[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 147 (Monday, October 20, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H9699-H9700]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REPEALING RESERVATION OF MINERAL RIGHTS IN LIVINGSTON PARISH, LOUISIANA
Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 542) to repeal the reservation of mineral rights made by the
United States when certain lands in Livingston Parish, Louisiana, were
conveyed by Public Law 102-562.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 542
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPEAL OF RESERVATION OF MINERAL RIGHTS,
LIVINGSTON PARISH, LOUISIANA.
(a) Amendments.--Section 102 of Public Law 102-562 (106
Stat. 4234) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(a) In General.--'';
(2) by striking ``and subject to the reservation in
subsection (b),''; and
(3) by striking subsection (b).
(b) Implementation of Amendment.--The Secretary of the
Interior shall execute the legal instruments necessary to
effectuate the amendment made by subsection (a)(3).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Renzi) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi).
Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 542, introduced by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker),
would give private citizens in Livingston Parish, Louisiana, mineral
rights that have been rightfully theirs for generations. The 640 acres
of land in question were held in private ownership when the United
States purchased the Louisiana Territory from France in 1803; but due
to poor recordkeeping by French colonial authorities, the Federal
Government ultimately came into possession of the title to this
property.
The citizens who rightfully held the land remained on the land for
nearly 2 centuries. In 1825, an order of survey was signed by a Federal
agent asserting the landowner's claim to the land, but those documents
were never filed in Washington. Again, in 1875 the owners' claim was
acknowledged but a land patent was never issued. Finally, in the late
1960s and early 1970s, the Federal Government surveyed the inventory of
Louisiana properties and discovered that no patent had been issued for
the Livingston Parish properties in question. While some legislative
attempts were made, it was not until 1992 that the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Baker) and Senator J. Bennett Johnston passed
legislation that conveyed the surface rights of the land to its
rightful owners. That bill did not convey the mineral rights to the
private owners. Historical precedent, however, shows that the mineral
rights should have been conveyed to them at the time, since private
landholders in the Louisiana Purchase territory were given title to
both surface and subsurface property rights.
Because the Federal Government was never actually entitled to the 640
acres in Livingston Parish, the mineral rights should be conveyed to
the rightful and patient owners of this property. Incidentally, there
is currently no oil and gas development on these lands and the U.S.
Geological Survey reports potential for only marginal minerals
production. H.R. 542 conveys these property owners their mineral rights
and corrects a 200-year-old bureaucratic error.
I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. PALLONE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 542 would repeal the reservation of
mineral rights made by the United States when lands in Livingston
Parish, Louisiana, were conveyed by Public Law 102-562, which was
enacted in 1992. The Congressional Budget Office's cost estimate of the
proposed legislation found that any foregoing receipts to the United
States would be negligible.
Mr. Speaker, we would have preferred that this bill be considered
under regular order with a hearing in the Committee on Resources prior
to markup and floor consideration. However, we will not object to its
consideration today.
{time} 1500
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the author of this bill.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I wish to express my appreciation to him and the minority for
their courtesies extended in the consideration of this important
measure.
As has been previously recited, at the time of the Louisiana Purchase
in 1803, the French law provided that the State at that time would
maintain control of mineral rights. Upon the acquisition of the
property by the United States Government, there was an effort to
restore mineral rights with surface rights. On March 3, 1819, Congress
passed an act adjusting the claims to land, establishing land offices
in the district east of the island of New Orleans. Specifically, this
was aimed at the property now in question.
For some 200 years, the property rights and mineral rights have been
legally and arbitrarily separated. In 1992,
[[Page H9700]]
I offered legislation which conveyed only surface rights of the
property to the landowners now awaiting resolution. At that time, there
was some debate as to the value of these mineral rights to the United
States Government. Pursuant to the intervening decade, there is now a
geological survey determination that any such value would be so minimal
in effect as to not adversely affect any taxpayer interest by
transferring these unquestioned mineral rights to the rightful owner.
I respectfully request that the House do now consider and adopt H.R.
542 in order to restore the property rights with mineral rights to
those who have been waiting 200 years for resolution.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Boozman). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 542.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________