Mining

Subscribe to Mining via RSS

Governor Mike Dunleavy signed Senate Bill (“SB”) 155 amending Alaska’s mineral tenure statutes, effective April 30, 2020. The legislation addresses issues regarding qualification to hold state mining claims, location of claims, statements of annual labor, and automatic abandonment of mining claims. The amendments and additions to the statutes clarify a number of issues and assure that state mining claims are not deemed abandoned without due process.

Qualifications

SB 155 amends AS 38.05.190 to clarify who may hold exploration and mining rights. As amended, the law expressly authorizes limited liability companies qualified to do business in Alaska and registered trusts to acquire and hold state mining claims. Previously, it was not clear that these types of entities could hold claims, or what effect such ownership may have on the claims. The amendments include a notice and cure process by which the Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) may void a mining interest if a qualification defect is not cured within 90 days after notice. The requirement that an owner be a citizen of the United States or a business entity organized in the United States, with limited exceptions, remains in the statute.
Continue Reading Alaska’s Mineral Tenure Statutes Amended

The Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) Division of Mining, Land and Water has issued guidance for placer mining operations to comply with the state’s COVID-19 health mandates. Mining is identified as “critical infrastructure” in the Alaska Essential Services and Critical Workforce Infrastructure Order. Before traveling to their placer operation, and while at their operation,…

State of Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy has issued COVID-19 Disaster Order of Suspension No 2, suspending a long list of statutory and regulatory provisions. The list of suspended statutes includes AS 38.05.850 which authorizes the state to grant easements and rights-of-way for roads, pipelines, and other facilities associated with the extraction of minerals. Under…

The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (“Commission”) announced that it intends to withdraw its simplified proceedings rule effective November 25, 2019. The Commission’s Federal Register announcement is found here.

The simplified proceedings were originally published in a final rule by the Commission on December 28, 2010. The Commission’s intention was to streamline…

On Monday, September 30, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) reinstated an Obama-era rule imposing heightened requirements for health and safety workplace examinations in surface metal and nonmetal mines. The reinstatement represents yet another volley in an already protracted regulatory process spanning two presidential administrations and multiple lawsuits.

The 2017 Obama-era rule, marking one of the administration’s final acts, required that:

  1. workplace exams had to be completed before miners begin work in the area examined;
  2. operators had to notify miners in the affected areas of conditions that might adversely affect health and safety;
  3. operators had to promptly initiate action to correct those adverse conditions;
  4. the workplace exam records had to include specific information, including, among other things, a description of all conditions found that might adversely affect health or safety and a notation as to when the corrective actions were complete; and
  5. records of the workplace exams had to be made available to MSHA and miner representatives upon request.

The rule initially went into effect on October 2, 2017. Just three days later, however, MSHA withdrew the rule, delaying the effective date to June 2018.

Following the 2017 election, the Trump administration published a revised rule that featured two key changes. First, examinations could be carried out either before work starts or as work was getting underway. Second, exam records no longer had to document adverse conditions, so long as the conditions were promptly corrected.Continue Reading MSHA Announces Reinstatement of 2017 Obama-Era Rule on Workforce Examinations

New rental rates are now in effect for state mining claims, leasehold locations, prospecting sites, and mining leases in Alaska. The new rental rates became effective on August 30, 2019, and thus are applicable to the rental year that commenced on September 1, 2019.

These increases were made by the State of Alaska Department of…

Alaska is different—it has moose hunters on hovercrafts, many large national parks, and certain unique federal laws. Last week the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that National Park Service laws and regulations of general applicability do not apply to inholdings within Alaska’s national parks. Sturgeon v. Frost, 587 U.S. ___ (2019).

While on a moose hunting trip twelve years ago, John Sturgeon was repairing his hovercraft on a section of the Nation River within the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve (a unit of the National Park System) when park rangers ordered him to stop using the hovercraft in the preserve. Mr. Sturgeon left that day without the benefit of his hovercraft and without a moose. He later sued, arguing that the Park Service ban on hovercrafts did not apply to the Nation River, a navigable river the bed of which is owned by the State of Alaska.

This case arose under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA). When the federal government designated national park lands in ANILCA, it swept tracts of nonfederal lands (state, Alaska Native corporation, and private inholdings) within the park boundaries. ANILCA provides that no state, Native, or private inholdings “shall be subject to the regulations applicable solely to public lands within [conservation system] units.” 16 U.S.C. § 3103(c). Nonetheless, the federal government claimed that the Park Service could regulate the inholdings like park lands.
Continue Reading National Park Service Regulations Do Not Apply to Inholdings in Alaska

Secretary of the Interior Zinke has directed that the Bureau of Land Management immediately begin implementing the recommendations in his Sage-Grouse Review Team’s report, which was was released today, concerning the 2015 greater sage-grouse amendments to federal land use management plans. (Prior post on Sage-Grouse Review Team here.) Among other things, such as coordinating federal mitigation policy with state mitigation approaches, the Trump Administration will now be moving to “[r]emove all [sagebrush focal areas (SFAs)] and the management actions tied to SFAs.” This would include the pending withdrawal for up to 20 years of over 10 million acres of SFAs on public lands in six western states from mineral location and entry under the General Mining Law .  (Prior posts on withdrawal here and here.) The report also recognizes a short-term “[n]eed to clarify under what circumstances or how the [land use management] plans recognize valid existing rights.” Because valid existing rights (i.e., a mining claim within which a valuable mineral deposit has been discovered) are relevant if a withdrawal is approved, this recommended clarification indicates that the Trump Administration may well withdraw the SFAs for a short time while it moves forward with amending the plans to remove the SFAs altogether.
Continue Reading Sage-Grouse: Short Flight for Pending 10 Million-Acre Withdrawal from General Mining Law?

About the Mineral Law Blog

Learn More

Here Stoel Rives shares insight and analysis about key mineral law developments. Drawing on a very active natural resources practice, we aim to keep readers informed about the legal aspects of news that impacts exploration and development of all things mineral.