<< Back to Press Releases

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), the Ranking Member on the House Natural Resources Committee, today commended Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne for taking the final steps toward removing an unconstitutional land withdrawal procedure.

            Young said the action was needed because a Democratic resolution in the Natural Resources Committee locked up 42 percent of the ’ uranium supplies.

            “We cannot afford to have more of our nation’s vital minerals and energy supplies to be locked up by the ill-advised actions of a single Congressional Committee,” Young said.

            On Friday, the Bureau of Land Management will publish in the Federal Register a Final Rule to eliminate the portion of invalid regulations providing for Committee-directed emergency withdrawal of lands from the operation of various public land laws.

This authority exists under Section 204(e) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.

            “This is an important action by the Interior Department and Secretary Kempthorne is to be commended for taking this necessary action,” Young said.

            “The current regulation is blatantly unconstitutional because the provision in law on which it is based is unconstitutional.”

Democratic Lockup Of Uranium Fields

            In 2008, the Democratic Members of the Natural Resources Committee approved a resolution by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) that used the unconstitutional land withdrawal process to lockup 42 percent of uranium supplies by shutting down mining in lands outside the Grand Canyon in northern Arizona and Utah .

The proposed withdrawal area has an estimated U308 endowment equivalent to approximately 42 percent of the total uranium reserves of the , according to the Energy Information Administration.

Supreme Court Has Ruled That Individual Committees Cannot Act Alone

In 1983, the Supreme Court decision in INS v. Chadha found that an action of one house of Congress acting alone does not meet the constitutional requirement for valid legislative action.  The Supreme Court held that such action has to be bicameral (House and Senate) and presented to the President.

In addition, the Congressional Research Service analyzed the authority of the Natural Resources Committee to issue a mandatory withdrawal order and determined that it violated Chadha.  This position has also been taken by the Department of the Interior and the Justice Department. 

The BLM published a proposed rule to remove both committee-directed and Secretary-initiated emergency withdrawals on October 10, 2008, initiating a 15-day public comment period.  The rationale for the proposed rule was twofold:

1) The existing regulations for emergency withdrawals are redundant, as the segregation of lands provided for in the conventional withdrawal process is equally as effective at protecting resources as are emergency withdrawals and provide for a public process in the decision-making;

2) The Committee-directed withdrawal presents constitutional issues.

            According to the Interior Department, while the BLM continues to believe that the regulations for Secretary-initiated emergency withdrawals is redundant, the BLM decided not to remove the emergency withdrawal regulations in their entirety in response to public comments.  The Final Rule removes only the Congressional committee-directed withdrawal provision of the regulation, but retains a procedure whereby the Secretary can initiate an emergency withdrawal.