70940 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

incorrectly on a correctly installed aileron 

trim chain. We are issuing this AD to prevent 

incorrect connection of the aileron trim 

cables, which could result in failure of the 

aileron trim system and consequent reduced 

controllability of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Replacement of Aileron Trim Chain and 

Modification of Installation 

(f) Within 30 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Replace the aileron trim 

chain, part number (P/N) 14127003–401, 

with a new, improved aileron trim chain, P/

N 14127003–403; and modify the installation 

of the aileron trim chain; according to the 

Accomplishment Instructions of BAE 

Systems (Operations) Limited Service 

Bulletin J41–27–061, Revision 1, dated July 

12, 2002. 

Actions Accomplished According to 

Previous Issue of Service Bulletin 

(g) Replacements and modifications 

accomplished before the effective date of this 

AD according to of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Service Bulletin J41–27–061, dated 

November 7, 2001, are considered acceptable 

for compliance with the corresponding 

actions specified in this AD. 

No Reporting Requirement 

(h) Although the service bulletin 

referenced in this AD specifies to report 

compliance information to the manufacturer, 

this AD does not include that requirement. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested in accordance with 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(j) British airworthiness directive 006–11–

2001 also addresses the subject of this AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 30, 2004. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–26919 Filed 12–7–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

36 CFR Part 242

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 100

RIN 1018–AT81

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska

AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture; 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

revise and clarify the jurisdiction of the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program in coastal areas in 

southwestern Alaska. This rulemaking 

is necessary in order to exclude 

numerous saltwater embayments within 

National Wildlife Refuge boundaries 

that were not withdrawn prior to 

Statehood, were never intended to fall 

under the subsistence management 

jurisdiction, but have been 

unintentionally included within the 

Subsistence Management Program 

jurisdiction.

DATES: We must receive your written 

public comments on this proposed rule 

no later than January 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments 

electronically to Subsistence@fws.gov. 

See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for file 

formats and other information about 

electronic filing. You may also submit 

written comments to the Office of 

Subsistence Management, 3601 C Street, 

Suite 1030, Anchorage, Alaska 99503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chair, Federal Subsistence Board, c/o 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Attention: Thomas H. Boyd, Office of 

Subsistence Management; (907) 786–

3888. For questions specific to National 

Forest System lands, contact Steve 

Kessler, Regional Subsistence Program 

Leader, USDA, Forest Service, Alaska 

Region, (907) 786–3888.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic 

filing of comments (preferred method): 

Please submit electronic comments 

(proposals) and other data to 

Subsistence@fws.gov. Please submit as 

either WordPerfect or MS Word files, 

avoiding the use of any special 

characters and any form of encryption. 

The Federal Subsistence Board will 

hold a public meeting in Anchorage, 

Alaska, within the comment period to 

receive comments on this proposed rule. 

Widespread notice will be made of this 

meeting in the Statewide newspapers 

and by general news release. 

Background 

In Title VIII of the Alaska National 

Interest Lands Conservation Act 

(ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126), 

Congress found that ‘‘the situation in 

Alaska is unique in that, in most cases, 

no practical alternative means are 

available to replace the food supplies 

and other items gathered from fish and 

wildlife which supply rural residents 

dependent on subsistence uses * * *’’

and that ‘‘continuation of the 

opportunity for subsistence uses of 

resources on public and other lands in 

Alaska is threatened * * *’’ As a result, 

Title VIII requires, among other things, 

that the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) 

implement a joint program to grant a 

preference for subsistence uses of fish 

and wildlife resources on public lands 

in Alaska, unless the State of Alaska 

enacts and implements laws of general 

applicability that are consistent with 

ANILCA and that provide for the 

subsistence definition, preference, and 

participation specified in Sections 803, 

804, and 805 of ANILCA. 

The State implemented a program that 

the Department of the Interior 

previously found to be consistent with 

ANILCA. However, in December 1989, 

the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in 

McDowell v. State of Alaska that the 

rural preference in the State subsistence 

statute violated the Alaska Constitution. 

The Court’s ruling in McDowell required 

the State to delete the rural preference 

from the subsistence statute and, 

therefore, negated State compliance 

with ANILCA. The Court stayed the 

effect of the decision until July 1, 1990. 

As a result of the McDowell decision, 

the Department of the Interior and the 

Department of Agriculture 

(Departments) assumed, on July 1, 1990, 

responsibility for implementation of 

Title VIII of ANILCA on public lands. 

On June 29, 1990, the Departments 

published the Temporary Subsistence 

Management Regulations for Public 

Lands in Alaska in the Federal Register

(55 FR 27114). 

As a result of this joint process 

between Interior and Agriculture, these 

regulations can be found in the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) both in Title 

36, ‘‘Parks, Forests, and Public 

Property,’’ and Title 50, ‘‘Wildlife and 

Fisheries,’’ at 36 CFR 242.1–242.28 and 

50 CFR 100.1–100.28, respectively. The 

regulations contain subparts as follows: 

Subpart A, General Provisions; Subpart 

B, Program Structure; Subpart C, Board 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70941

Determinations; and Subpart D, 

Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. 

Consistent with Subparts A, B, and C 

of these regulations, as revised May 7, 

2002 (67 FR 30559), the Departments 

established a Federal Subsistence Board 

to administer the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program. The Board’s 

composition includes a Chair appointed 

by the Secretary of the Interior with 

concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture; the Alaska Regional 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 

the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. 

National Park Service; the Alaska State 

Director, U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management; the Alaska Regional 

Director, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs; 

and the Alaska Regional Forester, USDA 

Forest Service. Through the Board, these 

agencies participated in the 

development of regulations for Subparts 

A, B, and C, and the annual Subpart D 

regulations. 

Jurisdictional Perspective 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Regulations (50 CFR 100.3 and 36 CFR 

242.3) currently specify that they apply 

on ‘‘all navigable and non-navigable 

waters within the exterior boundaries...’’

of the parks, refuges, forests, 

conservation areas, recreation areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers. This includes 

hundreds of thousands of acres of 

saltwater embayments within National 

Wildlife Refuge boundaries that were 

not withdrawn prior to Statehood where 

the Secretaries have unintentionally 

exerted jurisdiction. We have concluded 

that our regulations (50 CFR 100.3 and 

36 CFR 242.3) are in error as they relate 

to some bays associated with certain 

Refuges in Western Alaska. Therefore, 

we believe it is appropriate to correct 

the Federal Subsistence Management 

Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska 

to accurately reflect the intended 

jurisdiction in those areas. 

During the early interagency 

discussions relative to inclusion of 

fisheries management in the Federal 

Subsistence Management Program, there 

does not appear to have been any 

intention to specifically extend Federal 

jurisdiction to various embayments 

where there was no pre-Statehood 

withdrawal of submerged lands and 

waters. The preambles of the Advance 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (61FR 

15014, April 4, 1996) and the Proposed 

Rule (62 FR 66215, December 17, 1997) 

refer only to jurisdiction problems along 

rivers, not in marine areas. 

Prior to 1999, the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program clearly and 

specifically identified the waters under 

its jurisdiction in the 1992 rule that set 

out the structure of the Federal Program 

(57 FR 22940, May 29, 1992). The 

various embayments under discussion 

were not included in that 1992 rule. The 

Ninth Circuit Court decision in Alaska

v. Babbitt, 72.3d 698 (1995) (the Katie 

John decision), expanded Federal 

subsistence management to those 

navigable waters where the Federal 

Government holds reserved water rights. 

As work began to identify these waters, 

discussion centered on the problem of 

‘‘checkerboard jurisdiction’’ as it 

occurred on rivers within Conservation 

System Units. Federal officials 

recognized that meaningful management 

of a subsistence priority could not be 

accomplished unless there was a more 

unified area of jurisdiction within 

Federal conservation system units and 

other Federal areas. As a result, wording 

was adopted that extended Federal 

jurisdiction over subsistence fisheries to 

‘‘all navigable and non-navigable waters 

within the exterior boundaries * * *’’

This wording created some unforeseen 

consequences.

Additionally, ANILCA Section 103 is 

very specific that in coastal areas, 

boundaries for new additions to Federal 

reservations shall not extend seaward 

beyond the mean high-tide line unless 

the State concurs. The regulations 

published in compliance with that 

section delineating the National 

Wildlife Refuge boundaries (48 FR 7890, 

February 24, 1983) specify that Federal 

ownership does not extend below mean 

high tide except where the State may 

agree to that extension. Even though 

maps show hundreds of thousands of 

acres of marine waters (exclusive of preStatehood withdrawals) within the 

exterior boundaries of refuges, the Fish 

and Wildlife Service has never 

attempted nor intended to exercise any 

jurisdiction within those areas. 

Reworded Federal Subsistence 

Management Regulations would bring 

consistency among these documents. 

A further point of conflict arises over 

the identification of the boundary of the 

Alaska Maritime National Wildlife 

Refuge (and, therefore, the waters 

within that boundary.) One 

interpretation of the Refuge maps and 

BLM Master Title Plats is that there is 

a landward boundary of the Alaska 

Maritime NWR identified and that the 

seaward boundary is located at the 

boundary of territorial waters. If this 

interpretation is correct, then the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program would have subsistence 

fisheries jurisdiction over most of the 

marine waters in the State of Alaska. 

This was clearly not the intent when 

including all waters within the exterior 

boundaries. 

Additionally, in the final Issue Paper 

and Recommendations of the Alaska 

[Katie John] Policy Group (attachment to 

Acting Regional Solicitor Dennis 

Hopewell’s memorandum of June 15, 

1995, as amended July 12, 1995), he 

stated that:

Where a federal reservation with reserved 

water rights includes rivers or streams 

flowing into marine waters, reserved water 

rights will apply to all waters above the 

mouth of said rivers or streams, when the 

mouth is within the exterior boundaries of 

the federal reservation. The mouth is defined 

by a line drawn between the termini of the 

headlands on either bank of the river. * * *

There are apparently no cases in which the 

federal government has asserted reservation 

of rights to marine waters under the Winters 

doctrine. * * *

Extending the Winters doctrine assertion of 

reserved water rights to marine waters would 

be without precedent and would represent a 

considerable leap in reasoning. * * * 

Potential appropriation of such waters 

remains implausible to any degree that could 

substantially affect marine water quantity or 

levels at all but the most restricted of 

locations (such as some salt chucks).* * * 

[T]he rationale behind the federal reserved 

waters doctrine would not apply to these 

marine waters. From this standpoint, it 

would be difficult to establish a need to 

reserve water in marine waters in order to 

accomplish the purposes of a reservation, 

even such a reserve as the Alaska Maritime 

National Wildlife Refuge that specifically 

includes the ‘‘adjacent seas.’’

He made the following 

recommendations:

Where a federal reservation with reserved 

water rights includes rivers or streams 

flowing into marine waters, reserved water 

rights will be asserted to the mouths of those 

rivers or streams, where the mouths are 

within the exterior boundaries of the 

reservation. 

Reserved water rights will not be asserted 

in marine waters except to the extent that the 

United States has already taken the position 

that submerged lands underlying marine 

waters reserved to the United States at the 

time of Alaska statehood meet the ANILCA 

definition of public lands.

In order to correct any 

misconceptions regarding Secretarial 

intent; to create consistency among 

Solicitor opinions, subsistence 

regulations, and boundary regulations; 

and to avoid unnecessary complications 

and public confusion, we are proposing 

the amendments contained herein. The 

proposed § __.3(b) includes those areas 

(Alaska Maritime and Yukon Delta) 

where marine waters are included, and 

the regulations apply to both navigable 

and non-navigable waters. These are the 

refuge areas where pre-Statehood 

withdrawals exist. The proposed 

§ __.3(c) includes those areas where 

marine waters are not included, but the 

regulations still apply to both navigable 

70942 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

and non-navigable waters. The proposed 

§ __.3(d) includes those areas where the 

regulations apply only to non-navigable 

waters. These are the unassociated BLM 

lands that are not a part of a 

conservation system unit and have not 

been withdrawn from the public domain 

for specific purposes. Also, the addition 

of the text ‘‘other than military lands’’

is a clarification, inasmuch as the 

military lands have never been included 

in the Federal Subsistence Management 

Program because of national security 

and defense reasons and because they 

are not considered ‘‘public’’ lands. 

Because this rule relates to public 

lands managed by an agency or agencies 

in both the Departments of Agriculture 

and the Interior, identical text would be 

incorporated into 36 CFR part 242 and 

50 CFR part 100. 

Conformance With Statutory and 

Regulatory Authorities 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Compliance 

A Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (DEIS) for developing a 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program was distributed for public 

comment on October 7, 1991. That 

document described the major issues 

associated with Federal subsistence 

management as identified through 

public meetings, written comments, and 

staff analysis, and examined the 

environmental consequences of four 

alternatives. Proposed regulations 

(Subparts A, B, and C) that would 

implement the preferred alternative 

were included in the DEIS as an 

appendix. The DEIS and the proposed 

administrative regulations presented a 

framework for an annual regulatory 

cycle regarding subsistence hunting and 

fishing regulations (Subpart D). The 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(FEIS) was published on February 28, 

1992. 

Based on the public comments 

received, the analysis contained in the 

FEIS, and the recommendations of the 

Federal Subsistence Board and the 

Department of the Interior’s Subsistence 

Policy Group, the Secretary of the 

Interior, with the concurrence of the 

Secretary of Agriculture, through the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture—Forest 

Service, implemented Alternative IV as 

identified in the DEIS and FEIS (Record 

of Decision on Subsistence Management 

for Federal Public Lands in Alaska 

(ROD), signed April 6, 1992). The DEIS 

and the selected alternative in the FEIS 

defined the administrative framework of 

an annual regulatory cycle for 

subsistence hunting and fishing 

regulations. The final rule for 

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska, Subparts A, 

B, and C, published May 29, 1992, 

implemented the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program and included a 

framework for an annual cycle for 

subsistence hunting and fishing 

regulations. The following Federal 

Register documents pertain to this 

rulemaking:

FEDERAL REGISTER DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN

ALASKA, SUBPARTS A AND B 

Federal Register

citation 

Date of

publication Category Details 

57 FR 22940 May 29, 1992 Final Rule ‘‘Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska; Final Rule’’ 

was published in the Federal Register.

64 FR 1276 January 8, 1999 Final Rule 

(amended) 

Amended to include subsistence activities occurring on inland navigable waters in 

which the United States has a reserved water right and to identify specific Federal land units where reserved water rights exist. Extended the Federal Subsistence Board’s management to all Federal lands selected under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska Statehood Act and situated within 

the boundaries of a Conservation System Unit, National Recreation Area, National Conservation Area, or any new national forest or forest addition, until 

conveyed to the State of Alaska or an Alaska Native Corporation. Specified and 

clarified Secretaries’ authority to determine when hunting, fishing, or trapping 

activities taking place in Alaska off the public lands interfere with the subsistence priority. 

66 FR 31533 June 12, 2001 Interim Rule Expanded the authority that the Board may delegate to agency field officials and 

clarified the procedures for enacting emergency or temporary restrictions, closures, or openings. 

67 FR 30559 May 7, 2002 Final Rule In response to comments on an interim rule, amended the operating regulations. 

Also corrected some inadvertent errors and oversights of previous rules. 

68 FR 7703 February 18, 

2003

Direct Final Rule This rule clarified how old a person must be to receive certain subsistence use 

permits and removed the requirement that Regional Councils must have an odd 

number of members. 

68 FR 23035 April 30, 2003 Affirmation of Direct Final Rule Received no adverse comments on the direct final rule (68 FR 7703). Adopted direct final rule. 

An environmental assessment was 

prepared in 1997 on the expansion of 

Federal jurisdiction over fisheries and is 

available by contacting the office listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. The Secretary of the Interior 

with the concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture determined that the 

expansion of Federal jurisdiction did 

not constitute a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the human 

environment, and therefore, signed a 

Finding of No Significant Impact.

Compliance With Section 810 of 

ANILCA 

The intent of all Federal subsistence 

regulations is to accord subsistence uses 

of fish and wildlife on public lands a 

priority over the taking of fish and 

wildlife on such lands for other 

purposes, unless restriction is necessary 

to conserve healthy fish and wildlife 

populations. A Section 810 analysis was 

completed as part of the FEIS process. 

The final Section 810 analysis 

determination appeared in the April 6, 

1992, ROD, which concluded that the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program may have some local impacts 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70943

on subsistence uses, but the program is 

not likely to significantly restrict 

subsistence uses. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

These rules contain no new 

information collection requirements 

subject to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. They 

apply to the use of public lands in 

Alaska. The information collection 

requirements described in the rule were 

approved by OMB under 44 U.S.C. 3501 

and were assigned clearance number 

1018–0075, which expires August 31, 

2006. We will not conduct or sponsor, 

and you are not required to respond to, 

a collection of information request 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

Other Requirements 

Economic Effects—This rule is not a 

significant rule subject to OMB review 

under Executive Order 12866. This 

rulemaking will impose no significant 

costs on small entities; this rule does 

not restrict any existing sport or 

commercial fishery on the public lands, 

and subsistence fisheries will continue 

at essentially the same levels as they 

presently occur. The number of 

businesses and the amount of trade that 

will result from this Federal-land 

related activity is unknown but 

expected to be insignificant. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 

preparation of regulatory flexibility 

analyses for rules that will have a 

significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

which include small businesses, 

organizations, or governmental 

jurisdictions. The Departments have 

determined that this rulemaking will 

not have a significant economic effect 

on a substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

This rulemaking will impose no 

significant costs on small entities; the 

exact number of businesses and the 

amount of trade that will result from 

this Federal-land related activity is 

unknown. The number of small entities 

affected is unknown; however, the fact 

that the effects will be seasonal in 

nature and will, in most cases, not 

impact continuing preexisting uses of 

public lands indicates that the effects 

will not be significant. 

Title VIII of ANILCA requires the 

Secretaries to administer a subsistence 

preference on public lands. The scope of 

this program is limited by definition to 

certain public lands. Likewise, these 

regulations have no potential takings of 

private property implications as defined 

by Executive Order 12630. 

The Service has determined and 

certifies pursuant to the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et 

seq., that this rulemaking will not 

impose a cost of $100 million or more 

in any given year on local or State 

governments or private entities. The 

implementation of this rule is by 

Federal agencies, and no cost is 

involved to any State or local entities or 

Tribal governments. 

The Service has determined that these 

final regulations meet the applicable 

standards provided in Sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 on 

Civil Justice Reform. 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 

Title VIII of ANILCA precludes the State 

from exercising management authority 

over wildlife resources on Federal 

lands. 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), 512 DM 2, 

and E.O. 13175, we have evaluated 

possible effects on Federally recognized 

Indian tribes and have determined that 

there are no effects. The Bureau of 

Indian Affairs is a participating agency 

in this rulemaking. 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. This Executive 

Order requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. As this rule 

is not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 13211, affecting 

energy supply, distribution, or use, this 

action is not a significant action and no 

Statement of Energy Effects is required. 

William Knauer drafted these 

regulations under the guidance of 

Thomas H. Boyd of the Office of 

Subsistence Management, Alaska 

Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Taylor 

Brelsford, Alaska State Office, Bureau of 

Land Management; Greg Bos, Carl Jack, 

and Rod Simmons, Alaska Regional 

Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 

Sandy Rabinowitch and Bob Gerhard, 

Alaska Regional Office, National Park 

Service; Warren Eastland and Dr. Glenn 

Chen, Alaska Regional Office, Bureau of 

Indian Affairs; and Steve Kessler, 

Alaska Regional Office, USDA-Forest 

Service provided additional guidance.

List of Subjects 

36 CFR Part 242

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish, National 

forests, Public lands, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. 

50 CFR Part 100

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish, National 

forests, Public lands, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Secretaries propose to 

amend Title 36, part 242, and Title 50, 

part 100, of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, as set forth below.

PART—SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT 

REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN 

ALASKA

1. The authority citation for both 36 

CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd, 

3101–3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551–3586; 43 U.S.C. 

1733.

Subpart A—General Provisions 

2. In Subpart A of 36 CFR part 242 

and 50 CFR part 100, § __.3 would be 

revised to read as follows:

§ ____.3 Applicability and scope. 

(a) The regulations in this part 

implement the provisions of Title VIII of 

ANILCA relevant to the taking of fish 

and wildlife on public lands in the State 

of Alaska. The regulations in this part 

do not permit subsistence uses in 

Glacier Bay National Park, Kenai Fjords 

National Park, Katmai National Park, 

and that portion of Denali National Park 

established as Mt. McKinley National 

Park prior to passage of ANILCA, where 

subsistence taking and uses are 

prohibited. The regulations in this part 

do not supersede agency-specific 

regulations. 

(b) The regulations contained in this 

part apply on all public lands, including 

all inland waters, both navigable and 

non-navigable, within and adjacent to 

the exterior boundaries of the following 

areas, and on the marine waters as 

identified in the following areas: 

(1) Alaska Maritime National Wildlife 

Refuge, including the: 

(i) Karluk Subunit: all of the 

submerged land and water of the Pacific 

Ocean (Shelikof Strait) extending 3,000 

feet from the shoreline between a point 

on the spit at the meander corner 

common to Sections 35 and 36 of 

Township 30 South, Range 33 West, and 

a point approximately 11⁄4 miles east of 

Rocky Point within Section 14 of 

70944 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Township 29 South, Range 31 West, 

Seward Meridian as described in Public 

Land Order 128, dated June 19, 1943; 

(ii) Womens Bay Subunit: Womens 

Bay, Gibson Cove, portions of St. Paul 

Harbor and Chiniak Bay: all of the 

submerged land and water as described 

in Public Land Order 1182, dated July 

7, 1955 (U.S. Survey 2539); 

(iii) Afognak Island Subunit: all 

submerged lands and waters of the 

Pacific Ocean lying within 3 miles of 

the shoreline as described in 

Proclamation No. 39, dated December 

24, 1892; 

(iv) Simeonof Subunit: all of the 

submerged land and water of Simeonof 

Island together with the adjacent waters 

of the Pacific Ocean extending 1 mile 

from the shore line as described in 

Public Land Order 1749, dated October 

30, 1958; and 

(v) Semidi Subunit: all of the 

submerged land and water of the Semidi 

Islands together with the adjacent 

waters of the Pacific Ocean lying 

between parallels 55E57′00′′–56E15′00′′

North Latitude and 156E30′00′′–

157E00′00′′ West Longitude as described 

in Executive Order 5858, dated June 17, 

1932; 

(2) Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 

including those waters shoreward of the 

line of extreme low water starting in the 

vicinity of Monument 1 at the 

intersection of the International 

Boundary line between the State of 

Alaska and the Yukon Territory, 

Canada, and extending westerly, along 

the line of extreme low water across the 

entrances of lagoons such that all 

offshore bars, reefs and islands, and 

lagoons that separate them from the 

mainland to Brownlow Point, at 

approximately 70E10′ North Latitude 

and 145E51′ West Longitude; 

(3) National Petroleum Reserve in 

Alaska, including those waters 

shoreward of a line beginning at the 

western bank of the Colville River 

following the highest highwater mark 

westerly, extending across the entrances 

of small lagoons, including Pearl Bay, 

Wainwright Inlet, the Kuk River, Kugrua 

Bay and River, and other small bays and 

river estuaries, and following the ocean 

side of barrier islands and sandspits 

within three miles of shore and the 

ocean side of the Plover Islands, to the 

northwestern extremity of Icy Cape, at 

approximately 70E21′ North Latitude 

and 161E46′ West Longitude; and 

(4) Yukon Delta National Wildlife 

Refuge, including Nunivak Island: the 

submerged land and water of Nunivak 

Island together with the adjacent waters 

of the Bering Sea extending, for Federal 

Subsistence Management purposes, 3 

miles from the shoreline as described in 

Executive Order No. 5059, dated April 

15, 1929. 

(c) The regulations contained in this 

part apply on all public lands, 

excluding marine waters, but including 

all inland waters, both navigable and 

non-navigable, within and adjacent to 

the exterior boundaries of the following 

areas:

(1) Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife 

Refuge; 

(2) Aniakchak National Monument and 

Preserve; 

(3) Becharof National Wildlife Refuge; 

(4) Bering Land Bridge National 

Preserve; 

(5) Cape Krusenstern National 

Monument; 

(6) Chugach National Forest; 

(7) Denali National Preserve and the 

1980 additions to Denali National 

Park; 

(8) Gates of the Arctic National Park and 

Preserve; 

(9) Glacier Bay National Preserve; 

(10) Innoko National Wildlife Refuge; 

(11) Izembek National Wildlife Refuge; 

(12) Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge; 

(13) Katmai National Preserve; 

(14) Kenai National Wildlife Refuge; 

(15) Kobuk Valley National Park; 

(16) Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge; 

(17) Koyukuk National Wildlife Refuge; 

(18) Lake Clark National Park and 

Preserve; 

(19) Noatak National Preserve; 

(20) Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge; 

(21) Selawik National Wildlife Refuge; 

(22) Steese National Conservation Area; 

(23) Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge; 

(24) Togiak National Wildlife Refuge; 

(25) Tongass National Forest, including 

Admiralty Island National Monument 

and Misty Fjords National Monument; 

(26) White Mountain National 

Recreation Area; 

(27) Wrangell-St. Elias National Park 

and Preserve; 

(28) Yukon-Charley Rivers National 

Preserve; 

(29) Yukon Flats National Wildlife 

Refuge; 

(30) All components of the Wild and 

Scenic River System located outside 

the boundaries of National Parks, 

National Preserves, or National 

Wildlife Refuges, including segments 

of the Alagnak River, Beaver Creek, 

Birch Creek, Delta River, Fortymile 

River, Gulkana River, and Unalakleet 

River.

(d) The regulations contained in this 

part apply on all other public lands, 

other than military lands, including all 

non-navigable waters located on these 

lands. 

(e) The public lands described in 

paragraph (b) of this section remain 

subject to change through rulemaking 

pending a Department of the Interior 

review of title and jurisdictional issues 

regarding certain submerged lands 

beneath navigable waters in Alaska. 

3. In Subpart A of 36 CFR part 242 

and 50 CFR part 100, § __.4c revise the 

definitions of ‘‘Inland Waters’’ and 

‘‘Marine Waters’’ to read as follows:

§ __.4 Definitions.

* * * * *

Inland Waters means, for the 

purposes of this part, those waters 

located landward of the mean high-tide 

line and the waters located upstream of 

the straight line drawn from headland to 

headland across the mouths of rivers, 

creeks, or streams. Inland waters 

include lakes, reservoirs, ponds, creeks, 

streams, rivers, and other fresh and 

brackish water bodies. 

Marine Waters means, those waters 

located seaward of the mean high-tide 

line or, with regard to rivers, creeks, 

streams and other inland waters, 

seaward of a straight line drawn from 

headland to headland at the mouth of 

such waters.

* * * * *

Dated: November 3, 2004. 

Gale A. Norton, 

Secretary of the Interior, Department of the 

Interior.

Dated: November 22, 2004. 

Dennis E. Bschor, 

Regional Forester, USDA-Forest Service.

[FR Doc. 04–26789 Filed 12–7–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P; 4310–55–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[R03–OAR–2004–PA–0003; FRL–7845–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; VOC Requirements for 

Portable Fuel Containers

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the 

purpose of establishing the volatile 

organic compound (VOC) control 

requirements for portable fuel 

containers. In the Final Rules section of 

this Federal Register, EPA is approving 

the Commonwealth’s SIP submittal as a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a