled resources in western states to
    78 See CHARLES WALLACE MILLER, JR., SACRED COW IN THE AMERICAN WEST: THE ORIGIN, EVOLUTION ,
    ADMINISTRATION, AND IMPACT OF FEDERAL HARDROCK MINING LAWS AND POLICIES (1990) (unpublished
    Ph.D. dissertation; The Union Institute) at 365-366 (noting 78-11 vote in the Senate and that mining state
    senators in the West constituted the opposition.)
    79 LESHY, supra note 76, at 196 (noting that as a result of pressure from environmental groups, agencies
    “set their lawyers off to search for the authorities” to justify regulatory action and, unsurprisingly, found
    authorities.).
    80 Lisa O. Monaco, Comment, Give The People What They Want: The Failure Of "Responsive" Lawmaking,
    3 U.CHI. L. SCH. RT. 735, 748 (1996) (“the Congress, particularly the Senate, is governed by rules which
    make it easier to block legislation than to enact it . . . .”)
    22
    gain revenue and to satisfy their constituents’ interest in what is touted as proenvironmental
    legislation. Only through the efforts of western senators, for example, was
    the industry able to hold back the Clinton Administration’s willingness to sacrifice
    western interests for environmental regulatory measures popular in the more populous
    eastern states.81
    As environmental pressure groups began to focus their efforts on federal land
    policy, the FLMPA sec. 3809 regulations came under increasing attack. In addition, the
    General Accounting Office issued a series of critical reports on the Mining Law and
    BLM’s regulations beginning in the mid-1980s.82 Some GAO reports were requested by
    Mining Law opponent Congressman Nick Rahall (D-WV) as part of his campaign to
    change the Mining Law,83 and others by other opponents of the Mining Law.84
    The Clinton Administration initially favored legislative changes to the 1872
    Law.85 Clinton appointed several well-known advocates of changes to important
    positions at Interior, including Secretary Bruce Babbitt,86 solicitor John Leshy, and Jim
    81 See, e.g., Tom Kenworthy and Paul Overberg, How the mountain west was won by the GOP, USA
    TODAY (October 28, 2002) 2002 WL 4736347 (attributing shift to GOP to environmental policies of
    Clinton Administration and influx of migrants from California).
    82 See, e.g., General Accounting Office, Public Lands: Interior Should Ensure Against Abuses from
    Hardrock Mining (GAO/RCED-86-48) (1986); General Accounting Office, Federal Land Management:
    Limited Action to Reclaim Hardrock Mine Sites (GAO/RCED-88-21) (1987); General Accounting Office,
    Federal Land Management: An Assessment of Hardrock Mining Damage (GAO/RCED-88-123BR) (1988);
    General Accounting Office, Federal Land Management: The Mining Law of 1872 Needs Revision
    (GAO/RCED-89-72) (1989).
    83 See, e.g., General Accounting Office, Federal Land Management: An Assessment of Hardrock Mining
    Damage (GAO/RCED-88-123BR) 1 (1988) (letter from James Duffus, Associate Director of the GAO, to
    Congressman Rahall, reporting on GAO’s investigations done at his request); General Accounting Office,
    Federal Land Management: The Mining Law of 1872 Needs Revision (GAO/RCED-89-72) 1 (1989) (letter
    from J. Dexter Peach, Assistant Comptroller General of the GAO, noting that report done in response to
    Rahall’s request) andMILLER, supra note 68, at 388 (noting Rahall had requested GAO report on mining
    law).
    84 See General Accounting Office, Federal Land Management: Limited Action to Reclaim Hardrock Mine
    Sites (GAO/RCED-88-21) 1 (1987) (noting report requested by Rep. Mike Synar (D-OK)).
    85 Patrick Garver and Mark Squillace, Mining Law Reform – Administrative Style, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN MINERAL LAW FORTY-FIFTH ANNUAL INSTITUTE at 14-5 (1999).
    86 Quoted in T.H. Watkins, Hard Rock Legacy, 197(3) NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 76 (March 2000).
    23
    Baca, head of BLM.87 Babbitt proposed an agenda that involved major changes to the
    1872 Law: including ending patenting of mining claims and requiring royalties for the
    federal government.88 During the 103rd Congress, mining law bills passed both the
    House89 and Senate.90 The House bill, steered by Rep. Rahall, favored environmental
    pressure groups’ and Babbitt’s positions; the Senate bill was more favorable to the
    industry’s position. In the conference committee, efforts to reconcile the bills fell short as
    both eastern environmental interests and western mining interests refused to accept a
    compromise in an election year.91
    The 1994 elections changed the political calculus substantially, giving control of
    both houses to the Republicans more sympathetic to mining interests’ views of free
    access and the undesirability of further regulation. The Republican majority included
    mining legislation in the 1995 Budget Bill92 but the Administration rejected the changes
    on the grounds that they did “little or nothing to fix the problems posed by the current
    law.”93 After President Clinton vetoed that bill, legislative efforts to change the Mining
    87 Garver and Squillace, supra note 85, at 14-5.
    88 Garver and Squillace, supra note 85, at 14-6.
    89 H.R. 322, 103rd Congress (1999).
    90 S. 775, 103rd Congress (1999).
    91 Garver and Squillace, supra note 85, at 14-7.
    92 See Balanced Budget Act of 1995, H.R. Conf. Rep. 104-350 (November 16, 1995), sec. 5371-5382.
    Clinton cited the proposed revision of the mining law as one of the reasons for his veto. See William J.
    Clinton, Transcript of Radio Address (November 4, 1995) 1995 WL 15155406 (The budget “allows a
    giveaway of mining rights to companies at a fraction of their worth. Just recently, a law on the books since
    1872 that I am trying hard to change forced the Government to sell minerals worth $1 billion to a private
    company for $275. That is taxpayer robbery, and it's going to keep right on happening under the
    Republican budget.”)
    93 Statement of the Hon. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary, Department of the Interior, in Hearing Before the
    Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management of the Committee on Energy and Natural
    Resources, United States Senate, 105th Congress, 2nd Session (April 28, 1998) [hereafter “1998 Hearings”]
    at 23. See also Id. at 26 (“frankly, we would prefer no legislation on environmental regulations to [the bills
    in the Senate].”)
    24
    Law died and the administration turned to administrative means to achieve its policy
    objectives.94
    The politics of mining law change in the Clinton-Gore Administration were
    straightforward. Environmentalists were an important part of Clinton’s base of support,
    while he had little hope of gaining significant support in the West among those inclined
    to favor mining. The administration regularly attempted to gain support in the East
    among urban voters concerned with “the environment” through its public lands policies.
    For example, the creation of several national monuments in Utah without consulting with
    state officials on their boundaries was widely seen as a political maneuver to gain support
    in the east.95 Increasing environmental regulations on mining would cost Clinton and
    Gore little, while helping with their overall strategy of promoting environmental issues in
    the 1996 campaign.
    Western senators, on the other hand, had little incentive to bargain with the
    administration, since the existing mining law offered mining interests more than they
    were likely to retain in any compromise. By blocking change, Western senators could
    deliver more to their constituents in the mining industry than they could by negotiating
    with the administration. Thus, neither side had an incentive to bargain. As we have
    described elsewhere, the result was that the administration turned to rulemaking to
    94 Garver and Squillace, supra note 85, at 14-7 - 14-8. Some legislative efforts did continue, but did not
    produce successful legislation. See, e.g., Opening Statement of Hon. Frank H. Murkowski (R-AK), 1998
    Hearings, supra note 93, at 1 (“For the past 9 years, there has been an extensive, ongoing effort within the
    Congress to reform [the Mining Law.]”)
    95 See Christine A. Klein, Preserving Monumental Landscapes Under the Antiquities Act, 87 CORNELL L.
    REV. 1333 (2002) (describing controversies).
    25
    change the terms of mining claims, while congressional opponents used budget riders to
    attempt to block the regulations.96
    III. Conclusion
    Today the General Mining Law of 1872 is one of environmental pressure groups’
    favorite whipping boys. It has taken a sustained beating from scholar-activists including
    John Leshy, assorted politicians, and a wide range of interest groups. Like the
    Energizer® Bunny, however, it keeps on going. Elsewhere we have argued that one
    explanation for the Mining Law’s persistence is its solution of important incentive
    problems involved in mineral rights.97 In this paper, we have argued that another
    important part of the explanation lies in the type of interest group coalition necessary to
    change the Mining Law.
    The Mining Law’s survival is almost wholly due to the combination of the
    powerful regional coalition that supports its existence and the structure of the Senate,
    which enables that coalition to limit attacks on its interests. The hardrock mining industry
    presents a classic example of an industry vulnerable to majoritarian oppression.
    Concentrated in a few sparsely populated (and so politically weak) states, with large
    assets tied to specific locations, long time lines for projects, and the target of politically
    96 See Morriss, Meiners, & Dorchak, Between a Hard Rock, supra note 77. In the closing days of the
    administration, BLM issued final section 3809 regulations (65 Fed. Reg. 69,998 (2000)), literally on “the
    last day that they could be published and still become effective before the end of the Clinton
    Administration.” James Butler, Mining on Federal Lands Current Issues – Changes to BLM’s 3809
    Regulations, SG039 ALI-ABA 167, 177 (2001).These regulations were only a small part of an overall push
    by the administration to issue last minute regulations. Carol M. Cannon, The Long Goodbye, NATIONAL
    JOURNAL (January 27, 2001), 2001 WL 7181605. As Prof. John J. Pitney summarized it “Clinton was far
    more active at the end than other Presidents.” Id.
    97 See Morriss, Meiners & Dorchak, Homesteading Rock, supra note 3; Morriss, Meiners & Dorchak, Hard
    Rock Homesteads, supra note 3. See also Morriss, Meiners, & Dorchak, Between a Hard Rock, supra note
    77.
    26
    popular “pro-environmental” regulations and other administrative actions, the industry is
    in a difficult position.
    It has been successful in defending the Mining Law thus far when the opponents
    of the Mining Law make a frontal assault on the statute. It has been less successful when
    the statute’s opponents find ways to build bridges to interest groups in other areas.
    27
    SOURCES
    TO CHECK
    MARGARET SMITH CARTER, NEW DIGGINGS ON THE FEVER, 1824-1869 (1959)
    JAMES I CLARK, THE WISCONSIN LEAD REGION: FRONTIER COMMUNITY (1955)
    LARRY GARA, GOLD FEVER IN WISCONSIN,WISCONSIN MAGAZINE OF HISTORY, 38_106-
    108 (WINTER 1954-55)
    ANN M. KEPPEL, EARLY HISTORY OF LEAD REGION OF WISCONSIN, WISCONSIN
    MAGAZINE OF HISTORY 41:185-195 (SPRING 1958)
    MOSES MEEKER, EARLY HISTORY OF LEAD REGION OF WISCONSIN, SHSW COLLECTIONS,
    VOL. 6, PP. 271-296 (1906 REPRINT OF 1872 ORIGINAL)
    DAVID D. VAN TASSEL, DEMOCRACY, FRONTIER, AND MINERAL POINT: A STUDY OF THE
    INFLUENCE OF THE FRONTIER ON A WISCONSIN MINING TOWN (1951UWMASTER’S
    THESIS).
    JAMES E.WRIGHT, THE GALENA LEAD DISTRICT: FEDERAL POLICY AND PRACTICE, 1824-
    1847 (1966).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    San Bernardino, Ca.
    Posts
    67

    Help from Siskiyou County Supervisor

    Dear Supervisor Marcia Armstrong:
    I want to thank you for the time you spent, and your hard work, in gathering and sending to Jerry Hobbs and myself the very important documentation from Siskiyou County , and its officials, regarding suction dredge mining over the last 5 years. It will be very helpful to me, and Public Lands for the People, Inc., in our litigation seeking to restore suction dredge mining to California .
    I am attaching an itemization of the extensive documentation which you have provided. It is an impressive piece of work. Again, I thank you for sharing with us your extensive knowledge and professional acumen regarding suction dredge mining in Siskiyou County and California .
    With the highest personal regards, I remain very truly yours,
    David Young
    Attorney for Public Lands for the People, Inc.,
    and other miners, in litigation to restore suction dredge mining to California

    Itemized Documentation

    Date From To Letter Head Signature
    April 23, 2011 Marcia H. Armstrong Cal DF&G No No (there is an electronic confirmation
    Jan. 19, 2010 E-mail from Marcia H. Armstrong addressing Op-Ed article by Bruce Johnson John W. McCamman (and reply to sender) No (e-mail correspondence) No
    Dec. 3, 2009
    (with attached resolution 08-153) Ric Costales Mark Stopher Yes Yes
    Aug. 17, 2009 Marcia H. Armstrong Katharine Carter Yes No
    July 14, 2009 Brian McDermott Gov. Schwarzennegger Yes Yes
    April 28, 2009 Testimony of Marcia H. Armstrong CA Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee on SB 670 Yes No
    April 21, 2009 Michael N. Kobseff Hon. Fran Pavley Yes Yes
    April 13, 2009 Rose Ann Herrick Senator Wiggins Yes Yes
    Jan. 20, 2009 Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors RESOLUTION No Yes
    Jan. 20, 2009 Michael N. Kobseff Donald Koch Yes Yes
    June 13, 2007 Marcia H. Armstrong State Water Resources Control Board Yes No
    May 15, 2009 Marcia H. Armstrong Hon. John Benoit Yes No
    May 15, 2009 Brian McDermott Senator Florez Yes No
    July 10, 2007 Testimony of Marcia H. Armstrong CA Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee Yes No
    April 17, 2007 Marcia H. Armstrong Assembly Member Leno Yes No
    April 17, 2007 Jim Cook Assembly Member Leno No No
    April 7, 2007 Marcia H. Armstrong Hon. Mark Leno No No
    Jan. 6, 2006 Marcia H. Armstrong Senator Aanestad Yes No
    Jan. 3, 2006 Declaration of Marcia H. Armstrong Karuk Tribe of California vs. CA DF&G Legal Doc. Yes

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts