BLM Director's Response to the Alaska Governor's Appeal of the BLM Alaska State Director's Governor's Consistency Review Determination, 4435-4437 [2013-01200]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• Bureau of Land Management

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4435-4437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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 j2stout@blm.gov. 
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: https://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