[House Report 105-222]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    105-222
_______________________________________________________________________


 
FOR THE RELIEF OF GLOBAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KERR-
         MCGEE CORPORATION, AND KERR-MCGEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION

                                _______
                                

 July 31, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1211]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1211) for the relief of Global Exploration and 
Development Corporation, Kerr-McGee Corporation, and Kerr-McGee 
Chemical Corporation, 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. SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

  (a) Payment of Claims.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out 
of money not otherwise appropriated--
          (1) to the Global Exploration and Development Corporation, a 
        Florida corporation incorporated in Delaware, $9,500,000;
          (2) to Kerr-McGee Corporation, an Oklahoma corporation 
        incorporated in Delaware, $10,000,000; and
          (3) to Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, an Oklahoma 
        corporation incorporated in Delaware, $0.
  (b)  Condition of Payment.--(1) The payment authorized by subsection 
(a)(1) is in settlement and compromise of all claims of Global 
Exploration and Development Corporation, as described in the 
recommendations of the Court of Federal Claims set forth in 36 Fed. Cl. 
776.
  (2) The payments authorized by subsections (a)(2) and (a)(3) are in 
settlement and compromise of all claims of Kerr-McGee Corporation and 
Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, as described in the recommendations of 
the Court of Federal Claims set forth in 36 Fed. Cl. 776.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON FEES.

  No more than 15 percent of the sums authorized to be paid by section 
1 shall be paid to or received by any agent or attorney for services 
rendered in connection with the recovery of such sums. Any person 
violating this section shall be fined not more than $1,000.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    This bill will pay $10,000,000 and $9,500,000, 
respectively, to Kerr-McGee Corporation and Global Exploration 
and Development Corporation based on the recommendation made by 
the Court of Claims as to the amounts equitably due those 
companies. This recommendation is made by the Court in response 
to a congressional reference case concerning a phosphate 
prospecting permit dispute in the 1960's.

                BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

    During the 98th Congress, legislation was enacted that 
prohibited the Secretary of the Interior from issuing phosphate 
mining leases for the Osceola National Forest unless a joint 
resolution allowing such a lease is approved by the Congress. 
Prior to the legislation enacted in the 98th Congress, the 
Secretary of the Interior has issued a number of prospecting 
permits between 1963 and 1968 under the provisions of the 
Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. Under the provisions of the 
Mineral Leasing Act, if a prospector for phosphate is 
successful he is entitled to a lease to mine the phosphate.
    The claimants were among those who were successful in their 
prospecting efforts, but whose subsequent applications for 
mining leases were denied by the Secretary of the Interior.
    In 1983, the Secretary of the Interior in denying the 
applications determined that the applicants for phosphate 
mining leases could not show a reasonable likelihood of success 
in developing a valuable mine since there was no technology 
currently licensed by the State of Florida that provided 
reasonably successful reclamation of the mined lands to the 
standards required by the Forest Service.
    Over the next several years, the claimants were 
unsuccessful in obtaining relief from the Secretary's decision 
in the courts. The reason for their lack of success was the 
enactment in 1983 of the Florida Wilderness Act. That act 
stopped the issuance of phosphate mining leases in the Osceola 
National Forest. Thus, it also mooted the rights the claimants 
might have had to either force the Secretary to reopen his 
decision denying the leases or to demand compensation for 
erroneous denial of the leases.
    On the premises that their ``entitlement to preference 
right mining leases constitutes a property right'' and the 
United States action ``constitutes a taking of property'', the 
claimants brought an action in the Claims Court under the 
Tucker Act. The U.S. argued that the Claims Court did not have 
jurisdiction to review the Secretary's decisions rejecting the 
existence of a property interest. As a result, the claimants 
were unable to state sufficient taking claims. Without deciding 
the matter, the Claims Court expressed doubt as to its 
jurisdiction, however it also expressed its view that equity 
required that a forum be provided in which the merits of the 
asserted claims could be tested.
    In 1990, the parties filed a joint status report with the 
Claims Court agreeing that any action should be stayed pending 
the claimants' request for congressional reference and that, 
upon such reference, the claimants' cases should be dismissed 
with prejudice.
    In 1991, the Justice Department offered no objection to H. 
Res. 29 which referred H.R. 477, a bill to provide compensation 
to the claimants, to the Claims Court for a decision as to 
whether it was an equitable claim, if the resolution was 
``amended so that the referral becomes effective only upon the 
dismissal with prejudice of the Tucker Act cases currently 
pending before the Claims . . . These issues should appear 
before the Claims Court only once, not once on the merits of 
the takings issue and once pursuant to the congressional 
reference''. The House passed the resolution which sent the 
case to the Claims Court.
    Following the evidentiary hearing but before a decision by 
the Court, the claimants, the Department of Justice and the 
Department of the Interior presented a settlement agreement to 
the Court; the Court approved that settlement; and reported to 
the Congress that the amounts equitably due from the U.S. to 
Kerr-McGee and Global are, respectively $10,000,000 and 
$9,500,000. As part of the settlement, Kerr-McGee will return 
its $10,000,000 to the government by paying it to the Hazardous 
Waste Superfund as a partial settlement of litigation involving 
a Superfund cleanup site in Louisiana.
    An amendment was made to the bill at the request of the 
Department of Justice to clarify that the bill would implement 
the settlement of the disputed claims and would not be an 
admission of fault.

                        committee consideration

    On June 3, 1997, the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims 
met in open session and ordered favorably reported the bill 
H.R. 1211, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
    On July 23, 1997, the Committee on the Judiciary met in 
open session and ordered reported favorably the bill H.R. 1211, 
with amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present.

                      committee oversight findings

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports 
that the findings and recommendations of the Committee, based 
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

         committee on government reform and oversight findings

    No findings or recommendations of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in 
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

               new budget authority and tax expenditures

    Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House rule XI applies because this 
legislation does provide new budgetary authority or increased 
tax expenditures. See Congressional Budget Office letter.

               congressional budget office cost estimate

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets 
forth, with respect to the bill, H.R. 1211, the following 
estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, July 24, 1997.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed H.R. 1211, a bill for the relief of Global Exploration 
and Development Corporation, Kerr-McGee Corporation, and Kerr-
McGee Chemical Corporation, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on the Judiciary on July 23, 1997. The bill would 
require the Secretary of the Treasury to make two payments 
totaling $19.5 million. We expect these outlays would occur in 
fiscal year 1998. Because the bill would increase direct 
spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is John R. 
Righter.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.

                   constitutional authority statement

    Pursuant to rule XI, clause 2(l)(4) of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

                              agency views

    The comments of the Department of Justice on H.R. 1211 are 
as follows:

                        U.S. Department of Justice,
                             Office of Legislative Affairs,
                                      Washington, DC, June 2, 1997.
Hon. Lamar S. Smith,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, Committee on the 
        Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to comment 
on H.R. 1211, a bill ``for the relief of Global Exploration and 
Development Corporation, Kerr-McGee Corporation, and Kerr-McGee 
Chemical Corporation.'' We have no objection to the relief H.R. 
1211 would provide if the bill is modified to reflect that it 
would implement the settlement of disputed claims and would not 
be an admission of fault.
    H.R. 1211 is intended to resolve litigation between the 
Federal government and Global Exploration and Development 
Corporation, Kerr-McGee Corporation, and Kerr-McGee Chemical 
Corporation. This litigation was based upon the corporations' 
allegations that the United States improperly failed to grant 
or approve leases or to allow phosphate mining by Global and 
the Kerr-McGee corporations on the Osceola National Forest.
    After a six-week trial before the Court of Federal Claims 
but before the court could issue its opinion, the parties agree 
to a joint stipulation of settlement and submitted this 
stipulation to the court. On November 18, 1996, the court 
published its recommendation to Congress that the disputes be 
settled for the amounts set forth in H.R. 1211. See 36 Fed. Cl. 
776.
    The court's recommendation to Congress was not based upon a 
finding of any wrongdoing by the United States in its dealings 
with Global or the Kerr-McGee Corporations. Rather, the court's 
recommendation was based upon and limited to a finding that an 
equitable claim against the United States existed and that, it 
was in the best interest of all parties to settle this claim 
for the amounts set forth in the bill.
    While we generally have no objection to the bill, we 
believe that the language of subsection 1(b) could be 
interpreted as an admission or finding of liability on the part 
of the United States. Therefore, we recommend substituting the 
current language of subsection 1(b) with the following:
          (b) Condition of Payment.--(1) The payment authorized 
        by subsection (a)(1) shall be in settlement and 
        compromise of all claims of Global Exploration and 
        Development Corporation, as more fully discussed in the 
        Court of Federal Claims' recommendation to Congress set 
        forth in 36 Fed. Cl. 776.
          (2) The payment authorized by subsection (a)(2) shall 
        be in settlement and compromise of all claims of Kerr-
        McGee Corporation and Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, 
        as more fully discussed in the Court of Federal Claims' 
        recommendation to Congress as set forth in 36 Fed. Cl. 
        776.
    Please do not hesitate to call upon us if we may be of 
further assistance. The Office of Management and Budget has 
advised this Department that there is no objection to the 
submission of this report from the standpoint of the 
Administration's program.
            Sincerely,
                                               Andrew Fois,
                                        Assistant Attorney General.

                                
