Reversion of Certain Land Conveyed in Trust to the State of Alaska
Section 2 · Sec. 2 ·
What this chapter is about
This part changes an older law about land in Alaska. Some village groups gave land to the state to hold. The state held it in case a town was set up. If no town was set up, the group can ask for the land back. Groups do not have to hand over more land.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Section 14(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(c)) is amended--”
Everything in section 2 is an amendment to one provision, section 14(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(c)). Five numbered items follow. The first four renumber and relabel; the fifth relabels and also adds new text at the end. This Act does not state what section 14(c) said before the change.
What the document actually says
“Section 14(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(c)) is amended--”
That sentence, in plain words
This part reaches into an older law. It changes one piece of that law.
What this is about
The older law is about land claims in Alaska. The piece has the label 14(c). Five changes follow in this part.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (5) as subparagraphs (A) through (E), respectively, and indenting appropriately;”
The first of the five items, and it changes labels only. Paragraphs numbered (1) through (5) become subparagraphs lettered (A) through (E), in the same order, and the indentation moves to match. The items that follow refer back to this one with the phrase as so redesignated.
What the document actually says
“(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (5) as subparagraphs (A) through (E), respectively, and indenting appropriately;”
That sentence, in plain words
The old law had five parts with numbers. This change gives them letters instead. It also moves them over on the page.
What this is about
Laws use numbers and letters to mark their parts. Changing the marks does not change the words. It makes room for new parts later.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(2) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) (as so redesignated), by striking "(c) Each patent" and inserting the following: "(c) Conveyance of Certain Land by Village Corporation.-- "(1) In general.--Each patent";”
The second of the five items. It strikes the words the subsection opened with and inserts a heading for the subsection, Conveyance of Certain Land by Village Corporation, then a paragraph number and heading of its own, (1) In general. The words Each patent are carried through into the new paragraph (1).
What the document actually says
“(2) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) (as so redesignated), by striking "(c) Each patent" and inserting the following: "(c) Conveyance of Certain Land by Village Corporation.-- "(1) In general.--Each patent";”
That sentence, in plain words
The change gives the piece of law a title. The title is about land a village group hands over. What came next becomes part one.
What this is about
A heading tells a reader what a part is about. This change adds two of them. The words that were there before stay.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(B) by striking "There is authorized" and inserting the following: "(2) Technical assistance.-- "(A) In general.--There are authorized";”
Part of the third of the five items. It strikes the words There is authorized and inserts a new paragraph (2), headed Technical assistance, containing a subparagraph (A) headed In general that begins There are authorized. The same item also strikes the phrase section 14(c) of this Act in the first sentence following subparagraph (E) and inserts this subsection in its place.
What the document actually says
“(B) by striking "There is authorized" and inserting the following: "(2) Technical assistance.-- "(A) In general.--There are authorized";”
That sentence, in plain words
Words about money in the old law get a new home. The new part is called technical assistance. The words change from one to many.
What this is about
The old law already had these words. This change gives them a number and a heading. The number is two.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(4) in paragraph (2)(A) (as so redesignated), in the second sentence, by striking "The Secretary" and inserting the following: "(B) Form of funding.--The Secretary"; and”
The fourth of the five items. In the second sentence of the paragraph the previous item created, it strikes the words The Secretary and inserts a subparagraph letter and heading, (B) Form of funding, in front of them. The sentence itself carries on unchanged.
What the document actually says
“(4) in paragraph (2)(A) (as so redesignated), in the second sentence, by striking "The Secretary" and inserting the following: "(B) Form of funding.--The Secretary"; and”
That sentence, in plain words
One sentence in the old law starts with the word Secretary. This change puts a label in front of it. The label says form of funding.
What this is about
The rest of the sentence stays the same. Only the label in front of it is new.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(v) by striking "(C) the Village Corporation" and inserting the following: "(C) Conveyance to municipal corporation or the state in trust.-- "(i) In general.--The Village Corporation"; and”
Part of the fifth item. It heads subparagraph (C) Conveyance to municipal corporation or the state in trust and turns what followed into clause (i), In general. Other strikes in the same item cut the rest of the subparagraph into headed pieces: a definition of sale at subclause (II), a minimum acreage clause at clause (ii), and a net revenues clause at clause (iii). This Act does not state what the text being broken up said.
What the document actually says
“(v) by striking "(C) the Village Corporation" and inserting the following: "(C) Conveyance to municipal corporation or the state in trust.-- "(i) In general.--The Village Corporation"; and”
That sentence, in plain words
This change gives part C a title. The title is about handing land to a town or the state. What came next becomes clause one.
What this is about
Part C was one long block of text. The change cuts it into smaller pieces. Each piece gets a number and a short title.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(C) by striking "existed as of" in subparagraph (D) (as so redesignated) and all that follows through "for" in subparagraph (E) (as so redesignated) and inserting the following: "existed as of December 18, 1971. "(E) For"; and”
Part of the fifth item, and the only one that puts a date into the older law. It strikes everything from the words existed as of in subparagraph (D) through the word for in subparagraph (E), and inserts in place of that run the words existed as of December 18, 1971, followed by a new subparagraph (E) beginning For. This Act does not state what the struck run of text said.
What the document actually says
“(C) by striking "existed as of" in subparagraph (D) (as so redesignated) and all that follows through "for" in subparagraph (E) (as so redesignated) and inserting the following: "existed as of December 18, 1971. "(E) For"; and”
That sentence, in plain words
A long run of words in part D and part E is cut. New words go in. They set a date: December 18, 1971.
What this is about
Part E now starts fresh with the word For. This law does not say what the cut words said.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“"(iv) Cases in which conveyance shall not be required.--”
The last change the fifth item makes, and the one that carries the Act's substance. A clause is added at the end of subparagraph (C), numbered (iv) and headed Cases in which conveyance shall not be required. Three subclauses follow it: subclause (I) on land already conveyed in trust, subclause (II) on land not yet conveyed, and subclause (III) on what a reversion under subclause (I) is subject to.
What the document actually says
“"(iv) Cases in which conveyance shall not be required.--”
That sentence, in plain words
A new part is added at the end. Its title says when land need not be handed over.
What this is about
Three pieces sit under this new part. They are marked one, two, and three. Each is written out below.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Village Corporations, State of AlaskaHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“if a Village Corporation, prior to the date of enactment of the Alaska Native Village Municipal Lands Restoration Act of 2025, conveyed to the State in trust all or a portion of the acreage of land required to be conveyed under this subparagraph for the establishment of a Municipal Corporation in the future, and a Municipal Corporation has not been established as of that date of enactment”
The conditions written into subclause (I), which opens Notwithstanding any other provision of this subparagraph. Three things have to be true. The Village Corporation conveyed the land to the State in trust before this Act was enacted, and it was approved July 7, 2025. The land was all or part of the acreage required to be conveyed under subparagraph (C) for a Municipal Corporation to be established in the future. And no Municipal Corporation had been established as of that same date.
What the document actually says
“if a Village Corporation, prior to the date of enactment of the Alaska Native Village Municipal Lands Restoration Act of 2025, conveyed to the State in trust all or a portion of the acreage of land required to be conveyed under this subparagraph for the establishment of a Municipal Corporation in the future, and a Municipal Corporation has not been established as of that date of enactment”
That sentence, in plain words
This covers land a village group gave the state to hold. The group gave it before July 7, 2025. It was for a town that might be set up later. No town was set up by that date.
What this is about
A trust is a way for one party to hold land for another. The state held this land in trust. The town it was meant for never came.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Village Corporations, residents of Native villagesHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“on formal resolution by the Village Corporation and the residents of the Native village requesting dissolution of the trust, the trust shall be dissolved and title to the land shall revert to the Village Corporation, subject to subclause (III).”
The operative words of subclause (I). Where its conditions are met, two things follow: the trust is dissolved, and title to the land reverts to the Village Corporation. Both turn on a formal resolution, and the text requires one from two parties, the Village Corporation and the residents of the Native village. The reversion is made subject to subclause (III). The subclause does not name who dissolves the trust and sets no deadline for it.
What the document actually says
“on formal resolution by the Village Corporation and the residents of the Native village requesting dissolution of the trust, the trust shall be dissolved and title to the land shall revert to the Village Corporation, subject to subclause (III).”
That sentence, in plain words
The village group and the people of the village must both ask. They ask in a formal vote. Then the trust ends. The land goes back to the group.
What this is about
Going back means the group owns it again. Part three sets limits on that. This part does not say how long it takes.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: Village CorporationsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Notwithstanding any other provision of this subparagraph, as of the date of enactment of the Alaska Native Village Municipal Lands Restoration Act of 2025, a Village Corporation shall not be required to convey any additional land in trust under this subparagraph for the establishment of a Municipal Corporation in the future.”
Subclause (II), headed Additional land, and it looks forward rather than back. As of the date of enactment, July 7, 2025, a Village Corporation is not required to convey any more land in trust under subparagraph (C) for a Municipal Corporation to be established in the future. Like subclause (I) it is written to override the rest of the subparagraph, opening Notwithstanding any other provision of this subparagraph. It says nothing about whether a Village Corporation may convey such land anyway.
What the document actually says
“Notwithstanding any other provision of this subparagraph, as of the date of enactment of the Alaska Native Village Municipal Lands Restoration Act of 2025, a Village Corporation shall not be required to convey any additional land in trust under this subparagraph for the establishment of a Municipal Corporation in the future.”
That sentence, in plain words
From July 7, 2025, a village group need not hand over more land. That is land held for a town that might be set up later.
What this is about
This looks ahead, not back. It does not touch land handed over before that date. Part one covers that land.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Village CorporationsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“the reversion of land to a Village Corporation pursuant to subclause (I) shall be subject to-- "(AA) valid existing rights created by the applicable trust; and "(BB) any existing easements, rights-of-way necessary for public roadway access, or rights-of-way for access of holders of valid existing rights; and”
The first half of subclause (III), which opens In accordance with subsection (g). Land reverting under subclause (I) comes back carrying two things: valid existing rights created by the trust in question, and existing easements and rights-of-way. The rights-of-way named are those necessary for public roadway access and those for access of holders of valid existing rights.
What the document actually says
“the reversion of land to a Village Corporation pursuant to subclause (I) shall be subject to-- "(AA) valid existing rights created by the applicable trust; and "(BB) any existing easements, rights-of-way necessary for public roadway access, or rights-of-way for access of holders of valid existing rights; and”
That sentence, in plain words
Land that goes back still carries older rights. Some rights come from the trust itself. Others are paths and roads across the land.
What this is about
A right-of-way lets someone cross land they do not own. Some are for public roads. Others let rights holders reach their own land.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Village CorporationsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Village Corporation shall assume the obligations of the applicable trust with respect to any lease or other use agreement applicable to the land on reversion of the land to the Village Corporation pursuant to subclause (I).”
The second half of subclause (III). On reversion under subclause (I), the Village Corporation has to take on the obligations the trust carried under any lease or other use agreement that applies to the land. The duty attaches at the reversion itself.
What the document actually says
“the Village Corporation shall assume the obligations of the applicable trust with respect to any lease or other use agreement applicable to the land on reversion of the land to the Village Corporation pursuant to subclause (I).”
That sentence, in plain words
The village group takes on the deals that came with the land. A lease is one kind of deal. The group must keep them.
What this is about
The trust made these deals while it held the land. They do not end when the land goes back. They pass to the group.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The provision the section amends, each of the five numbered items it makes to that provision, and each of the three subclauses of the clause it adds at the end.
The smallest of the lettering changes taken one by one: capitalizing a first word, striking a semicolon and inserting a period, and the like. They are recorded here as a group, because none of them changes what anybody must do. The approval line and the legislative history the Government Publishing Office prints after the last section are held out of the indexed text.
The section works by amending an older statute, and that statute is not indexed here. So the site does not record what section 14(c) said before this change, or what it reads as with the change applied. A reader who wants either has to follow the citation into the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(c)).
