Angela, and many others....
I apologize for not responding sooner. Was away from email, busy
with holiday and family.
First, I want to repost a copy of the legislation. Then I'll try to
answer questions in a separate message.
Before Christmas I sent to INPCRP via Lois a pdf file copy of the draft
legislation which she posted as a link in her message.
Here is a "paste-in" version of the draft.
The paste-in does not show the changes in wording, so it is hard to see
what is existing and what is new.
So please look at the Acrobat version, if possible:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~inpcrp/20041991-005.pdf
For those of you who don't have Acrobat, you can see the existing law
regarding protection of archaeological sites and cemeteries at:
http://www.ai.org/legislative/ic/code/title14/ar21/ch1.html
Reading this before you read the paste-in will give you the context of
what we have on th books and how we hope the law will be changed.
******
Paste-in version:
Defines "artifact", for purposes of the historic preservation law, as any
human made object that is more than 100 years old. Requires a person to
contact the department of natural resources to determine whether the
ground that will be disturbed is within 100 feet of a recorded burial
ground or cemetery. Except for certain coal operations, requires an
approved development plan to disturb the ground within 100 feet of a
burial ground or cemetery.
SECTION 1. IC 14-8-2-289, AS AMENDED BY P.L.52-2001, SECTION 4, IS
AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2004]: Sec. 289. "Unit of
local government" has the following meaning:
(1) For purposes of IC 14-12-1, has the meaning set forth
in IC 14-12-1-3. and
(2) For purposes of IC 14-21-1 and IC 14-22-10, means a:
(A) county;
(B) city;
(C) town; or
(D) township;
located in Indiana.
SECTION 2. IC 14-21-1-2 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE
JULY 1, 2004]: Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, "artifact" means an object
made or shaped by human workmanship before December 11, 1816. that is at
least one hundred (100) years old.
SECTION 3. IC 14-21-1-8, AS AMENDED BY P.L.46-2000, SECTION 7, IS
AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2004]: Sec. 8. (a) As used
in this chapter, "plan" refers to:
(1) an archeological plan, as described in subsection (b);
or
(2) a development plan, as described in subsection (c).
(b) As used in this chapter, "archeological plan" means a plan for
the systematic recovery, analysis, and disposition by scientific methods
of material evidence and information about the life and culture in past
ages.
(c) As used in this chapter, "development plan" means a plan for
the erection, alteration, an activity that will disturb the land surface
or subsurface and that will:
(1) erect, alter, or repair of any a structure;
(2) construct or modify a utility line or transmission
facility;
(3) drill or change drilling operations for an oil well or
a gas well; or
(4) remove sand and gravel.
SECTION 4. IC 14-21-1-26.4 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE AS A NEW
SECTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2004]: Sec. 26.4. (a) This
section does not apply to the following:
(1) A surface coal mining and reclamation operation
permitted under IC 14-34.
(2) The repair of a structure.
(b) If a person intends to engage in an activity that will disturb
the land surface or subsurface to:
(1) erect or alter a structure;
(2) construct or modify a utility line or transmission
facility;
(3) drill or change drilling operations for an oil well or
a gas well; or
(4) remove sand and gravel;
the person, before beginning the activity, must contact the department to
determine whether the ground that will be disturbed is within one hundred
(100) feet of a recorded burial ground or cemetery.
(c) The department shall respond in writing to a request made
under subsection (b) within thirty (30) days.
(d) A person shall attach a copy of the department's written
response issued under subsection (c) regarding the proposed activity with
any application for a permit that is submitted to the state or a unit of
local government.
SECTION 5. IC 14-21-1-26.5, AS AMENDED BY P.L.177-2001, SECTION 3,
IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2004]: Sec. 26.5. (a)
This section applies to a person who intents to disturb the land surface
or subsurface to:
(1) erect or alter a structure;
(2) construct or modify a utility line or transmission
facility;
(3) drill or change drilling operations for an oil well or
a gas well; or
(4) remove sand and gravel.
Notwithstanding IC 23-14-44-1, this section does not apply to the
following:
(1) A public utility (as defined in IC 8-1-2-1(a)).
(2) A corporation organized under IC 8-1-13.
(3) A municipally owned utility (as defined in IC
8-1-2-1(h)).
(4) a surface coal mining and reclamation operation
permitted under IC 14-34.
(b) Except as provided in this subsection, subsection (b), (c) and
subsection (c), (d), a person may not disturb the ground within one
hundred (100) feet of a burial ground or cemetery for the purpose of
erecting, altering, or repairing any structure
(1) without having a development plan approved by the
department under section 25 of this chapter; or
(2) in violation of a development plan approved by the
department under section 25 of this chapter.
The department must review the development plan not later than sixty (60)
days after the development plan is submitted.
(b) (c) A development plan:
(1) must be approved if a person intends to construct a
new structure or alter or repair an existing structure to disturb the land
surface or subsurface in a manner that would significantly impact the
burial ground or cemetery; and
(2) is not required if a person intends to erect, alter,
or repair an existing land or building structure for an incidental or
existing use that would not impact the burial ground or cemetery.
(c) (d) A development plan for a governmental entity to disturb
ground within one hundred (100) feet of a burial ground or cemetery must
be approved as follows:
(1) A development plan of a municipality requires approval
of the executive of the municipality and does not require the approval of
the department. However, if the burial ground or cemetery is located
outside the municipality, approval is also required by the executive of
the county where the burial ground or cemetery is located. A county
cemetery commission established under IC 23-14-67-2 may advise the
executive of the municipality on whether to approve a development plan.
(2) A development plan of a governmental entity other
than:
(A) a municipality; or
(B) the state;
requires the approval of the executive of the county where
the governmental entity is located and does not require the approval of
the department. However, if the governmental entity is located in more
than one (1) county, only the approval of the executive of the county
where the burial ground or cemetery is located is required. A county
cemetery commission established under IC 23-14-67-2 may advise the county
executive on whether to approve a development plan.
(3) A development plan of the state requires the approval
of the department.
(d) (e) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally
violates this section commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense
is a Class D felony if the person disturbs buried human remains or grave
markers while committing the offense.
****
The legislation is being proposed by Rep. Matt Pierce and is intended to
help prevent damage to KNOWN cemeteries and burial grounds that are on the
state registry.
I'll try to answer other questions in another reply.
Regards,
Cheryl Ann Munson
******
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, gtielking
wrote:
Cheryl,
I think I have missed something. I have the same questions as Kyle. Can you
post the proposed language of this bill on the INPCRP list?
Thanks,
Angela Tielking
----- Original Message -----
From: <KidClerk(a)aol.com>
To: <INPCRP-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Re: Fw: cemetery protection -- Indiana legislation
> Cheryl:
>
> I'm not sure if you were subscribed in time to read two messages that Rich
> Green and I had posted (almost simultaneously) regarding the definition of
> "artifact". Based on the proposed change, a grave marker which is more
than 100
> years old would be considered an artifact since it undoubtedly was
man-made.
>
> The fear is that this definition would be enforced to exclude the removal,
> repair, or replacement of the tombstone and would place those that restore
> cemeteries at a great disadvantage. It would appear this definition as
presented
> could easily be interpreted as such...and that is of great concern.
>
> May I ask what group or individual proposed these legislative changes and
> what the actual intent is? And what legislator(s) is/are sponsoring the
> amendments?
>
> It appears that there will be proposed legislation from more than one
front
> as far as cemeteries are concerned, and it would be nice to try and have
> everyone on one page if possible, or at least understand each other's
intentions.
> The worst thing that could happen is if we end up not supporting one
another's
> proposals and testifying against each other now that we finally have the
ear
> of some of our state legislators as far cemeteries go.
>
> thanks for answering some of these concerns.
>
> Kyle D. Conrad
> Brook, IN
>
>
> ==== INPCRP Mailing List ====
> "Show me your cemeteries, and I will tell you what kind of people you
have."
> Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
>
==== INPCRP Mailing List ====
Scott Satterthwaite < ssattert(a)localnet.com > is the INPCRP State Coordinator.
Feel free to contact him directly regarding questions or comments you may have about the
INPCRP.