[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4435-4437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01200]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLAK930000 L16100000.DU0000.12XL]
BLM Director's Response to the Alaska Governor's Appeal of the
BLM Alaska State Director's Governor's Consistency Review Determination
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is publishing this notice
to explain why the BLM Director is rejecting the Alaska Governor's
recommendations regarding the Environmental Assessment and Finding
[[Page 4436]]
of No Significant Impact for the Delta River Special Recreation
Management Area (SRMA) Plan and East Alaska Resource Management Plan
(EARMP) Amendment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Stout, Division Chief for Decision
Support, Planning and NEPA, telephone 202-912-7275; address 1849 C
Street NW., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20240; email [email protected].
Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call
the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to
contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is
available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question
with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal
business hours. A copy of the Delta River SRMA Plan and EARMP are
available on the BLM-Alaska Web site at: www.blm.gov/ak.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 25, 2011, the BLM released the
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact for
the Delta River SRMA Plan and the EARMP Amendment. On September 20,
2011, the Governor of Alaska submitted a Governor's Consistency Review
Finding of Inconsistency for the EA and Finding of No Significant
Impact for the Delta River SRMA Plan and EARMP Amendment (Finding) to
the BLM Alaska State Director. The State Director determined the
Governor's Finding was outside the scope of the Governor's Consistency
Review process and did not accept the Governor's recommendations. A
written response was sent to the Governor on March 28, 2012, addressing
issues raised in the Governor's Finding, and informing him of
clarifications made to the BLM's Decision Record for the project.
On April 27, 2012, the Governor appealed the State Director's
decision not to accept his recommendations to the BLM Director. The BLM
Director issued a final response to the Governor affirming the State
Director's decision and made minor revisions to the final decision
record for the project to address some of the Governor's concerns.
Pursuant to 43 CFR 1610.3-2, the substantive portions of the Director's
response to the Governor are printed as follows.
``Your letter contained an April 27, 2012, appeal of the BLM Alaska
State Director's response to your Finding of Inconsistency for the
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) for the Delta River Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA)
Plan and East Alaska Resource Management Plan Amendment Plan (EARMP).
Your letter also responded to the Director's Protest Resolution Report,
dated December 9, 2011. I have carefully considered your appeal and
response, and associated recommendations. A detailed response to the
issues raised is enclosed; you will note that we have adopted several
of your recommendations as part of the Protest Resolution Process.
In response to your appeal, under the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (FLPMA) and its implementing regulations, the scope of
the appeal process is narrow, as is the Governor's Consistency Review
process. Pursuant to 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e), in reviewing your appeal, I
must first consider whether you have raised actual inconsistencies with
State or local plans, policies, or programs. If such inconsistencies
are raised, I would then consider whether your recommendations address
the inconsistencies and provide for a reasonable balance between the
national interest and the State of Alaska's interest.
Your appeal states that the Plan does not comply with the
requirement of 43 CFR 1610.3-2(a) and (b) for BLM land use plans to be
consistent with the purposes, policies and programs of Federal laws and
regulations applicable to public lands. The appeal maintains your
position that the Plan does not meet this standard because it is
inconsistent with various provisions of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) and its implementing regulations, as
well as the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The consistency review and
appeal process, as set forth in 43 CFR 1610.3-2(d) and (e) applies to
the identification of known inconsistencies with State or local plans,
policies, or programs. After carefully considering the points raised in
the appeal, I have concluded that the appeal has not identified any
known inconsistencies with State or local plans, policies, or programs.
Therefore, I affirm the BLM Alaska State Director's response to your
Finding of Inconsistency.
Also, please note that BLM Assistant Director Edwin Roberson, on my
behalf, gave due consideration to several of the State's concerns with
the Plan in the December 9, 2011, Director's Protest Resolution Report,
as reflected in his letter to the Alaska Attorney General's Office,
dated March 28, 2012. I refer you to the findings in the Director's
Protest Resolution Report for the BLM response to these concerns. The
Report can be found at: http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/planning/planning_overview/protest_resolution/protestreports.html.''
The following attachment also was provided as part of the response:
BLM Response to Issues Raised by Governor Sean Parnell
1. Recommending the public refrain from legally allowed
activities is inconsistent with ANILCA Section 1110 and Department
of the Interior implementing regulations at 36 CFR 36.11.
While the BLM intends to manage certain segments of the Delta
River Special Recreation Management Area to afford opportunities for
nonmotorized user experiences, your concerns regarding the BLM
recommending that the public refrain from motorized boating and
airplane landings are duly noted. As described in the Director's
Protest Resolution Report, the BLM has decided to remove motorized
boating and airplane landings as ``outcomes to be avoided'' for the
Tangle Lakes Zone 1 RMZ and the Delta River Zone 4 RMZ. If in the
future the BLM finds that such use would be detrimental to the
resource values of the area, the BLM will take action under 43 CFR
36.11(h) or other applicable law to restrict such activities.
2. Group size limitations must be implemented by regulation
consistent with ANILCA Section 1110(a) and Department of the
Interior implementing regulation at 43 CFR 36.11.
Camp group size limits do not fall within the scope of Section
1110(a) of ANILCA. Section 1110(a) and its implementing regulation
43 CFR 36.11 solely pertain to methods of transportation. The BLM's
establishment of the group size limit allows the BLM authorized
officer to permit exceptions for larger groups where appropriate,
and is consistent with Section 302(b) of FLPMA, which provides the
Secretary of the Interior with authority to regulate such uses
through published rules or other instruments as the Secretary deems
appropriate.
3. Following the direction in ANILCA Section 810 to determine
whether subsistence access restrictions need to be implemented by
regulation pursuant to ANILCA Section 811 is a misinterpretation of
ANILCA and is inconsistent with the regulatory process followed by
other Department of the Interior land management agencies.
I agree that the BLM Alaska State Director's response did not
clearly differentiate between Sections 810 and 811 of ANILCA. The
BLM will clarify that the standard found in 810 does not apply to
811 in the Decision Record and the Final Special Recreation
Management Area Plan/Plan Amendment. Furthermore, while there is no
need at this time to issue regulations implementing ANILCA Section
811, the BLM will continue to strive to be consistent with other
Federal land management agencies in this regard.
4. The Plan did not follow the cited Interagency Wild and Scenic
Rivers Coordinating Council process to determine outstandingly
remarkable values for the Delta Wild and Scenic River.
As noted in Section 2.2.1 of the Plan, the BLM followed the
Interagency Wild and
[[Page 4437]]
Scenic River Coordinating Council process and other relevant
guidance in determining the River's outstandingly remarkable values.
For each value considered, the BLM determined that the entire State
of Alaska was the geographic region for which the value was
evaluated and compared for purposes of determining its significance.
Authority: 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e).
Janine Velasco,
Acting Deputy Director, Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-01200 Filed 1-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P