[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 141 (Thursday, October 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S12290]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        MINING PATENT MORATORIUM

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I would like to engage in a colloquy with 
the distinguished Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee concerning a report on mining patents that was recently 
completed by the Department of the Interior.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would gladly engage in such a 
colloquy with my distinguished colleague, the Chairman of the Forests 
and Public Land Management Subcommittee of the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee. The senior Senator from Idaho has worked on mining 
law reform legislation for several Congresses and is a recognized 
expert in the area of mining and natural resources. I am pleased to 
discuss the mining issue with him.
  Mr. CRAIG. I thank the Chairman for his kind words. In July, the 
Energy and Natural Resources Committee received a copy of a report from 
the Interior Department, entitled ``Five Year Plan for Making Final 
Determination on Ninety Percent of Grandfathered Patent Applications 
Pursuant to Public Law 104-134.'' My subcommittee has not yet fully 
analyzed the report that addresses the mineral patent moratorium which 
was enacted originally on September 30, 1994, for fiscal year 1995, and 
extended through fiscal year 1996 on April 25, 1996. I believe the 
Appropriations Committee received the report as well.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. The Energy and Natural Resources Committee received 
the report. I am concerned that the report appears to provide a 
partisan justification for Secretary Babbitt's various actions and 
inactions regarding the mineral patenting process since 1993.
  Mr. CRAIG. I share your concern, and I note that the report provides 
a plan to process 90 percent of the mineral patent backlog in five 
years, which may or may not be effective. The Conference Report on H.R. 
3610, Department of Defense Appropriations Act, extended the patent 
moratorium for fiscal year 1997. In your view has the Congress endorsed 
Secretary Babbitt's actions and his plan?
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Certainly not in my view. We will review the adequacy 
of the Secretary's plan at the appropriate time.
  Mr. CRAIG. I agree, and I note further that the Congress is clearly 
not in a position to ratify or reject the Department's determinations 
regarding individual patent applications which are pending and are 
identified in the Secretary's report as ``grandfathered,'' or impliedly 
identified as not ``grandfathered'' by their absence on the list.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I completely agree. The legality of the Secretary's 
actions, inactions and determinations affecting individual patent 
applicants will be reviewed, as needed, by the federal courts in 
accordance with due process law.
  Mr. CRAIG. One final concern which I have is that the Interior 
Department may be construing the ``five-year'' schedule to clear the 
patent backlog as somehow shielding the Department from claims of 
unreasonable delay by individual patent applicants in the interim. Such 
a construction would be clearly contrary to our intent, which was to 
keep the patent application processing moving forward.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I share your concern. Such a construction would thwart 
our purpose entirely.
  Mr. CRAIG. I thank the distinguished Chairman for this colloquy.

                          ____________________