[House Report 104-797]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     104-797
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                      ALASKA LAND BANK PROTECTION

                                _______
                                

 September 17, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2505]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 2505) to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to 
make certain clarifications to the land bank protection 
provisions, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that 
the bill as amended do pass.
  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. AUTOMATIC LAND BANK PROTECTION.

  (a) Lands Received in Exchange From Certain Federal Agencies.--The 
matter preceding clause (i) of section 907(d)(1)(A) of the Alaska 
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (43 U.S.C. 1636(d)(1)(A)) is 
amended by inserting ``or conveyed to a Native Corporation pursuant to 
an exchange authorized by section 22(f) of Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act or section 1302(h) of this Act or other applicable law'' 
after ``Settlement Trust''.
  (b) Lands Exchanged Among Native Corporations.--Section 907(d)(2)(B) 
of such Act (43 U.S.C. 1636(d)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ``and'' at 
the end of clause (ii), by striking the period at the end of clause 
(iii) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the end the following:
          ``(iv) lands or interest in lands shall not be considered 
        developed or leased or sold to a third party as a result of an 
        exchange or conveyance of such land or interest in land between 
        or among Native Corporations and trusts, partnerships, 
        corporations, or joint ventures, whose beneficiaries, partners, 
        shareholders, or joint venturers are Native Corporations.''.
  (c) Actions by Trustee Serving Pursuant to Agreement of Native 
Corporations.--Section 907(d)(3)(B) of such Act (43 U.S.C. 
1636(d)(3)(B)) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (i), 
by striking the period at the end of clause (ii) and inserting ``; 
or'', and by adding at the end the following:
          ``(iii) to actions by any trustee whose right, title, or 
        interest in land or interests in land arises pursuant to an 
        agreement between or among Native Corporations and trusts, 
        partnerships, or joint ventures whose beneficiaries, partners, 
        shareholders, or joint venturers are Native Corporations.''.

SEC. 2. RETAINED MINERAL ESTATE.

  Section 12(c)(4) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
U.S.C. 1611(c)(4)) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and (D) as 
        subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively, and by inserting after 
        subparagraph (B) the following new subparagraph:
  ``(C) Where such public lands are surrounded by or contiguous to 
subsurface lands obtained by a Regional Corporation under subsections 
(a) or (b), the Corporation may, upon request, have such public land 
conveyed to it.''; and
          (2) in subparagraph (D) (as so redesignated), by striking 
        ``(A) or (B)'' and inserting ``(A), (B), or (C)''.

SEC. 3. ELIM NATIVE CORPORATION LAND RESTORATION.

  (a) Withdrawal and Availability for Selection.--The lands described 
in subsection (b) are withdrawn from disposition under the public land 
laws, entry or appropriation under the mining laws of the United 
States, and the operation of the mineral leasing laws of the United 
States, subject to valid existing rights, for a period of one year from 
the date of enactment of this Act, for selection by the Elim Native 
Corporation under this section.
  (b) Lands Described.--The lands described in this section are a 
parcel of land in the vicinity of Elim, Alaska, at approximately 
latitude 64 50 N. Longitude 162 00 W, more particularly described as 
follows:
          Beginning at the point of intersection of line 3-4, U.S. 
        Survey No. 2548 with the protracted West Boundary of T8S, R18W 
        KRM, Alaska;
          Thence North, along the west boundary of the aforementioned 
        township, approximately 4\1/2\ miles to the protracted position 
        for the corner of sections 1, 6, 7, and 12;
          Thence Northeasterly, parallel with line 4-3 of U.S. Survey 
        No. 2548, approximately 20\1/2\ miles, to a point;
          Thence East approximately 6 miles to corner no. 3 U.S. Survey 
        No. 2548;
          Thence Southwesterly along lines 3-4, U.S. Survey 2548 
        approximately 27\1/2\ miles to the point of beginning, 
        containing, 52,799.3 acres, more or less.
  (c) Authorization To Select Lands; Reservation of Easement.--The Elim 
Native Corporation is authorized to select the lands described in 
subsection (b) to satisfy its land entitlements under section 19(b) of 
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1618(b)). The 
Secretary is authorized to receive, adjudicate and convey the lands to 
the Elim Native Corporation subject to (1) valid existing rights, and 
(2) an easement reserved to the United States for the benefit of the 
public. An easement in the lands shall be reserved to the Iditarod 
National Historic Trail.
  (d) Withdrawal and Selection of Additional Lands.--The Secretary is 
authorized to withdraw, and Elim Native Corporation is authorized to 
select, within 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act 
additional lands adjacent to the lands withdrawn by subjection (a) to 
fulfill Elim Native Corporation's land entitlements equal to the total 
acreage of the Norton Bay Reservation as withdrawn by Executive Order 
No. 2508, dated January 3, 1917.

SEC. 4. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC LAW 102-415.

  Section 20(f) of the Alaska Land Status Technical Corrections Act of 
1992 (106 Stat. 2129) is amended by adding at the end of the following 
new paragraph:
  ``(4) The Region shall be deemed to have 3,250 acres of subsurface 
entitlement pursuant to this section, which entitlement shall be 
satisfied in the manner prescribed for the Region in section 14(h)(9) 
of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(9)).''.

SEC. 5. CALISTA CORPORATION LAND EXCHANGE.

  (a) Congressional Findings.--Congress finds and declares that--
          (1) the land exchange authorized by section 8126 of Public 
        Law 102-172 should be implemented without further delay;
          (2) lands and interests in lands in the exchange are within 
        the boundaries of the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge 
        established by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation 
        Act (ANILCA) and include wetlands, grasslands, marshes, and 
        riverine and upland fish and wildlife habitat lands, which 
        represent the premier habitat area for waterfowl and other 
        birds in the Pacific and other flyways--
                  (A) for nesting, breeding, and staging grounds for 
                countless thousands of migratory waterfowl, including 
                species such as Spectacled Eider, Tundra Swan, White-
                fronted Goose, many song birds and neotropical 
                migrants, Harlequin Duck, Canvasbacked Duck, Snow 
                Goose, several species of diving and dabbling ducks, 
                Cackling and other subspecies of Canada Geese, and 
                Emperor Goose; and
                  (B) as habitat for other wildlife and fish such as 
                wolf, brown and black bear, moose, caribou, otter, fox, 
                mink, musk ox, salmon, grayling, sheefish, rainbow 
                trout, blackfish, pike, and dolly varden;
        the acquisition of which lands and interests in lands would 
        further the purposes for which the refuge was established by 
        ANILCA;
          (3) the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Region is burdened by some of 
        the most serious and distressing economic, social, and health 
        conditions existing anywhere in the United States, including 
        high incidence of infant mortality, teenage suicide, hepatitis, 
        alcoholism, meningitis, tuberculosis, and unemployment (60 to 
        90 percent);
          (4) the Calista Corporation, the Native Regional Corporation 
        organized under the authority of the Alaska Native Claims 
        Settlement Act (ANCSA) for the Yupik Eskimos of Southwestern 
        Alaska, which includes the entire Yukon Delta National Wildlife 
        Refuge--
                  (A)(i) has responsibilities provided for by the 
                Settlement Act to help address social, cultural, 
                economic, health, subsistence, and related issues 
                within the Region and among its villages, including the 
                viability of the villages themselves, many of which are 
                remote and isolated; and
                  (ii) has been unable to fully carry out such 
                responsibilities; and
                  (B) the implementation of this exchange is essential 
                to helping Calista utilize its assets to carry out 
                those responsibilities to realize the benefits of 
                ANCSA;
          (5) the parties to the exchange have been unable to reach 
        agreement on the valuation of the lands and interests in lands 
        to be conveyed to the United States under section 8126 of 
        Public Law 102-171; and
          (6) in light of the foregoing, it is appropriate and 
        necessary in this unique situation that Congress authorize and 
        direct the implementation of this exchange as set forth in this 
        section in furtherance of the purposes and underlying goals of 
        the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska National 
        Interest Lands Conservation Act.
  (b) Land Exchange Implementation.--Section 8126(a) of Public Law 102-
172 (105 Stat. 1206) is amended--
          (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)''; and
          (2) by inserting after ``October 28, 1991'' the following: 
        ``(hereinafter referred to as `CCRD') and in the document 
        entitled, `The Calista Conveyance and Relinquishment Document 
        Addendum', dated July 16, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 
        `CCRD Addendum')'';
          (3) by striking ``The value'' and all that follows through 
        ``Provided, That the'' and inserting in lieu thereof the 
        following:
  ``(2) Unless prior to October 1, 1996, the parties mutually agree on 
a value of the lands and interests in lands to be exchanged as 
contained in the CCRD or the CCRD Addendum, the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall credit the property account to be established by 
subsection (c) with an amount determined by paragraph (5) of the CCRD 
Addendum. The'';
          (4) in the last sentence, by inserting a period after 
        ``1642'' and striking all that follows in that sentence; and
          (5) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
  ``(3) The amount credited to the property account is not subject to 
adjustment for minor changes in acreage resulting from preparation or 
correction of the land descriptions in the CCRD or CCRD Addendum or the 
exclusion of any small tracts of land as a result of hazardous 
materials surveys.''.
  (c) Exchange Administration.--Section 8126(c) of Public Law 102-172 
(105 Stat. 1207) is amended--
          (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(c)'';
          (2) by inserting after ``subsection (a) of this section,'' 
        the following: ``upon conveyance or relinquishment of the 
        remaining lands in the CCRD and the CCRD Addendum,''; and
          (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
  ``(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Calista Corporation 
may assign, without restriction, any or all of the account upon written 
notification to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the 
Interior.
  ``(3) Calista will provide to the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska 
State Office, appropriate documentation to enable that office to 
perform the accounting required by paragraph (1) and to forward such 
information, if requested by Calista, to the Secretary of the Treasury 
as authorized by such paragraph.
  ``(4) For the purpose of the determination of the applicability of 
section 7(i) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 
1606(i)) to revenues generated pursuant to this section, such revenues 
shall be calculated in accordance with paragraph (4) of the CCRD 
Addendum.''.

SEC. 6. MINING CLAIMS.

  Paragraph (3) of section 22(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 
Act (43 U.S.C. 1621(c)) is amended--
          (1) by striking out ``regional corporation'' each place it 
        appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``Regional Corporation''; 
        and
          (2) by adding at the end the following: ``The provisions of 
        this section shall apply to Haida Corporation and the Haida 
        Traditional Use Sites, which shall be treated as a Regional 
        Corporation for the purposes of this paragraph, except that any 
        revenues remitted to Haida Corporation under this section shall 
        not be subject to distribution pursuant to section 7(i) of this 
        Act.''.

SEC. 7. SALE, DISPOSITION, OR OTHER USE OF COMMON VARIETIES OF SAND, 
                    GRAVEL, STONE, PUMICE, PEAT, CLAY, OR CINDER 
                    RESOURCES.

  Subsection (i)(1) of section 7 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 
Act (43 U.S.C. 1606(i)(1)) is amended--
          (1) by striking ``Seventy per centum'' and inserting ``(A) 
        Except as provided by subparagraph (B), seventy percent''; and
          (2) by adding at the end the following:
  ``(B) In the case of the sale, disposition, or other use of common 
varieties of sand, gravel, stone, pumice, peat, clay, or cinder 
resources made after the date of enactment of this subparagraph, the 
revenues received by a Regional Corporation shall not be subject to 
division under subparagraph (A). Nothing in this subparagraph is 
intended to or shall be construed to alter the ownership of such sand, 
gravel, stone, pumice, peat, clay, or cinder resources.''.

SEC. 8. ALASKA NATIVE ALLOTMENT APPLICATIONS.

  Section 905(a) of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act 
(43 U.S.C. 1634(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
  ``(7) Paragraph (1) of this subsection and section (d) shall apply, 
and paragraph (5) of this subsection shall cease to apply, to an 
application--
          ``(A) that is open and pending on the date of enactment of 
        this paragraph,
          ``(B) if the lands described in the application are in 
        Federal ownership, and
          ``(C) if all protests which were filed by the State of Alaska 
        pursuant to paragraph (5)(B) with respect to the application 
        have been withdrawn and not reasserted or are dismissed.''.

SEC. 9. VISITOR SERVICES.

  Paragraph (1) of section 1307(b) of the Alaska National Interest 
Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3197(b)(1)) is amended--
          (1) by striking ``Native Corporation'' and inserting ``Native 
        Corporations''; and
          (2) by striking ``is most directly affected'' and inserting 
        ``are most directly affected''.

SEC. 10. REPORT.

  Within nine months after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to Congress a report indicating 
the actions taken in carrying out subsection (b) of section 1308 of the 
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3198). The 
report shall also address the recruitment processes that may restrict 
employees hired under subsection (a) of such section from successfully 
obtaining positions in the competitive service. The Secretary of 
Agriculture shall cooperate with the Secretary of the Interior in 
carrying out this section with respect to the Forest Service.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of H.R. 2505 is to amend the Alaska Native 
Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska National Interest Lands 
Conservation Act to make certain clarifications to the land 
bank protection provisions, and for other purposes.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) helped 
settle the aboriginal land claims of Alaska Natives. The goals 
of ANCSA were two fold: (1) to establish property rights of 
Native Alaskans in their aboriginal land, and (2) to secure an 
economic base for their long-term survival as a people. ANCSA 
created thirteen regional corporations, 200 village 
corporations and granted these entities 44 million acres and 
$962.5 million to implement these goals.
    In 1980, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest 
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) to designate and conserve 
certain public lands in Alaska, including the designation of 
units of the National Park, National Wildlife Refuge, National 
Forest, National Wild and Scenic River and National Wilderness 
Preservation Systems.
    This bill is a result of the legislative council of the 
Alaska Federation of Natives and Congress to address some of 
the technical problems which have arisen since passage of ANCSA 
and ANILCA. Two of these issues are discussed in further 
detail, below.

                 restoration of elim corporation lands

    By Executive Order 2508, January 3, 1917, President Woodrow 
Wilson set aside the Norton Bay Reservation ``for the use of 
the United States Bureau of Education and of the natives of 
indigenous Alaskan race'', including adjacent islands within 
three miles of the coast. This area contained 350,000 acres.
    In 1919, Congress mandated that the withdrawal of public 
lands for use as Indian reservations could only be made by an 
Act of Congress. 43 U.S.C. 150, 41 Stat. 34. Congress in 1927 
declared that no changes could be made in the boundaries of 
Executive Order reservations for the use of Indians except by 
an Act of Congress. 25 U.S.C. 398d, 44 Stat. 1347. The 1927 Act 
is applicable to Alaska. 70 I.D. 166 (1963). After the 1927 
Act, President Herbert Hoover issued Executive Order 5207 which 
revoked approximately 50,000 acres of land from the Norton Bay 
Reservation for use of homesteading by ex-servicemen of World 
War I. No ex-servicemen applied for any land within the old 
Norton Bay Reservation. The Committee is somewhat puzzled by 
the apparent change of heart within this Administration in 
regard to the Elim 50,000 acre entitlement. When this issue was 
discussed during the 102d Congress, the Secretary of the 
Interior agreed that Elim was entitled to the 50,000 acres. See 
April 21, 1992, letter from Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land 
and Minerals Management to Chairman George Miller, Committee on 
Interior and Insular Affairs, in Appendix. The Administration 
is simply ignoring the fact that only Congress can revoke 
Reservation lands. Therefore, the Committee feels that Elim 
Native Corporation is entitled to the 50,000 acres and that the 
Administration should disregard Executive Order 5207 issued by 
President Hoover and restore the 50,000-acre Elim entitlement.

                   calista corporation land exchange

    Section 5 of H.R. 2505, the Calista Corporation land 
exchange provision, would amend Section 8126 of Public Law 102-
72, which authorized a land exchange between the United States 
and Calista Corporation. It would also provide for a limited 
exemption from the ANCSA 7(i) revenue sharing requirements for 
a portion of the value realized by Calista from the exchange, 
pursuant to a 1990 Mutual Assistance Agreement between Calista 
and other interested Alaska Native corporations.
    The Calista region of Alaska is one of the poorest and most 
socially troubled areas in the Nation. The exchange was 
authorized to provide Calista with a means of economic self 
sufficiency in furtherance of the purposes of ANCSA. Under 
Section 8126, the Secretary of the Interior and Calista were to 
determine a mutually agreeable value for Calista's lands and 
interests which are to be exchanged, subject to a maximum per 
acre value of $300. The two parties have been unable to arrive 
at a mutually agreeable value, however. Moreover, the 
Secretary's appraisals did not comply with the requirements of 
Section 8126 and as a result, in the Committee's opinion, 
significantly underestimated the value of Calista's lands and 
interests. Section 5 would eliminate this impasse by 
establishing a total value to be ascribed to Calista's lands 
and interests, as Congress has had to do in numerous other 
instances since 1976. See, Public Law 94-204; Public Law 99-
664; Public Law 100-383; Public Law 102-415 and section 1417 of 
ANILCA.
    In doing so Congress would simply be providing the figure 
which Calista and the Secretary of the Interior were unable to 
determine. The Committee is continuing to discuss the issue of 
what an appropriate value should be with Calista and the 
Secretary and it is expected that there will be further changes 
to the language of Section 5.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 2505 was introduced by Congressman Don Young (R-AK) on 
October 18, 1995. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources. The Committee held hearings on March 19, 1996, and 
June 11, 1996, to hear testimony from the Administration, the 
Alaska Federation of Natives, Calista Native Corporation, Ahtna 
Native Corporation and Elim Native Corporation on the bill.
    On July 17, 1996, the Committee met to consider H.R. 2505. 
Congressman Young offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to reflect ongoing discussions and a partial 
resolution of several outstanding issues. The amendment was 
adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended, was ordered 
favorably reported to the House of Representatives by voice 
vote in the presence of a quorum.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

               Section 1. automatic land bank protection

    Section 1 would amend ANILCA to extend the automatic land 
protections to lands trades between village corporations, 
intra-regional corporation land trades and Native Corporation 
land trades with federal or state governments.

                   Section 2. retained mineral estate

    Section 2 would allow a Native Regional Corporation the 
option of obtaining the retained mineral estate of the Native 
Allotments that are totally surrounded by ANCSA 12(a) and 12(b) 
land selections of the village corporations.

          Section 3. elim native corporation land restoration

    Section 3 would replace approximately 50,000 acres which 
were taken away from the people of Elim by an Executive Order 
in 1929. This provision would allow this land to be returned to 
the Elim people using Elim Native Corporation, a 19(b) ANCSA 
corporation for the village of Elim.
    Section 3 was considered in the 102d Congress in H.R. 3157. 
At that time, the Elim land restoration provision was supported 
by the Administration and the Alaska Federation of Natives; 
however, the neighboring village of Koyuk objected on the land 
selection area boundaries. Due to the objection, the Elim 
provision was removed from H.R. 3157. The Alaska Federation of 
Natives and the village of Koyuk currently support this revised 
Elim land restoration provision.
    The Committee is deeply disappointed in the inconsistency 
of the Department of the Interior with regard to the Elim land 
restoration provision and include in this report the Department 
of Interior's letter to the Honorable George Miller, Chairman 
of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, dated April 
21, 1992, outlining the Department's directive that the 
proposed amendment tie authority for conveyance of Elim's 
rightful additional acreage to some existing entitlement. 
Section 3 of H.R. 2505 does so. See also, the testimony of the 
Department of the Interior of March 19, 1996, on section 3 of 
H.R. 2505, attached in the appendix to this report.

          Section 4. proposed amendment to public law 102-415

    Section 4 would amend Public Law 102-415 to grant 
subsurface rights to the Cook Inlet Region Corporation in 
fulfillment of their entitlement under 14(h)(2) of ANCSA.

              Section 5. calista corporation land exchange

    Section 5 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to 
determine the value of Calista Corporation's lands by a given 
set of minimum values for the lands and interests. Further, any 
value realized by Calista from the exchange would be exempted 
from the 7(i) revenue sharing provision of the Alaska Native 
Claims Settlement Act.

                         Section 6. mining laws

    Section 6 would amend section 22(c) of ANCSA to include the 
Haida Corporation in the transfer of the administration of 
certain mining claims.

Section 7. sale, disposition, or other use of common varieties of sand, 
         gravel, stone, pumice, peat, clay or cinder resources

    Section 7 would make revenues derived by the Regional 
Corporations from the sale of sand, rock and gravel exempt from 
7(i) revenue sharing without affecting the ownership of the 
affected material spelled out in this proposal. This provision 
will codify an agreement that was reached between the ANCSA 
Regional Corporations in June of 1980 after years of 
litigation.

            Section 8. alaska native allotment applications

    Section 8 would address the Native allotment applications 
that the State of Alaska protested per ANILCA. In those 
instances where the State of Alaska filed a protest against the 
legislative approval of Native allotments under ANILCA, and the 
State subsequently lifts its protest, that allotment will then 
be considered legislatively approved per ANILCA. In addition, 
if the courts or the Department of the Interior Bureau of Land 
Appeals dismisses the State of Alaska's protests, the affected 
Native allotments would also be considered legislatively 
approved under this provision.

                      section 9. visitor services

    Section 9 would allow the Secretary of the Interior the 
flexibility of working with affected Native Corporations rather 
than just one Native Corporation on the implementation of 
Section 1307 of ANILCA for the contracting for visitor 
services, except sport fishing and hunting guiding activities, 
within any conservation unit. Currently, Section 1307(b)(1) 
requires the Secretary of the Interior to give preference to 
the Native Corporation which the Secretary determines is most 
directly affected by the establishment or expansion of a 
conservation unit.

                           Section 10. Report

    Section 10 addresses Section 1308 of ANILCA, which 
authorizes the Secretary of the Interior in limited 
circumstances to hire local people who do not completely 
qualify under certain job descriptions through appointments. A 
problem has arisen under this authority, in hat when these 
people appointed through this process later acquire all the 
necessary skills, they are unable to become permanent employees 
of the Department of the Interior, with all the attendant 
benefits. This provision will direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to complete a report within nine months of enactment 
to address the recruitment process that may restrict employees 
hired under ANILCA Section 1308 from successfully obtaining 
positions in the competitive service.

            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that the 
enactment of H.R. 2505 will have no significant inflationary 
impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national 
economy.

                        Cost of the Legislation

    Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 2505. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     Compliance With House Rule XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R. 
2505 does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax 
expenditures. H.R. 2505 would increase direct spending over 
because of provisions which would result in loss of federal 
receipts from property sales and lease-related income.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 2505.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
2505 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                Washington, DC, September 13, 1996.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2505, a bill to 
amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to make certain 
clarifications to the land bank protection provisions, and for 
other purposes.
    Enacting H.R. 2505 would affect direct spending; therefore, 
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply to the bill.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them.
            Sincerely,
                                              James L. Blum
                                   (For June E. O'Neill, Director).
    Enclosure.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

    1. Bill number: H.R. 2505.
    2. Bill title: A bill to amend the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act to make certain clarifications to the land bank 
protection provisions, and for other purposes.
    3. Bill status: As ordered reported by the House Committee 
on Resources on July 17, 1996.
    4. Bill purpose: H.R. 2505 would affect the terms and 
conditions of various property transactions involving Alaska 
Native Corporations. Under this bill, native corporations could 
obtain the subsurface rights retained by the federal government 
in lands granted to individuals or villages if the public lands 
are surrounded by or contiguous to corporation-owned 
properties. The bill also would extend certain protections to 
land exchanges among corporations, clarify the status of 
applications involving land allotments, and exempt a 
corporation's revenues from sand, gravel, and certain other 
resources from the income distribution requirements that apply 
to regional corporations' development of subsurface property.
    Several provisions would affect the property rights of 
specific native corporations. H.R. 2505 would amend existing 
law by assigning a value of $60 million to properties that are 
to be conveyed by the Calista Corporation in exchange for 
rights to certain federal properties if the parties to the 
exchange have not agreed on a valuation by October 1, 1996. It 
also would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to 
the Elim Corporation about 53,000 acres to fulfill the 
corporation's entitlement under the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act. Another provision would expand the entitlement 
of the Cook Inlet Region Incorporated (CIRI) to include 
subsurface rights to an additional 3,520 acres.
    Finally, the bill includes several administrative 
provisions related to contracting preferences for visitor 
services, hiring preferences for certain positions, and 
managing mining claims related to the Haida Corporation or 
Haida Traditional Use sites.
    5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates 
that enacting this bill would increase direct spending by about 
$43 million over the next six years. Enacting this bill would 
increase administrative costs at the Department of the 
Interior, subject to the availability of appropriated funds, 
but the effect on discretionary spending would not be 
significant. The following table shows the estimated budgetary 
impacts over the 1997-2002 period.

                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   1997    1998    1999    2000    2001    2002 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING                                                
                                                                                                                
Spending under current law:                                                                                     
    Estimated budget authority..................................       0       5       0      -1      -1      -1
    Estimated outlays...........................................       0       5       0      -1      -1      -1
Proposed changes:                                                                                               
    Estimated budget authority..................................      60      -5      -3      -3      -3      -3
    Estimated outlays...........................................      60      -5      -3      -3      -3      -3
Spending under H.R. 2505:                                                                                       
    Estimated budget authority..................................      60       0      -3      -4      -4      -4
    Estimated outlays...........................................      60       0      -3      -4      -4      -4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The costs of this bill fall within budget functions 300 and 
800.
    6. Basis of estimate:
    Direct Spending. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2505 
would increase direct spending by about $43 million over the 
next six years because of provisions that would result in a 
loss of federal receipts from property sales and lease-related 
income.
    Most of the costs of this bill would result from the 
provisions prescribing the value of the Calista Corporation's 
properties to be exchanged with the Department of the Interior. 
Under current law, the department is authorized to exchange 
properties of a value equal to those that would be conveyed to 
the government by the Calista Corporation. Existing law vests 
the initial authority for determining the value of the Calista 
properties with the Secretary of the Interior and provides that 
the parties may pursue arbitration if they cannot agree on the 
valuation. The valuation must be consistent with certain 
standards and procedures and cannot exceed an average of $300 
per acre (or about $63 million in total). The statute also 
requires the government to award monetary credits to the 
Calista Corporation on October 1, 1996, equal to the value of 
the properties remaining to be conveyed by Calista to the 
department at that time. The corporation is authorized to use 
these monetary credits to purchase properties owned by any 
federal agency or instrumentality. The value of monetary 
credits counts as direct spending in the year they are issued 
and as receipts in the years in which they are redeemed. If the 
credits are used to acquire property that otherwise would have 
been sold by the government, the use of the credits would 
result in a corresponding loss of receipts from such sales.
    The two parties to the Calista exchange currently disagree 
on the valuation of the properties, but they have not yet 
pursued administrative remedies to settle their differences. 
The gap between the valuations is substantial: the department's 
appraisal assigned a value of about $5 million to the 
properties, while the corporation asserts that the property is 
worth significantly more. Given the differences in 
methodologies and values, this impasse could last for some 
time. Because the department would probably not award monetary 
credits until there is an agreement, it is possible that, under 
current law, Calista would not receive any monetary credits for 
several years. For the purpose of this estimate, however, we 
assume an agreement will be reached in fiscal year 1998, 
because of Calista's interest in acquiring property with the 
credits. While a negotiated valuation could exceed the 
department's $5 million appraisal, CBO has no basis for 
estimating whether and to what extent the Secretary would agree 
to a higher value. Hence, we assume for this estimate that 
Calista would receive monetary credits of about $5 million in 
the absence of this legislation. We would expect Calista to use 
at least half of its monetary credits to acquire properties 
that otherwise would have been sold, which suggests that the 
exchange would cost the federal government at least $3 million 
under current law.
    Because it is unlikely that the parties will have agreed on 
a valuation prior to October 1, 1996, CBO assumes that enacting 
H.R. 2505 would set the value of Calista's monetary credits at 
the $60 million level specified in the bill in fiscal year 
1997. As shown in the table above, this action would change the 
amount and timing of the monetary credits, resulting in a net 
increase in the value of the credits of $55 million relative to 
a base case of $5 million. Increasing the value of the credits 
would increase the cost of the exchange to the extent that 
Calista's use of the credits would result in a loss of receipts 
from the property. Assuming that Calista would use at least 
half of its monetary credits to acquire such income-producing 
properties, CBO estimates that this legislative valuation would 
increase the net cost of the Calista exchange by about $27 
million over the next 10 years. The net increase in outlays 
over the 1997-2002 period would be $43 million. These costs 
would be lower if the monetary credits to be awarded under 
current law were greater than $5 million.
    Increasing CIRI's subsurface entitlement by 3,520 acres 
could result in a loss of receipts from oil and gas leases. 
While it is impossible to predict which properties the 
corporation would select, information from CIRI representatives 
strongly suggests that the corporation would choose properties 
near its other holdings in the Kenai National wildlife Refuge. 
The federal government currently retains 10 percent of the 
royalties from oil and gas leases in this area and would forgo 
some of this income if the corporation chose productive 
acreage. Because the federal share of royalties from the entire 
refuge totaled only $300,000 in 1995, we estimate that the 
budgetary effect of this provision would not be significant.
    Although the federal government collects income from leases 
for some of the lands that would be conveyed to the Elim 
Corporation, CBO estimates that the loss of receipts from that 
conveyance would not be significant over the 1997-2002 period. 
Likewise, allowing native corporations to acquire the 
government's retained mineral rights to certain properties 
would have no significant budgetary impact in the near term, 
because it is unlikely that the affected acreage would be in 
areas where the government has active oil or gas leases or 
production. We estimate that other provisions in the bill would 
have no significant effect on direct spending or receipts.
    Spending Subject to Appropriations. Based on information 
provided by the Department of the Interior, we estimate that 
the administrative cost of implementing this bill would total 
less than $500,000. Most of this spending would occur in fiscal 
year 1997, assuming that this bill and the necessary 
appropriations are enacted by the beginning of the fiscal year.
    7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts through 1998. As shown in the following 
table, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2505 would affect 
direct spending by increasing the value of monetary credits for 
the Calista Corporation. Other provisions could also affect 
direct spending by giving various native corporations the 
rights to income-producing federal lands, but we estimate that 
any such additional effects would be negligible.

                [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 1996     1997     1998 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays............................  .......       60       -5
Change in receipts...........................  .......    (\1\)  .......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.                                                     

    8. Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal 
governments: H.R. 2505 contains an intergovernmental mandate as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 
104-4), but this mandate would impose no significant costs on 
state, local, or tribal governments.
    Section 1 of this bill would amend the Alaska National 
Interest Lands Conservation Act to clarity what lands are 
eligible for automatic land protections, including exemption 
from property taxes. This would impose a mandate on the state 
of Alaska and its constituent local governments because it 
could slightly increase the amount of land exempt from state 
and local property taxes. (Public Law 104-4 defines the direct 
costs of mandates to include revenues that state, local, or 
tribal governments would be prohibited from collecting.) Based 
on information provided by Alaska state officials, we estimate 
that the impact would be negligible, because Alaska has no 
state property tax and most of the land affected would be in 
areas of the state with no local property taxes.
    While H.R. 2505 contains no other mandates, other sections 
of the bill result in both costs and benefits for state, local, 
and tribal governments. In general, the bill would benefit 
specific Alaska native corporations, but some of these 
provisions could affect the distribution of land and other 
resources among the corporations or between the corporations 
and the state. For example, section 6 would allow regional 
corporations to dispose of sand, gravel, and similar materials 
without distributing part of the proceeds among the other 
regional corporations, as required by current law. This would 
allow village corporations to gain greater access to these 
resources. In addition, because the state receives most of the 
royalties from oil and gas leases on federal lands in Alaska, 
it could lose some income as a result of section 4, which 
increases CIRI's subsurface entitlement. The state's share of 
royalties from the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, where CIRI 
is likely to make its selections, was almost $3 million in 
1995. We cannot estimate how much, if any, of this income the 
state would lose, however, without knowing exactly which 
properties CIRI would select.
    Other provisions would benefit Alaska native corporations 
by expanding their rights to property and resources. These 
provisions include the section that would specify the value of 
the properties to be exchanged by the Calista Corporation for 
other federal properties. This section would effectively 
increase the amount of property that the corporation could 
obtain. The Elim Corporation would benefit from the provision 
specifying additional lands that would be available for 
selection by that corporation. Further, native corporations 
generally would benefit from the section allowing them to 
obtain additional subscriber rights now retained by the federal 
government.
    9. Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill would 
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in Public Law 
104-4.
    10. Previous CBO estimate: None.
    11. Estimate prepared by: Federal cost estimate: Kathleen 
Gramp and Victoria Heid; impact on State, local, and tribal 
governments: Marjorie Miller; impact on the private sector: 
Elliot Schwartz.
    12. Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, for Paul N. 
Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 2505 contains an intergovernmental mandate, as defined 
under Public Law 104-4, but this mandate imposes no significant 
costs on state, local or tribal governments.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

            ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT

          * * * * * * *

  TITLE IX--IMPLEMENTATION OF ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT AND 
                          ALASKA STATEHOOD ACT

          * * * * * * *

                        alaska native allotments

  Sec. 905. (a)(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (7) Paragraph (1) of this subsection and section (d) shall 
apply, and paragraph (5) of this subsection shall cease to 
apply, to an application--
          (A) that is open and pending on the date of enactment 
        of this paragraph,
          (B) if the lands described in the application are in 
        Federal ownership, and
          (C) if all protests which were filed by the State of 
        Alaska pursuant to paragraph (5)(B) with respect to the 
        application have been withdrawn and not reasserted or 
        are dismissed.
          * * * * * * *

                            alaska land bank

  Sec. 907. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (d) Automatic Protections for Lands Conveyed Pursuant to the 
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.--(1)(A) Notwithstanding 
any other provision of law or doctrine of equity, all land and 
interests in land in Alaska conveyed by the Federal Government 
pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to a Native 
individual or Native Corporation or subsequently reconveyed by 
a Native Corporation pursuant to section 39 of that Act to a 
Settlement Trust or conveyed to a Native Corporation pursuant 
to an exchange authorized by section 22(f) of Alaska Native 
Claims Settlement Act or section 1302(h) of this Act or other 
applicable law shall be exempt, so long as such land and 
interests are not developed or leased or sold to third parties 
from--
          (i) adverse possession and similar claims based upon 
        estopped;
  (2) Definitions.--(A) * * *
  (B) For purposes of this subsection--
          (i) land shall not be considered developed solely as 
        a result of--
                  (I) the construction, installation, or 
                placement upon such land of any structure, 
                fixture, device, or other improvement intended 
                to enable, assist, or otherwise further 
                subsistence uses or other customary or 
                traditional uses of such land, or
                  (II) the receipt of fees related to hunting, 
                fishing, and guiding activities conducted on 
                such land;
          (ii) land upon which timber resources are being 
        harvested shall be considered developed only during the 
        period of such harvest and only to the extent that such 
        land is integrally related to the timber harvesting 
        operation; [and]
          (iii) land subdivided by a State or local platting 
        authority on the basis of a subdivision plat submitted 
        by the holder of the land or its agent, shall be 
        considered developed on the date an approved 
        subdivision plat is recorded by such holder or agent 
        unless the subdivided property is a remainder 
        parcel[.]; and
          (iv) lands or interest in lands shall not be 
        considered developed or leased or sold to a third party 
        as a result of an exchange or conveyance of such land 
        or interest in land between or among Native 
        Corporations and trusts, partnerships, corporations, or 
        joint ventures, whose beneficiaries, partners, 
        shareholders, or joint venturers are Native 
        Corporations.
  (3) Action by a Trustee.--(A) * * *
  (B) The prohibitions of subparagraph (A) shall not apply--
          (i) when the actions of such trustee, receiver, or 
        custodian are for purposes of exploration or pursuant 
        to a judgment in law or in equity (or arbitration 
        award) arising out of any claim made pursuant to 
        section 7(i) or section 14(c) of the Alaska Native 
        Claims Settlement Act; [or]
          (ii) to any land, or interest in land, which has 
        been--
                  (I) developed or leased prior to the vesting 
                of the trustee, receiver, or custodian with the 
                right, title, or interest of the Native 
                Corporation; or
                  (II) expressly pledged as security for any 
                loan or expressly committed to any commercial 
                transaction in a valid agreement[.]; or
          (iii) to actions by any trustee whose right, title, 
        or interest in land or interests in land arises 
        pursuant to an agreement between or among Native 
        Corporations and trusts, partnerships, or joint 
        ventures whose beneficiaries, partners, shareholders, 
        or joint venturers are Native Corporations.
          * * * * * * *

                 TITLE XIII--ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

          * * * * * * *

                   revenue-producing visitor services

  Sec. 1307. (a) * * *
  (b) Preference.--Notwithstanding provisions of law other than 
those contained in subsection (a), in selecting persons to 
provide (and in contracting for the provisions of) any type of 
visitor of visitor service for any conservation system unit, 
except sport fishing and hunting guiding activities, the 
Secretary--
          (1) shall give preference to Native [Corporation] 
        Corporations which the Secretary determines [is] are 
        most directly affected by the establishment or 
        expansion of such unit by or under the provisions of 
        this Act;
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                  ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT

          * * * * * * *

                         regional corporations

    Sec. 7. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (i)(1) [Seventy per centum] (A) Except as provided by 
subparagraph (B), seventy percent of all revenues received by 
each Regional Corporation from the timber resources and 
subsurface estate patented to it pursuant to this Act shall be 
divided annually by the Regional Corporation among all twelve 
Regional Corporations organized pursuant to this section 
according to the number of Natives enrolled in each region 
pursuant to section 5. The provisions of this subsection shall 
not apply to the thirteenth Regional Corporation if organized 
pursuant to subsection (c) hereof.
  (B) In the case of the sale, disposition, or other use of 
common varieties of sand, gravel, stone, pumice, peat, clay, or 
cinder resources made after the date of enactment of this 
subparagraph, the revenues received by a Regional Corporation 
shall not be subject to division under subparagraph (A). 
Nothing in this subparagraph is intended to or shall be 
construed to alter the ownership of such sand, gravel, stone, 
pumice, peat, clay, or cinder resources.
          * * * * * * *

                         native land selections

  Sec. 12. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c) The difference between thirty-eight million acres and the 
22 million acres selected by Village Corporations pursuant to 
subsections (a) and (b) shall be allocated among the eleven 
Regional Corporations (which exclude the Regional Corporation 
for southeastern Alaska) as follows:
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (4) Where the public lands consist only of the 
        mineral estate, or portion thereof, which is reserved 
        by the United States upon patent of the balance of the 
        estate under one of the public land laws, other than 
        this Act, the Regional Corporations may select as 
        follows:
                  (A) * * *
          * * * * * * *
                  (C) Where such public lands are surrounded by 
                or contiguous to subsurface lands obtained by a 
                Regional Corporation under subsections (a) or 
                (b), the Corporation may, upon request, have 
                such public land conveyed to it.
                  [(C)] (D) Where the Regional Corporation 
                elects to obtain such public lands under 
                subparagraph [(A) or (B)] (A), (B), or (C) of 
                this paragraph, it may select, within ninety 
                days of receipt of notice from the Secretary, 
                the surface estate in an equal acreage from 
                other public lands withdrawn by the Secretary 
                for that purpose. Such selections shall be in 
                units no smaller than a whole section, except 
                where the remaining entitlement is less than 
                six hundred and forty acres, or where an entire 
                section is not available. Where possible, 
                selections shall be of lands from which the 
                subsurface estate was selected by that Regional 
                Corporation pursuant to subsection 12(a)(1) or 
                14(h)(9) of this Act, and, where possible, all 
                selections made under this section shall be 
                contiguous to lands already selected by the 
                Regional Corporation or a Village Corporation. 
                The Secretary is authorized, as necessary, to 
                withdraw up to two times the acreage 
                entitlement of the in lieu surface estate from 
                vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved public 
                lands from which the Regional Corporation may 
                select such in lieu surface estate except that 
                the Secretary may withdraw public lands which 
                had been previously withdrawn pursuant to 
                subsection 17(d)(1).
                  [(D)] (E) No mineral estate or in lieu 
                surface estate shall be available for selection 
                within the National Petroleum Reserve--Alaska 
                or within Wildlife Refuges as the boundaries of 
                those refuges exist on the date of enactment of 
                this Act.
          * * * * * * *

                             miscellaneous

  Sec. 22. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c)(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (3) This section shall apply to lands conveyed by interim 
conveyance or patent to a [regional corporation] Regional 
Corporation pursuant to this Act which are made subject to a 
mining claim or claims located under the general mining laws, 
including lands conveyed prior to enactment of this paragraph. 
Effective upon the date of enactment of this paragraph, the 
Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Land Management and in 
a manner consistent with section 14(g), shall transfer to the 
[regional corporation] Regional Corporation administration of 
all mining claims determined to be entirely within lands 
conveyed to that corporation. Any person holding such mining 
claim or claims shall meet such requirements of the general 
mining laws and section 314 of the Federal Land Management and 
Policy Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744), except that any filings 
that would have been made with the Bureau of Land Management if 
the lands were within Federal ownership shall be timely made 
with the appropriate [regional corporation] Regional 
Corporation. The validity of any such mining claim or claims 
may be contested by the [regional corporation] Regional 
Corporation, in place of the United States. All contest 
proceedings and appeals by the mining claimants of adverse 
decisions made by the [regional corporation] Regional 
Corporation shall be brought in Federal District Court for the 
District of Alaska. Neither the United States nor any Federal 
agency or official shall be named or joined as a party in such 
proceedings or appeals. All revenues from such mining claims 
received after passage of this paragraph shall be remitted to 
the [regional corporation] Regional Corporation subject to 
distribution pursuant to section 7(i) of this Act, except that 
in the event that the mining claim or claims are not totally 
within the lands conveyed to the [regional corporation] 
Regional Corporation, the [regional corporation] Regional 
Corporation shall be entitled only to that proportion of 
revenues, other than administrative fees, reasonably allocated 
to the portion of the mining claim so conveyed. The provisions 
of this section shall apply to Haida Corporation and the Haida 
Traditional Use Sites, which shall be treated as a Regional 
Corporation for the purposes of this paragraph, except that any 
revenues remitted to Haida Corporation under this section shall 
not be subject to distribution pursuant to section 7(i) of this 
Act.
          * * * * * * *

 SECTION 20 OF THE ALASKA LAND STATUS TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT OF 1992

SEC. 20. GOLD CREEK SUSITNA ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED ACCOUNT.

  (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (f) Implementation.--(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (4) The Region shall be deemed to have 3,520 acres of 
subsurface entitlement pursuant to this section, which 
entitlement shall be satisfied in the manner prescribed for the 
Region in section 14(h)(9) of the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(9)).
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


   SECTION 8126 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATION ACT, 1992

  Sec. 8126. (a)(1) Property as defined in section 8133 of the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1991 (104 Stat. 
1909) held by Federal agencies or instrumentalities and which 
is not scheduled for disposition by sale prior to October 1, 
1996, as determined by such agencies or instrumentalities shall 
be, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, 
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior, at his request, 
without compensation or reimbursement, for the purpose of 
entering into a land exchange or exchanges with the Calista 
Corporation, a corporation organized under the laws of the 
State of Alaska. The Secretary is authorized to exchange such 
property for the lands and interests in lands (which for 
purposes of this section include lands, partial estates, and 
land selection rights) of equal value identified in the 
document entitled ``The Calista Conveyance and Relinquishment 
Document'', dated October 28, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 
``CCRD'') and in the document entitled, ``The Calista 
Conveyance and Relinquishment Document Addendum'', dated July 
16, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ``CCRD Addendum''). [The 
value of the lands and interests in lands included in that 
document shall be determined by the Secretary of the Interior 
not later than nine months after the date of enactment of this 
section. In making such value determination, the Secretary 
shall consider, in addition to the ``Uniform Appraisal 
Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions'', the public interest 
values of such lands and interests in lands, including, but not 
limited to, the location of such lands and interests in lands 
within the boundary of a national wildlife refuge, and 
statutorily authorized or mandated exchanges with and 
acquisitions by the Federal Government of lands and interests 
in lands in Alaska. In the event that the parties cannot agree 
on the value of such lands and interests in land, the 
procedures specified in subsection 206(d), of Public Law 94-
579, as amended, shall be used to establish the value: 
Provided, That the]
  (2) Unless prior to October 1, 1996, the parties mutually 
agree on a value of the lands and interests in lands to be 
exchanged as contained in the CCRD or the CCRD Addendum, the 
Secretary of the Treasury shall credit the property account to 
be established by subsection (c) with an amount determined by 
paragraph (5) of the CCRD Addendum. The average value per acre 
of such lands and interests in lands shall be no more than 
$300. Property exchanged and conveyed by the United States 
pursuant to this section shall be considered and treated as 
conveyances of land entitlements under 43 U.S.C. 1601 through 
1642 [(except for subsections (a) through (c) and (f) through 
(j) of section 1620, section 1627(b), and section 1636(d)).].
  (3) The amount credited to the property account is not 
subject to adjustment for minor changes in acreage resulting 
from preparation or correction of the land descriptions in the 
CCRD or CCRD Addendum or the exclusion of any small tracts of 
land as a result of hazardous materials surveys.
          * * * * * * *
  (c)(1) The Secretary of the Interior shall maintain an 
accounting of the value of lands and interests in lands 
remaining to be conveyed or relinquished by Calista Corporation 
pursuant to this section. On October 1, 1996, the Secretary of 
the Treasury shall establish a property account with an initial 
balance equal to the value of lands and interests in lands 
which Calista Corporation has not then conveyed or relinquished 
to the United States pursuant to this section. Subject to 
reduction upon conveyances pursuant to subsection (a) of this 
section, upon conveyance or relinquishment of the remaining 
lands in the CCRD and the CCRD Addendum, said account shall be 
available on or after October 1, 1996, for the sale of property 
by all agencies or instrumentalities of the United States, to 
the same extent as is separately authorized to the accounts 
described in subsection 9102(a)(2) of the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 1151).
  (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Calista 
Corporation may assign, without restriction, any or all of the 
account upon written notification to the Secretary of the 
Treasury and the Secretary of the Interior.
  (3) Calista will provide to the Bureau of Land Management, 
Alaska State Office, appropriate documentation to enable that 
office to perform the accounting required by paragraph (1) and 
to forward such information, if requested by Calista, to the 
Secretary of the Treasury as authorized by such paragraph.
  (4) For the purpose of the determination of the applicability 
of section 7(i) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
U.S.C. 1606(i)) to revenues generated pursuant to this section, 
such revenues shall be calculated in accordance with paragraph 
(4) of the CCRD Addendum.
            DISSENTING VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE MILLER

    I must oppose this legislation in its current form. Yet I 
do so reluctantly because Chairman Young and I have often 
worked cooperatively together on Alaska Native matters. 
However, despite many months of negotiations between the Alaska 
Native Corporations and the Department of the Interior, this 
bill does not have a consensus of support. Simply put, these 
are not technical, noncontroversial amendments.
    Among its shortcomings, H.R. 2505 would allow Native 
Corporations to select potentially valuable Federal oil, gas 
and coal rights within national wildlife refuges, would give 
away over 50,000 acres of public lands without legal or 
equitable justification, and would require that over $60 
million in Federal assets be conveyed to acquire Native 
Corporation lands (primarily subsurface) that the Department of 
the Interior considers to be of questionable priority for 
acquisition.
    There are five sections of the bill that are worthy of 
support. It is my hope that the controversial provisions can be 
modified or dropped prior to consideration on the House floor.
                                                     George Miller.
                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              

                   U.S. Department of the Interior,
                                   Office of the Secretary,
                                    Washington, DC, April 21, 1992.
Hon. George Miller,
Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: This responds to your request for the 
Department of the Interior's (the Department's) views on eight 
proposed amendments to H.R. 3157, the ``Alaska Land Status 
Technical Corrections Act of 1991,'' a bill which would amend 
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA).
    On February 24, 1991, the Department submitted written 
testimony on H.R. 3157, as introduced. The issues raised in our 
testimony still are of concern to the Department. This letter 
sets forth only the Department's concerns with the eight 
proposed amendments. The proposed amendments will be discussed 
in the same order and have been given the same headings as 
those submitted with your letter requesting our views.

      ratification of land transfers to caswell and montana creek

    This proposed amendment involves the Cook Inlet Region, 
Inc. (CIRI) and the Caswell and Montana Creek Native Groups, 
all of whom entered into a settlement agreement in 1982. 
Pursuant to the settlement, CIRI conveyed approximately 11,000 
acres to each group with the understanding that the conveyances 
satisfied their entitlements under section 12(b) of ANCSA. The 
Department was not a party to the settlement agreement. The 
purpose of the proposed amendment is to ratify the transfers 
and satisfy the Department's ANCSA land transfer obligations to 
the two groups and CIRI.
    The conveyances to Caswell and Montana Creek were made by 
CIRI from lands received from the State of Alaska under 
Paragraph II and Appendix C, Part 1.A. (Kashwitna Pool) of the 
Terms and Conditions for Land Consolidation and Management in 
the Cook Inlet Area (ratified by Section 12(b) of the Act of 
January 2, 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1611 n.).
    Conveyances from Appendix C are debited from CIRI's 
entitlement under Section 12(c) of the ANCSA. The Terms and 
Conditions provided for methods of satisfying entitlements that 
are somewhat different from the normal procedures, i.e., 
ordinarily, the United States conveys land directly to groups 
but, by virtue of special legislation affecting CIRI, land is 
conveyed to the regional corporation and it then reconveys to 
village corporations and groups. In order to avoid a double 
charge for the Caswell/Montana Creek group entitlements, we 
recommend the following language by added at the end of the 
proposed amendment:

          The ratification of the conveyances made by CIRI in 
        this section shall not be a basis for or generate a 
        claim by CIRI, or either of the groups named herein, 
        for additional conveyances of land or money or any 
        other thing of value against either the State of Alaska 
        or the United States.

                elim native corporation land conveyance

    Under this proposed amendment, 50,000 acres of land would 
be withdrawn, subject to valid existing rights, for selection 
by the Elim Native Corporation. These lands were excluded in 
1929 by Executive Order from the original Elim reserve. Elim 
was one of five native corporations that elected to take lands 
set aside in reserve for the benefit of Natives instead of 
participating in the ANCSA land selection process. Pursuant to 
its election, Elim received patent to 297,982 acres on 
September 14, 1979--the lands that were included in the Elim 
reserve on the date of entitlement under the ANCSA. Elim did 
not appeal the decision to convey and accepted the patent.
    We suggest that proposed amendment tie authority for 
conveyance of additional acreage to some existing entitlement. 
Moreover, the proposed amendment presents a problem in that 
about 11,440 acres of the described lands proposed for 
conveyance to Elim have been validly selected by the Native 
village of Koyuk. This would leave only 38,560 acres for Elim 
instead of the 50,000 they desire. If the proposed amendment is 
included in H.R. 3157, it should include clear Congressional 
intent and guidance as to which entity will receive the 11,440 
acres, and a proviso that he conveyance is in full satisfaction 
of Elim's entitlement under Section 19(b) of the ANCSA.
          * * * * * * *
    The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there 
is no objection to the presentation of this report from the 
standpoint of the Administration's program.
            Sincerely,
                                    Richard Roldan,
                                Deputy Assistant Secretary,
                                      Land and Minerals Management.
                              ----------                              


 Statement of Deborah L. Williams, Special Assistant to the Secretary 
              for Alaska, U.S. Department of the Interior

before the house committee on natural resources on h.r. 2505, march 19, 
                                  1996

    Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for 
the opportunity to testify on H.R. 2505, to amend the Alaska 
Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) to make certain 
clarifications to the land bank protection provisions and other 
purposes.
    Chairman Young, in response to your remarks when you 
introduced H.R. 2505, the Department of the Interior has been 
working cooperatively with the Alaska Federation of Natives 
(AFN), the State of Alaska, and other to develop and consensus 
bill. We join this Committee in seeking a bill that will add to 
an improved conveyance process and equity in the application of 
law. Through our discussions, we have found many areas of 
consensus. We urge that these consensus items be retained and 
nonconsensus items be considered separately to facilitate 
smooth progress of the consensus items through the legislative 
process.
    In the current version of H.R. 2505 we support four 
sections as written or with changes, we concur with AFN that 
one section should be dropped, and we oppose two sections as 
written.
    In addition to the original sections, we are working with 
the AFN, the State, and others on several matters which may 
result in consensus recommendations that will enhance the bill. 
Matters under consideration include possible changes to: 
section 1307 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation 
Act (ANILCA), to provide needed flexibility for the Secretary 
in determining Native Corporation preferences for providing 
visitor services under ANILCA section 1307(b)(1); section 1308 
of ANILCA, to improve the opportunities for local individuals 
hired under this authority to qualify and compete for career 
positions; and Section 905(a)(5) of ANCSA, to facilitate 
certification of Native allotments.
    Section 1 of H.R. 2505 provides land bank protection for 
lands received from certain Federal agencies, lands exchanged 
among Native Corporations, and actions by a trustee serving 
pursuant to agreement of Native Corporations. The Department 
supports this section.
    The objective of Section 2 is to permit Regional 
Corporation to select the retained mineral estate under the 
surface of lands patented to individuals through public land 
entries including homesteads, homesites, headquarters sites, 
trade and manufacturing sites, and the Native Allotment Act of 
1906. The Act of March 8, 1922, 48 U.S.C. 376 (1958), directed 
that, in Alaska, public lands known to contain workable coal, 
oil, and gas deposits, or that may be valuable for coal, oil, 
or gas could be entered, claimed, perfected and patented out of 
federal ownership, but all coal, oil or gas must be reserved to 
the United States.
    This deliberate splitting of surface and mineral interest 
has resulted in numerous small parcels (up to 160 acres) of 
federal reserved minerals whose surface has been patented to a 
private individual. In many instances, subsequent to ANCSA, the 
surrounding lands, both surface and subsurface have been 
conveyed to Native Village and Regional Corporations. The 
objective of this legislative proposal is to consolidate 
holdings in Native ownership. It provides protection for those 
Regional Corporations that desire to conduct mineral 
exploration on their subsurface estate and avoids the issue of 
possible loss of federal oil and gas resources under the law of 
capture by giving the subsurface to the regional corporation 
owning the surrounding subsurface estate.
    This consolidation proposal does come at an expense to the 
United States. The proposal permits the systematic selection of 
lands determined to have prospective value for coal, oil or gas 
to be conveyed out of federal ownership without reference to 
the value of the minerals. For example, within the National 
Wildlife Refuge System in Alaska there are currently in excess 
of 100,000 acres of retained mineral estate surrounded by lands 
conveyed to Native Village Corporations pursuant to the Alaska 
Native Claims Settlement Act. Under the new authority provided 
by this Act the number of selectable acres will increase 
dramatically with the conveyance of Native allotments where the 
Bureau of Land Management has determined that the selected 
Native lands are valuable for coal, oil, or gas.
    Although the proposal does not increase Regional 
Corporation's ANCSA entitlement, consolidating mineral 
interests in Native ownership under this proposal provides, 
under some circumstances, for further splitting surface and 
subsurface estate. Regional corporations desire to take the 
reserved mineral interests under these small parcels, and 
receive substitute surface rights in other lands, keeping the 
subsurface of these new areas in federal ownership.
    The Department recommends a different balance, one that 
parallels past practices and recognizes the higher value of 
reserved subsurface that would be conveyed under this section. 
If a corporation uses section 12(c) or 14(h)(8), then there 
will be no in-lieu subsurface. This is consistent with the 
provisions of section 6(b) of the Alaska Statehood Act, as 
amended, and section I.B.(1) of the Terms and Conditions with 
the Cook Inlet Region Inc. This recommended change recognizes 
that these reserved mineral estates exist only because they 
were known to be valuable for oil, gas or coal, or were 
prospectively valuable at the time of the conveyance of the 
homestead, homesite, headquarters site, or Alaska Native 
Allotment. There, these tracts are substantially more valuable 
than the average subsurface. The Regional Corporation can 
choose either to select them under these terms or to select the 
entire estate in some other place.
    To facilitate future management by all parties, we 
recommend that if a Corporation elects to take some available 
parcels in a given geographic area that they take all. We would 
prefer to include the entire area encompassing a given 
selection, such as beneath a Village selection, but at the 
least all parcels in a Township. Furthermore, these proposed 
changes are warranted because providing substitute surface 
substantially increases the cost of conveyance adjudication and 
of cadastral survey at a time when the appropriated funds for 
these purposes are being substantially reduced.
    Attachment 1 reflects our proposed revised language for 
this section.
    In Section 3 the Elim Native Corporation is requesting 
fifty thousand (50,000) acres of land entitlement over and 
above their entitlement granted under Section 19(b) of the 
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971. This 
request is based on Elim's position that their original reserve 
was illegally reduced by Executive Order (EO) No. 5207 in 1929.
    The history of this reserve is as follows: In 1917, 
Executive Order (EO) No. 2508 withdrew approximately 350,000 
acres along the northern shore of Norton Bay, Alaska for the 
use of the United States Bureau of Education and ``for the 
Natives of Indigenous Alaskan race.'' In 1929, EO 5207 revoked 
approximately 50,000 acres of the 1917 reserve and opened the 
lands to homestead entry by exservicemen of the World War.
    A 1968 Report to the U.S. Senate Committee on Interior and 
Insular Affairs, entitled ``Alaska Natives and the Land,'' 
showed Norton Bay (Elim) as an EO reserve and reflected the 
reduction in size by EO 5207. A cadastral survey of these lands 
determined the exact acreage of the reserve to be 298,000 acres 
which was patented to Elim pursuant to ANSCA.
    Our review of the historical records determined that the 
1917 withdrawal was not intended to be a permanent reservation 
and thus was not illegally reduced. There are two kinds of 
reserves, those created by the Executive and those created by 
Congress. According to well established law, Native Americans 
have no compensable interest in those created by the Executive; 
thus they are tenants at well. The Executive historically had 
the power to grant other interests in an to change the 
boundaries of those reserves.
    Whether a withdrawal is temporary or permanent in nature is 
not dependent on the duration of a withdrawal. A withdrawal for 
a present use necessary to discharge responsibilities of the 
Executive may be considered permanent; while a withdrawal lands 
for public purposes, as distinguished from use, is said to be 
temporary.
    The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was 
intended to provide full and final compensation to Alaska 
Natives for the extinguishment of any and all aboriginal titles 
or claims of title. Section 1437(b)(3) of ANILCA confirms that 
those reserves as they existed on December 18, 1971 were to be 
conveyed to the village after filing an election under section 
19(b) of ANCSA.
    We would also note that the additional lands sought by Elim 
in this section were never a part of the original reserve. Some 
of the land excised from the original reserve have been 
conveyed to the neighboring village corporation of Koyuk which 
was opposed to Elim getting title to them. The Bering Straits 
Native Corporation and the State of Alaska have valid 
selections on a portion of the lands Elim is attempting to 
receive now. Finally, providing the conveyance of land by 
sought by this section may establish an unacceptable precedent.
    There appears to be no basis in law or policy for passage 
of this proposed legislation, therefore the Department opposes 
this section.
    Section 4 extends the exemption period from estate and gift 
tax for Native Corporation stock through its period of 
inalienability. We have recommended to AFN and they have agreed 
that the last three words be replaced with * * *. ``ANCSA, as 
amended.'' With this change, the Department has no objection to 
this section.
    Section 5 amends P.L. 102-415 to provide the Cook Inlet 
Region Inc. with an additional 3,520 acre subsurface 
entitlement. Section 20 of Public law 102-415, enacted in 1992, 
settled the land claims of Gold Creek-Susitna Association, Inc. 
(Gold Creek), by establishing a bid account based on the 
appraised value of 3,520 acres. No lands were available for 
conveyance to Gold Creek and no lands were selected or conveyed 
as a result of this settlement. There was no charge against the 
14(h)(2) entitlement of CIRI and no reduction of 14(h)(8) 
entitlement for other Regional Corporations. The Act did not 
address the possibility of a subsurface entitlement for Cook 
Inlet Region, Inc., under Section 14(h)(2) of ANCSA. CIRI now 
seeks to obtain a subsurface entitlement of 3,520 acres from a 
pool previously outlined for them as part of the 1976 agreement 
for the Terms and Conditions for Land Consolidation and 
Management in the Cook Inlet Area. The majority of the 
potential subsurface areas are located within the Kenai 
National Wildlife Refuge, We believe this provision, as 
written, is not in the public interest.
    We do not believe that CIRI is entitled to 3,520 acre of 
subsurface in a National Wildlife Refuge as a result of the 
Gold Creek settlement case. Section 1406 (b) and (e) of ANILCA 
clearly states Congressional intent to terminate all 
possibility for increasing subsurface entitlements within 
Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. Gold Creek is distant from 
the Kenai Refuge and the original settlement did not involve 
Refuge lands. Monetary settlement to a Native group, especially 
20 years after the passage of ANCSA, should not invoke a right 
to Regional Corporation subsurface entitlements. However, if 
such entitlements are legislatively determined to be valid, the 
original intent of Congress, and the extraordinary values of 
the Kenai Refuge, should preclude any subsurface conveyances 
within the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.
    If any subsurface rights are provided to CIRI, then a 
charge must be made to the 14(h)(2) entitlement of CIRI and the 
14(h)(8) entitlements of the other 11 regional corporations 
must be reduced.
    The Department opposes this section as written. However, 
Attachment 2 reflects our proposed revised language to provide 
for subsurface selection from public lands in the Talkeetna 
Mountains area in the event CIRI is deemed entitled to the 
additional subsurface. The Talkeetna Mountains deficiency 
selection area is only about 75 air miles from Gold Creek 
versus more than 150 air miles to the Kenai Refuge.
    The 1.9 million acre Kenai Refuge was created in 1941 and 
encompasses a diverse and complex ecosystem. The refuge 
provides habitat for moose, brown bear, wolves and caribou as 
well as 146 species of resident and migratory birds. The vital 
salmon spawning habitats on the refuge support 40 percent of 
the Cook Inlet commercial fishery as well as one of the most 
famous sport fisheries in the world.
    The Kenai Refuge is a very popular recreation area due to 
its proximity to Anchorage, location along the road system and 
spectacular scenic beauty. The Refuge receives over 500,000 
visitors per year. However, despite the heavy seasonal use in 
certain areas most of the Refuge remains undisturbed by humans. 
These undisturbed areas include most of the potential CIRI 
subsurface selection areas. Reasonable surface access must be 
provided to all subsurface estate owners. Development and 
access to possible CIRI subsurface selections will have adverse 
impacts on the recreational and wilderness qualities of the 
Kenai Refuge.
    As this Committee knows, because of the Kenai Wildlife 
Refuge's high public values, the Service is currently pursuing 
the acquisition of critical inholdings within the Kenai Refuge. 
The Service's acquisition and land exchange efforts include 
negotiations with two Native corporations who own lands within 
the Kenai River drainage area. Also, there are a few small 
private patents scattered throughout the Refuge. The Service 
has recently acquired one of these remote properties and is 
seeking funding for another. The creation of new inholdings 
within the Refuge simply does not make public policy or 
resource management sense in this extraordinary refuge.
    In Section 6, the AFN and DOI concur that the issues 
involved concerning land valuation of Calista Corporation Land 
Exchanges should not be part of these technical amendments at 
this time.
    Section 7. The Department is opposed to section 7 unless 
the ``Village Corporation'' language is made specific to 
Hydaburg Village. The Department is hopeful that we will 
receive shortly from the AFN and the Hydaburg Village draft 
language that satisfies our concern.
    Mr. Chairman, that completes our prepared testimony. We 
have been working closely with AFN, the State of Alaska, and 
others to develop a viable consensus bill. Again, it is our 
recommendation that HR 2505 should represent a consensus bill 
and that nonconsensus items should be considered separately. 
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I will be pleased to 
respond to any questions you may have.
                              ----------                              


                              Attachment 1

     Section 2--Retained Mineral Estate, Proposed Revised Language

SEC. 2. RETAINED MINERAL ESTATE.

    Section 1403 of the Alaska National Interest Lands 
Conservation Act (ANILCA) (43 U.S.C. 1610) is hereby amended to 
read as follows:

                        retained mineral estate

    Section 12(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 
(ANCSA) (43 U.S.C. 1611(c) is amended by adding a new paragraph 
(4) to subsection (c) to read as follows:
    ``Where the public lands consist only of the mineral 
estate, or portion thereof, which is reserved by the United 
States upon patent of the balance of the estate under one of 
the public land laws, other than this Act the Regional 
Corporations may select as follows:
          ``(A) Where such public lands were within the 
        exterior boundaries of an area withdrawn pursuant to 
        subsections 11(a)(1) or 11(a)(3) and are surrounded by 
        and contiguous to subsurface estate conveyed to a 
        Regional Corporation under subsections 14 (e), (f) or 
        (h), upon request, have such public land included in 
        its selection and considered by the Secretary to be 
        withdrawn and properly selected.
          ``(B) Where such public lands withdrawn pursuant to 
        Sec. 11(a)(1) or 11(a)(3) as described in (A) are 
        required to be selected, the Regional Corporation may, 
        at its option, exclude such public lands from its 
        selection.
          ``(C) A Regional Corporation identifying lands 
        described in (A) for selection, shall select all of the 
        available parcels within a township. The first election 
        to receive such public lands shall be pursuant to the 
        in lieu rights provided by subsection 12(a)(1) or 
        14(h)(9) of this Act, if there is an entitlement; 
        otherwise, the Regional Corporation may elect to 
        receive the parcels of land pursuant to subsection 
        12(c)(3) or 14(h)(8). Election to take acreage subject 
        to reserved mineral rights shall not earn the Regional 
        Corporation in-lieu surface selections, but shall 
        satisfy the acreage entitlement for that number of 
        subsurface acres selected.''

                              explanation

    This proposed revision will do the following:
          1. It allows the Native Corporations to select 
        potentially highly mineralized Federal subsurface.
          2. To facilitate future land management by both 
        parties, it requires that if a Corporation elects to 
        take some parcels in a given geographic area that they 
        take all. We would prefer to include the entire area 
        encompassing a certain selection such as beneath a 
        Village Selection, but at the least all parcels in a 
        Township.
          3. It provides that where a Region has a 12(a)(1) or 
        14(h)(9) entitlement, it must be used prior to using 
        12(c)(3) or 14(h)(8) entitlements.
                              ----------                              


                              Attachment 2

         Section 5 (Gold Creek/ciri)--Proposed Revised Language

    Section 20, PL 102-415, is amended by adding a new 
subsection (h):
    (h) Establishment of the account under section (b) and 
conveyance of land under section (c), if any, will be treated 
as though 3,520 acres of land had been conveyed to Gold Creek 
under section 14(h)(2) of ANCSA, as amended, for which rights 
to in-lieu subsurface estate are hereby provided to CIRI. 
Within one year from the date of enactment of this provision, 
CIRI shall select 3,520 acres of land from the area designated 
for in-lieu selection by paragraph I.B.(2)(b) of the document 
identified in section 12(b) of the Act of January 2, 1976, 43 
U.S.C. 1611n.

                              explanation

    The proposed wording provides that, for accounting purposes 
only, Gold Creek's 3,520 acre entitlement will be treated as 
though 3,520 acres of surface estate was actually conveyed to 
Gold Creek, and charged against section 14(h)(2). CIRI is then 
entitled to 3,520 acres in the Talkeetna Mountains for in-lieu 
subsurface rights.
                              ----------                              


                            Executive Order

                                 ALASKA

    It is hereby ordered that Executive order of March 30, 
1901, reserving certain lands in Alaska for reindeer stations, 
be and is hereby revoked as to the following tract:

          Beginning at a point about 6 miles above the mouth of 
        Unalaklik River, and extending along the north bank of 
        the Unalaklik River in a generally northeasterly 
        direction 10 miles, thence in a generally northwesterly 
        direction 10 miles, thence in a generally southwesterly 
        direction 10 miles and thence in a generally 
        southeasterly direction to the place of beginning.

    It is further ordered that Executive order of January 3, 
1917 (No. 2508), amended February 6, 1917 (Executive Order 
2525), which reserved lands on Norton Bay, Alaska, for the use 
of the United States Bureau of Education and of the natives of 
the indigenous Alaskan race, be and is hereby revoked as to the 
tract described as follows:

          Beginning at a point where the line of latitude 
        65 deg. north intersects the line of longitude 
        161 deg.20' west of Greenwich; thence due west to 
        longitude 161 deg.30, west of Greenwich; thence south 
        to the north shore of Norton Bay; thence northeasterly 
        along said shore to a point on said shore due south of 
        the point of beginning; thence north to the place of 
        beginning.

    Pursuant to Public Resolution No. 29 of February 14, 1920 
(41 Stat. 434), as amended January 21 and December 28, 1922 (42 
Stat. 353, 1067), the public lands described above shall be 
opened to entry under applicable homestead laws requiring 
residence by ex-service men of the World War under the terms 
and conditions of said resolution and the regulations issued 
thereunder, for a period of 91 days beginning with the 63rd day 
from and after the date hereof, and thereafter to appropriation 
under any public land laws applicable thereto by the general 
public.
    Subsequent to the date hereof and prior to the date of 
restoration to general disposition as herein provided, no 
rights may be acquired to the restored lands by settlement in 
advance of entry, or otherwise, except strictly in accordance 
herewith.

                                                    Herbert Hoover.
    The White House, October 12, 1929.

                              [No. 5207.]

                              ----------                              


                            Executive Order

    Executive Order No. 2508, dated January 3, 1917, 
withdrawing a tract of land on the northern shore of Norton 
Bay, Alaska, and certain adjacent islands, for the use of the 
United States Bureau of Education and of the natives of 
indigenous Alaskan race, is hereby amended to read as follows:

                        ``Norton Bay Reservation

    It is hereby ordered that a tract on the northern shore of 
Norton Bay, Alaska, described as follows: Beginning at a point 
where the line of Latitude 65 deg. N. intersects the line of 
Longitude 161 deg.20' W. of Greenwich; thence due west to 
Longitude 161 deg.40' W. of Greenwich; thence in a straight 
line southwesterly to the line of Longitude 162 deg.40' W, of 
Greenwich; thence south to the northshore of Norton Bay; thence 
northeasterly along said shore to a point on said shore due 
south of the point of beginning; thence north to the place of 
beginning; also the adjacent islands within three miles of the 
coast line of said tract, are hereby reserved and set aside for 
the use of the United States Bureau of Education and of the 
natives of indigenous Alaskan race, subject to any valid 
adverse rights which may exist by prior inception.''

                                                    Woodrow Wilson.
    The White House, 6 February, 1917.

                              [No. 2525.]

                              ----------                              


                            Executive Order

                        norton bay reservation.

    It is hereby ordered that a tract on the northern shore of 
Norton Bay, Alaska, described as follows: Beginning at a point 
where the line of Latitude 65 deg.N, intersects the line of 
Longitude 161 deg. 29' W. of Greenwich; thence due west to 
Longitude 161 deg. 40' W. of Greenwich; thence in a straight 
line south-westerly to the line of Longitude 162 deg. 40' W. of 
Greenwich; thence south to the north shore of Norton Bay; 
thence northeasterly along said shore to a point on said shore 
due south of the point of beginning; thence north to the place 
of beginning; also the adjacent islands within three miles of 
the coast line of said tract, are hereby reserved and set aside 
for the use of the United States Bureau of Education and of the 
natives of indigenous Alaskan race, subject to any valid 
adverse rights which may exist by prior inception.

                                                    Woodrow Wilson.
    The White House, 3 January, 1917.

                              [No. 2508.]