83622 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

36 CFR Part 242 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–SM–2024–0017; 

245D0102DM DS61900000 

DMSN00000.000000 DX61901; 70101–1261– 

0000L6] 

RIN 1018–BH67 

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska—Subpart B, 

Federal Subsistence Board 

Membership 

AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture; 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Based on requests during joint 

consultations with Alaska Native Tribes 

and others, the Departments of the 

Interior and Agriculture (Departments) 

revise the regulations concerning the 

composition of the Federal Subsistence 

Board (Board), which has authority to 

administer the subsistence taking and 

uses of fish and wildlife on public lands 

in Alaska, subject to the Department’s 

oversight. The Departments add three 

public members nominated or 

recommended by federally recognized 

Tribal governments, require that those 

nominees have certain knowledge and 

experience, define requirements used to 

select the Board Chair, and affirm the 

Secretaries’ authority to replace Board 

members and the Secretaries’ 

responsibility and oversight regarding 

Board decisions. These regulatory 

revisions are responsive to the primary 

requests made to the Departments 

during the consultations. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

18, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submitted comments and 

supporting documents are available for 

review by going to the Regulations.gov 

website at https://www.regulations.gov 

and typing the docket number, FWS– 

R7–SM–2024–0017, into the search 

block at the top of the page. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Crystal Leonetti, Acting Director, Office 

of Subsistence Management; 907–786– 

3888; or subsistence@ios.doi.gov. For 

questions specific to National Forest 

System lands, contact Gregory Risdahl, 

Regional Subsistence Program Leader, 

USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region; 

907–302–7354 or gregory.risdahl@

usda.gov. Individuals in the United 

States who are deaf, blind, hard of 

hearing, or have a speech disability may 

dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to 

access telecommunications relay 

services. Individuals outside the United 

States should use the relay services 

offered within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History of the Program 

Under title VIII of the Alaska National 

Interest Lands Conservation Act 

(ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126), the 

Secretary of the Interior and the 

Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) 

jointly implement the Federal 

Subsistence Management Program 

(Program). The Program provides a 

preference for take of fish and wildlife 

resources for subsistence uses on 

Federal public lands and waters in 

Alaska. The Secretaries published 

temporary regulations to carry out the 

Program in the Federal Register on June 

29, 1990 (55 FR 27114), and final 

regulations were published in the 

Federal Register on May 29, 1992 (57 

FR 22940). The Program regulations 

have subsequently been amended many 

times. Because the Program is a joint 

effort between the Department of the 

Interior (DOI) and the Department of 

Agriculture (collectively, ‘‘the 

Departments’’), these regulations are 

located in two titles of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR): Title 36, 

‘‘Parks, Forests, and Public Property,’’ 

and Title 50, ‘‘Wildlife and Fisheries,’’ 

at 36 CFR 242.1–28 and 50 CFR 100.1– 

28, respectively. The regulations contain 

subparts as follows: Subpart A, General 

Provisions; Subpart B, Program 

Structure; Subpart C, Board 

Determinations; and Subpart D, 

Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. 

Consistent with subpart B of these 

regulations, the Secretaries established a 

Federal Subsistence Board (Board) to 

administer the Program. The Board is 

currently made up of: 

• 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, 

National Park Service; 

• The Alaska State Director, Bureau 

of Land Management; 

• The Alaska Regional Director, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs; 

• The Alaska Regional Forester, U.S. 

Forest Service; and 

• Two public members appointed by 

the Secretary of the Interior with 

concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture. 

Through the Board, these agencies 

and public members participate in the 

development of regulations for subparts 

C and D, which, among other things, set 

forth program eligibility and specific 

harvest seasons and limits. 

In administering the Program, the 

Secretaries divided Alaska into 10 

subsistence resource regions, each of 

which is represented by a Subsistence 

Regional Advisory Council (Council). 

The Councils provide a forum for rural 

residents with personal knowledge of 

local conditions and resource 

requirements to have a meaningful role 

in the subsistence management of fish 

and wildlife on Federal public lands in 

Alaska. The Council members represent 

varied geographical, cultural, and user 

interests within each region. 

Background of This Rule 

In January 2022, the Departments held 

joint consultations with approximately 

445 individual subsistence users and 

representatives from federally 

recognized Tribes of Alaska, Tribal 

Consortia, Alaska Native Organizations, 

and Alaska Native Corporations. In 

October–November 2022, DOI 

leadership and officials of the 

Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, held joint consultations 

with various Alaska Tribes regarding 

fisheries. During all of these 

consultations, a primary request from 

commenters was to make changes to the 

Federal Subsistence Board, including 

increasing the number of public 

members to five and adding more voting 

members who represent Alaska Native 

villages and have local knowledge and 

direct subsistence experience. 

As a result of this consultation 

process, the Departments proposed to 

revise CFR titles 36 (in part 242) and 50 

(in part 100) at § __.10 to be responsive 

to the requests to define the 

requirements used for the selection of 

the Board Chair, increase the number of 

public members of the Board, and 

include a voice for federally recognized 

Tribal governments to nominate or 

recommend a certain number of the 

public members of the Board (89 FR 

14008, February 26, 2024). The 

proposed rule also included a provision 

that the Board Chair, like the two 

current public members, must possess 

personal knowledge of and direct 

experience with subsistence uses in 

rural Alaska. The proposed rule further 

required the three new public members 

to possess personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska, including Alaska Native 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83623 

subsistence uses, and to be nominated 

or recommended by federally 

recognized Tribal governments. 

As is currently required in the 

Program regulations, the Board Chair 

and all public members were proposed 

to be appointed by the Secretary of the 

Interior with the concurrence of the 

Secretary of Agriculture. The Secretaries 

were to retain the authority to remove 

public members from the Board and also 

would retain their existing authorities to 

replace agency personnel on the Board. 

The proposed rule also explained, as is 

currently the case, that the public 

members will become special 

governmental employees for the 

purpose of serving on the Board. 

Lastly, consistent with title VIII of 

ANILCA, the proposed rule confirmed 

that the Secretaries retain the authority 

to modify, disapprove, or stay any 

action taken by the Board. For 

temporary special actions, the proposed 

rule provided that such actions would 

not become effective until at least 10 

calendar days after the date of the action 

to allow the Secretaries an opportunity 

to act, if needed. For emergency special 

actions, the proposed rule provided that 

the Board action would likewise not 

become effective for 10 calendar days 

unless the Board determines that the 

emergency situation calls for responsive 

action within 24 hours to protect 

subsistence resources or public safety. 

The February 26, 2024, proposed rule 

(89 FR 14008) opened a public comment 

period that closed April 26, 2024. 

During the public comment period, the 

Departments received 65 comments 

from a variety of individuals and 

entities, including Federally Recognized 

Tribes of Alaska and Alaska Native 

Corporations. The public comments and 

a report detailing the information 

received during the 2022 joint 

consultations, ‘‘Federal Subsistence 

Policy Consultation Summary Report,’’ 

can be found in Docket No. FWS–R7– 

SM–2024–0017 at https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Regulatory Revisions 

The February 26, 2024, proposed rule 

(89 FR 14008) described the regulatory 

revisions proposed by the Secretaries. 

The following paragraphs summarize by 

subject matter the regulatory changes 

being made in this final rule. 

I. Increase in Number of Public Board 

Members 

The current Board includes a Chair, 

two public Board members, and five 

Federal agency personnel. The 

Secretaries will add three public 

members nominated or recommended 

by federally recognized Tribes in 

Alaska, while also requiring that they 

possess personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska, including Alaska Native 

subsistence uses, for the purpose of 

ensuring adequate representation by 

members with rural subsistence 

experience on the Board at any 

particular meeting. 

II. Qualifications of Chair 

In addition, the Secretaries will 

require that the Board Chair possess 

personal knowledge of and direct 

experience with subsistence uses in 

rural Alaska. 

III. Term Limits 

The Secretaries may establish term 

limits for service of Board members in 

such circumstances as the Secretaries 

deem appropriate. 

IV. Oversight Responsibility and 

Ratification Requirement 

For Board actions (e.g., cyclic 

regulation revisions, customary and 

traditional use determinations, 

subsistence resource regions, rural 

determinations, and requests for 

reconsideration), the Secretaries retain, 

and will exercise when appropriate, 

their authority to modify or disapprove 

actions prior to publication in the 

Federal Register, as has been the 

practice. 

In regard to special actions, we 

acknowledge that the Board’s decisions 

are often time-sensitive regarding 

harvest opportunities for rural Alaskans 

or critical population issues of a species. 

Therefore, special actions, both 

emergency and temporary, are valid 

upon decision by the Board. However, 

the final rule makes explicit that 

Secretaries may at any time rescind, 

modify, disapprove, or stay a special 

action. 

Summary of Comments and Response 

to Comments 

In response to the proposed rule, the 

Departments received general comments 

and comments specific to four questions 

asked in the proposed rule. Of the 65 

public comments received, 56 

supported the proposed rule, 7 opposed 

the proposed regulatory revisions or 

opposed them unless modified, and 2 

were outside the scope of the proposed 

rule. 

Many of the comments were specific 

to how to implement additional public 

Board membership. These comments 

were responsive to the questions posed 

in the proposed rule, and they will be 

useful as the Departments navigate the 

nomination and appointment process. 

Other comments were specific to 

regulation promulgation and the legality 

of the proposed rule, and we respond to 

those comments below. 

Questions 1 and 2 are closely tied in 

the comments received. While they ask 

two specific questions, the comments 

received tended to address both 

questions, and we address both together 

in this document. 

Question 1: Are federally recognized 

Tribal governments the only groups that 

should nominate/recommend public 

board members that possesses the 

qualifications identified in this 

proposed rule? Should Alaska Native 

Corporations and other entities also be 

included as entities to nominate/ 

recommend public board members, so 

long as the nominees possess personal 

knowledge of and direct experience 

with subsistence uses in rural Alaska 

(including Alaska Native subsistence 

uses)? 

Question 2: Would it be preferable for 

federally recognized Tribes to nominate/ 

recommend only two of the three new 

public board members? 

Comments: Eight comments received 

in response to questions 1 and 2 

indicated a preference for nominations 

by federally recognized Tribal 

governments only. Other comments 

were in support of full or at least some 

Alaska Native Corporation participation 

or expressed desire to open the 

nominations to all rural residents of 

Alaska. An additional comment 

suggested that all Tribes, including 

those who are not federally recognized, 

should be able to provide the 

nominations. 

Response: The final rule regulatory 

language maintains that the additional 

public members be nominated by 

federally recognized Tribal governments 

in Alaska. The Secretaries’ limitation of 

nominations from federally recognized 

Tribes tracks the Secretaries’ political 

relationship with Tribal Nations and 

responsibility for maintaining a 

government-to-government relationship. 

This language does not limit the 

nominations to Alaska Natives or a 

member of a federally recognized Tribe, 

nor does it preclude Alaska Native 

Corporations or other Alaska Native 

entities that are not federally recognized 

Tribes from providing input to Tribes 

during nominee selection. Further, the 

language does not affect the nomination 

or recommendation process for the other 

public member positions who do not 

have this nomination requirement. No 

changes were made to the final 

regulations as a result of these 

comments. 

Comments: Additional comments 

suggested requirements that should be 

put in place if Alaska Native 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
83624 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Corporations are allowed to nominate, 

suggesting that they should be required 

to consult with Tribes or should get 

approval of their nominees from Tribes 

first. 

Response: The Departments note that 

neither the proposed rule nor the final 

rule provides for nominations from 

Alaska Native Corporations. 

Comments: Four commenters 

expressed concern that requiring the 

additional public members to be 

nominated or recommended by a Tribal 

government constitutes a racial 

classification. One of these commenters 

further expressed concern that the new 

public members would ‘‘represent 

Native villages.’’ 

Response: Both of these concerns 

reflect a misreading of the proposed 

rule, which does not include a 

requirement that a nominee be Alaska 

Native or a member of a federally 

recognized Tribe. A federally recognized 

Tribal government may recommend a 

person of any race or ethnicity and may 

also recommend a person who is not a 

Tribal member. Tribal membership, in 

any case, is a political identity based on 

membership in a sovereign government, 

not a racial classification warranting 

heightened scrutiny. See, e.g., Morton v. 

Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974); United 

States v. Cooley, 593 U.S. 345, 349 

(2021) (‘‘Long ago we described Indian 

tribes as ‘‘distinct, independent political 

communities’’ exercising sovereign 

authority.’’ Worcester v. Georgia, 31 

U.S. 515, 6 Pet. 515, 559, 8 L. Ed. 483 

(1832)). 

The addition of three public members 

to be nominated or recommended by 

federally recognized Tribes reflects the 

following goals: To add public members 

so that the Federal Subsistence Board is 

more balanced between public and 

Federal agency members; to increase 

community input into Board 

recommendations; and to improve 

Board decisions by adding persons with 

personal knowledge of and direct 

experience with subsistence uses in 

rural Alaska, including Alaska Native 

subsistence uses. The Secretaries’ 

inclusion of nominations from federally 

recognized Tribes is consistent with the 

Secretaries’ political relationship with 

Tribal Nations. The Secretaries’ 

consideration of these nominations/ 

recommendations recognizes Tribes’ 

qualifications to identify individuals 

who possess personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska, both Native and nonNative, and to identify individuals who 

are best able to present Indigenous 

Knowledge that can be included in the 

Board’s decision making. Tribal 

governments are well-situated to make 

these recommendations in part because 

of the high proportion of Alaska Natives 

in the rural areas of the State and 

particularly in the most remote and 

roadless regions. 

Comments: Two commenters 

highlighted the existing high levels of 

Alaska Native participation in the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program, through the Subsistence 

Resource Commissions (SRCs), Regional 

Advisory Councils (RACs), and the 

current public Board members and 

questioned the need for three additional 

public members nominated by Tribes. 

Response: The Departments gave 

careful consideration to the level of 

current participation and experience on 

the SRCs, RACs, and Board, by both 

Native and non-Native rural subsistence 

users. As stated above, the addition of 

three public members to be nominated 

or recommended by federally 

recognized Tribes is consistent with the 

Secretaries’ political relationship with 

Tribal Nations and reflects an effort to 

add more balance between public and 

Federal agency members, to increase 

community input into Board 

recommendations, and to improve 

Board decisions by ensuring balance of 

rural representation by having persons 

with personal knowledge of and direct 

experience with subsistence uses in 

rural Alaska, including Alaska Native 

subsistence uses. 

Additionally, most of rural Alaska 

consists of the Unorganized Borough, 

which in turn comprises 11 census 

areas; these areas are for statistical 

analysis but have no regional 

governments of their own. Tribal 

governments are a primary form of local 

government in much of rural Alaska. 

The requirement that a nomination or 

recommendation come from a Tribal 

government thus functions as a 

community recommendation that the 

candidate has the necessary knowledge 

and expertise. Further, the rule still 

provides that the Chair and two other 

public seats are available, outside of this 

nomination process, to others with the 

preexisting qualifications. 

Comments: Four commenters 

expressed concern, without providing 

any details, that allowing Tribal 

governments to nominate or recommend 

public members violated the 

Constitution, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 

and/or ANILCA. 

Response: The Departments believe 

that allowing federally recognized 

Tribal governments to nominate or 

recommend persons with relevant 

qualifications to be considered for 

appointment to the Federal Subsistence 

Board is consistent with the 

Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 

1964, and ANILCA. It is consistent with 

the federal government’s political 

relationship with federally recognized 

Tribes and there is no requirement that 

a nominee be Alaska Native or a 

member of a federally recognized Tribe. 

Moreover, the Secretaries retain 

ultimate authority to decide whether to 

appoint to the Board the particular 

individuals nominated or recommended 

by Tribes; the Secretaries are not 

delegating their authority to appoint. 

Comment: Another commenter noted 

that the additional seats should be 

available to all rural Alaskans, not just 

those nominated by Tribes. 

Response: As noted above, under the 

rule, the Chair and two other public 

members are not subject to this new 

nomination process. Additionally, as 

noted above, there is no requirement 

that a nominee be Alaska Native or a 

member of a federally recognized Tribe, 

nor must a nominee ‘‘represent Native 

villages’’ as alleged by one commenter. 

A federally recognized Tribal 

government may recommend a person 

of any race or ethnicity and may also 

recommend a person who is not a Tribal 

member. Accordingly, the final rule has 

not been changed from the proposed 

rule as a result of these comments. 

Question 3: How should the 

Secretaries solicit and receive 

nominations/recommendations? Should 

the Secretaries broadly solicit 

nominations or recommendations from 

federally recognized Tribal 

governments, or should the Secretaries 

identify as a matter of their sole 

discretion one or more specific federally 

recognized Tribal governments? 

Comments: Eight comments received 

in response to question 3 indicated a 

preference for regional representation of 

appointees and offered many routes to 

achieve a cadre of public members that 

would ensure the representation on the 

Board is not biased to just one part of 

the State. 

Response: These suggestions were not 

included in the final regulations 

because the Departments will take these 

comments into consideration during the 

implementation phase. However, the 

commenters did not indicate that 

limited numbers of Tribal governments 

should be selected to submit 

nominations. The final rule regulatory 

language regarding who can nominate 

three new public Board members will 

remain inclusive of all Alaska federally 

recognized Tribal governments. 

Question 4: Is the proposed quorum of 

six appropriate with the addition of the 

three new public board members, or 

should it be increased? 

Comments: On the question of 

quorum size, two commenters wanted to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83625 

ensure there was always public member 

representation within the quorum. 

Response: The Departments 

considered this concern but ultimately 

declined to increase the quorum size or 

base the quorum on the Board member 

status because the Board Chair, who is 

a public member, essentially ensures 

that at least one public member is 

represented in the quorum. Recognizing 

the timeline involved in nominating, 

appointing, and onboarding new Board 

members, the Departments decided to 

create a sliding scale for its quorum, 

starting at the current regulatory 

quorum of five and building to six. This 

approach keeps the quorum at greater 

than 50 percent but also avoids 

unintentionally creating a situation 

where a quorum may be difficult to 

achieve before all new Board positions 

are filled. The Departments made a 

change from the proposed rule to the 

final rule and elected to set the quorum 

at five when there are nine or fewer 

Board members and six when there are 

10 or more Board members. 

Comments: A related comment noted 

that the additional three members 

would create a public member majority, 

thus outnumbering the agency members 

who manage the land. A further 

comment noted that this situation 

makes it more likely that Board 

regulations will conflict with bureau 

regulations, recommending a way to 

avoid such conflicts. 

Response: When finalizing the rule, 

the Departments considered the 

potential implications of having a 

public member majority, including the 

increased likelihood of conflicting 

regulations, and determined that the 

benefits from the additional public 

members outweigh concerns about a 

public member majority on the Board. 

Existing Board regulations at 50 CFR 

100.3 and 36 CFR 242.3 already provide 

clarity on how to handle conflicting 

regulations. Accordingly, the final rule 

remains unchanged from the proposed 

rule regarding the number of public 

members as a result of these comments. 

Term Limits 

Comments: The Departments received 

comments regarding implementing term 

limits, including recommendations for 

3-year staggered terms without term 

limits, 3-year to 5-year staggered terms, 

and 5-year term limits, each with 

varying recommendations for the 

requirements for re-nomination, reapplication, and re-appointment. 

Response: After considering the range 

of opinions on terms and term limits 

without any one approach garnering 

more support than any other, the 

Departments found no compelling 

reasons to change course and elected to 

retain the proposed regulatory text in 

the final rule regulation, which provides 

the Secretaries flexibility to apply term 

limits to Board members as the 

Secretaries deem appropriate. 

Qualifications of Appointed Public 

Board Members 

Comments: Seven commenters 

primarily requested that appointed 

Board members possess firsthand 

knowledge of subsistence practices, 

with some commenters suggesting that 

knowledge should include Alaska 

Native subsistence uses. 

Response: The rule already 

incorporates these concerns as it 

requires that all five public members 

‘‘possess personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska’’ and the three new 

public members ‘‘shall possess personal 

knowledge of and direct experience 

with subsistence uses in rural Alaska 

(including Alaska Native subsistence 

uses).’’ The remainder of the four 

qualifications mentioned by 

commenters were specific to 

implementation of additional Board 

members and may be considered during 

the nomination and evaluation process. 

Thus, no change to the final rule was 

needed because those concerns and 

suggestions will be addressed during 

that process. 

Comment: One commenter stated that 

non-Tribal members should be able to 

be nominated. 

Response: The rule allows for 

federally recognized Tribal governments 

to nominate anyone meeting the basic 

qualifications, including non-Tribal 

persons. Accordingly, the final rule 

remains unchanged from the proposed 

rule as a result of this comment. 

Public Member Resources 

Comments: Four commenters 

remarked that public members should 

have alternates to serve in their place if 

they are absent and suggested that the 

alternates attend all of the Board 

meetings so that the alternates are more 

effective when filling in for appointed 

members. Three commenters said that 

the public members should be assigned 

staff assistants like agency Board 

members. 

Response: These suggestions were not 

included in the final rule regulations 

because the required quorum number 

accounts for any absences or vacancies, 

and because these provisions would 

significantly affect the budget for the 

new rule, but the Departments will take 

the comments concerning additional 

administrative support and related 

funding into consideration during the 

implementation phase. 

Secretarial Ratification Period for Board 

Special Actions 

Comments: Two commenters 

expressed concern about the ratification 

period, specifically related to the 

conservation of fish and wildlife 

populations. 

Response: Based on this feedback, the 

Departments further considered the 

practical impact of delaying the 

effective date of Board actions for 10 

calendar days and whether the 

emergency situation exception would 

resolve any concerns. In reviewing the 

special actions approved by the Board 

in the last 2 years, not including 

delegations of authority to agency field 

officials for in-season management, 

more than half (7 of 13) of the special 

action requests required implementation 

in less than 10 days following Board 

action. Of those, two of the seven 

involved action that was required 

within 24 hours of the Board action. 

The Departments gave careful thought 

to the difficulty in timely assembling 

the Board to thoughtfully consider and 

deliberate about emergent situations. 

Seasonal and regional conservation 

issues regarding fish and wildlife arise 

across approximately 230 million acres 

of Federal public lands and waters 

under Federal subsistence management 

and include multiple species of fish and 

wildlife that are subject to a dynamic 

and complicated range of partially or 

fully overlapping Federal and State 

hunting and fishing regulations. The 

Departments also considered the short 

duration of special actions, including 

that emergency special actions are 

limited to a maximum of 60 days, and 

temporary special actions extend no 

longer than determined by the Board to 

be necessary and are limited to the end 

of the current regulatory cycle 

(maximum of 2 years and a number of 

which are effective for only a few 

months). Additionally, the Departments 

considered the negative impacts of 

imposing a delay on effective dates of 

Board special actions and concluded 

they should be avoided in light of the 

provision in the proposed rule, carried 

forward to the final rule, acknowledging 

that the Secretaries retain authority to 

(at any time) stay, modify, or disapprove 

any action taken by the Board. The 

Departments also considered the 

exemption in the proposed rule for 

situations where responsive action is 

necessary within 24 hours to protect 

subsistence resources, but the 

information described above indicates 

that that proposed exemption may 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
83626 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

sometimes be insufficient to address the 

negative impacts of a delay. 

Ultimately, in light of the comments 

and concerns noted above, the 

Departments decided to modify the 

ratification period to provide the Board 

with additional flexibility and eliminate 

the costs that would have been 

associated with the practical limitations 

of the proposed rule. As modified, a 

ratification period of 10 days would 

apply to emergency and temporary 

special actions as a general matter, but 

the Board would have the flexibility to 

establish a shorter period of time for any 

given action (including making the 

action immediately effective). The 

Departments conclude that this revised 

approach to the ratification period will 

provide the benefits of maximizing the 

opportunity for Secretarial oversight 

without unduly constraining the Board 

from taking prompt action when 

necessary. While Board actions will be 

deemed automatically ratified if the 

Secretaries do not modify, disapprove, 

stay, or expressly ratify the action 

within the time period specified by the 

Board in the action, the Secretaries may 

revisit a prior ratification (express or 

automatic) at any time. 

Tribal Consultation and Comment 

As expressed in Executive Order 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments,’’ the 

Federal officials that have been 

delegated authority by the Secretaries 

are committed to honoring the unique 

government-to-government political 

relationship that exists between the 

Federal Government and Federally 

Recognized Indian Tribes (Tribes) as 

listed in 75 FR 60810 (October 1, 2010) 

and the relationship required by statute 

for consultation and coordination with 

Alaska Native Corporations. 

Consultation with Alaska Native 

Corporations is based on Public Law 

108–199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 23, 2004, 

118 Stat. 452, as amended by Public 

Law 108–447, div. H, title V, Sec. 518, 

Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267, which 

provides that: ‘‘The Director of the 

Office of Management and Budget and 

all Federal agencies shall hereafter 

consult with Alaska Native corporations 

on the same basis as Indian tribes under 

Executive Order No. 13175.’’ 

The Departments are committed to 

efficiently and adequately providing 

opportunities to Tribes and Alaska 

Native Corporations for consultation 

with regard to subsistence rulemaking. 

In January 2022, officials from DOI and 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture held 

joint consultations with federally 

recognized Tribes of Alaska and various 

Tribal Consortia. Later during October– 

November 2022, DOI leadership and the 

Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, held joint consultations 

with various Alaska Tribes regarding 

fisheries. Approximately 445 individual 

subsistence users and representatives 

from Alaska Native Tribes, Tribal 

Consortia, Alaska Native Organizations, 

and Alaska Native Corporations 

participated in the consultations, and a 

majority of the commenters specifically 

requested increasing the number of 

public members to five and adding more 

voting members who represent Alaska 

Native Villages and have local 

knowledge and direct subsistence 

experience. 

The Departments considered Tribes’ 

and Alaska Native Corporations’ 

information, input, and 

recommendations, and addressed their 

concerns as much as practicable in this 

rulemaking action. 

Changes From the Proposed Rule 

Based on the public and Tribal 

comment received, the final rule 

diverges from the proposed rule in 

regard to proposed paragraph 

§ ll.10(d)(12). While the proposed 

regulations at that paragraph provided 

for a 10-day delay in Board actions 

taking effect to allow the Secretaries the 

opportunity to modify, disapprove, stay, 

or expressly ratify actions taken by the 

Board, in this final rule we have 

modified the waiting period provision 

to provide more flexibility to the Board 

while maximizing the opportunity for 

Secretarial oversight. This change is 

based on public and Council input that 

the waiting period provision in the 

proposed rule might interfere with the 

purposes of the order and subsistence 

management goals. For example, in 

some circumstances, a waiting period 

could allow for a fish run to be 

completed before subsistence users had 

an opportunity to harvest any fish as 

described in the preceding section. 

The Department also made a change 

to the quorum at paragraph 

§ ll.10(d)(2). Recognizing the timeline 

involved in nominating, appointing, and 

onboarding new Board members, the 

Departments decided to create a sliding 

scale for its quorum, starting at the 

current regulatory quorum of five and 

building to six. This approach keeps the 

quorum at greater than 50 percent but 

also avoids unintentionally creating a 

situation where a quorum may be 

difficult to achieve before all new Board 

positions are filled. The Departments 

made a change in this final rule by 

electing to set the quorum at five when 

there are nine or fewer Board members 

and six when there are 10 or more Board 

members. 

Other than the changes just described, 

we have made no other revisions to the 

proposed regulatory text in this final 

rule. 

Conformance With Statutory and 

Regulatory Authorities 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Compliance 

A draft environmental impact 

statement that described four 

alternatives for developing a Federal 

Subsistence Management Program was 

distributed for public comment on 

October 7, 1991. The final 

environmental impact statement (FEIS) 

was published on February 28, 1992. 

The record of decision on Subsistence 

Management for Federal Public Lands in 

Alaska was signed April 6, 1992. The 

selected alternative in the FEIS 

(alternative IV) defined the 

administrative framework of an annual 

regulatory cycle for subsistence 

regulations. 

A 1997 environmental assessment 

dealt with the expansion of Federal 

jurisdiction over fisheries and is 

available at the office listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The 

Secretary of the Interior, with 

concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture, determined that expansion 

of Federal jurisdiction does not 

constitute a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the human 

environment and, therefore, signed a 

finding of no significant impact. 

Similarly, this rule does not constitute 

a major Federal action significantly 

affecting the quality of the human 

environment. Further, a detailed 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is not 

required because the rule is covered by 

a categorical exclusion under 43 CFR 

46.210(i): ‘‘Policies, directives, 

regulations, and guidelines: that are of 

an administrative, financial, legal, 

technical, or procedural nature; or 

whose environmental effects are too 

broad, speculative, or conjectural to 

lend themselves to meaningful analysis 

and will later be subject to the NEPA 

process, either collectively or case by 

case.’’ We have also determined that the 

rule does not involve any of the 

extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 

CFR 46.215 that would require further 

analysis under NEPA. 

Section 810 of ANILCA 

An ANILCA section 810 analysis was 

completed as part of the FEIS process on 

the Federal Subsistence Management 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83627 

Program. 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. The final section 

810 analysis determination appeared in 

the April 6, 1992, ROD and concluded 

that the Program, under Alternative IV 

with an annual process for setting 

subsistence regulations, may have some 

local impacts on subsistence uses, but 

will not likely restrict subsistence uses 

significantly. 

During the subsequent environmental 

assessment process for extending 

fisheries jurisdiction, an evaluation of 

the effects of the subsistence program 

regulations was conducted in 

accordance with section 810. That 

evaluation also supported the 

Secretaries’ determination that the 

regulations will not reach the ‘‘may 

significantly restrict’’ threshold that 

would require notice and hearings 

under ANILCA section 810(a). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule contains existing 

information collections. All information 

collections require approval by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq.). We may not conduct or sponsor, 

and you are not required to respond to, 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. OMB has reviewed and 

approved the information collection 

requirements associated with this 

rulemaking and assigned OMB Control 

Number 1018–0075 (expires March 31, 

2027). This rule makes no substantive 

changes to the currently approved 

information collections. We anticipate a 

minor increase in the estimated number 

of annual responses and annual burden 

hours associated with the currently 

approved FWS Form 3–2321, 

Membership Application. We estimate 

the total burden associated with this 

information collection to be 15,429 

annual responses, 6,953 annual burden 

hours, and no non-hour cost burden. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094) 

Executive Order 14094 reaffirms the 

principles of E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 

and states that regulatory analysis 

should facilitate agency efforts to 

develop regulations that serve the 

public interest, advance statutory 

objectives, and are consistent with E.O. 

12866 and E.O. 13563. Regulatory 

analysis, as practicable and appropriate, 

shall recognize distributive impacts and 

equity, to the extent permitted by law. 

E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that 

regulations must be based on the best 

available science and that the 

rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas. The Secretaries 

conducted this rulemaking in a manner 

consistent with these requirements. 

E.O. 12866, as reaffirmed by E.O. 

13563 and E.O. 14094, provides that the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) in OMB will review all 

significant rules. OIRA has determined 

that this final rule is not significant. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

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

preparation of flexibility analyses for 

rules that will have a significant effect 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, which include small 

businesses, organizations, or 

governmental jurisdictions. In general, 

this final rule will not result in effects 

to the economy. The Departments 

certify 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. 

Congressional Review Act 

Under the Congressional Review Act 

(5 U.S.C. 804(2)), this rule is not a major 

rule. It will not have an effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, will 

not cause a major increase in costs or 

prices for consumers, and will not have 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. 

Executive Order 12630 

Title VIII of ANILCA requires the 

Secretaries to administer a subsistence 

priority on public lands. The scope of 

the 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. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Secretaries have determined and 

certify 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 there is no cost 

imposed on any State or local entities or 

Tribal governments. 

Executive Order 12988 

The Secretaries have determined that 

these regulations meet the applicable 

standards provided in sections 3(a) and 

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

regarding civil justice reform. 

Executive Order 13132 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a federalism summary 

impact statement. Title VIII of ANILCA 

precludes the State from exercising 

subsistence management authority over 

fish and wildlife resources on Federal 

lands unless it meets certain 

requirements. 

Executive Order 13175 

Title VIII of ANILCA does not provide 

specific rights to Tribes for the 

subsistence taking of wildlife, fish, and 

shellfish. However, the Departments 

provided federally recognized Tribes 

and Alaska Native Corporations 

opportunities to consult on this rule. 

Consultation with Alaska Native 

Corporations are based on Public Law 

108–199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 23, 2004, 

118 Stat. 452, as amended by Public 

Law 108–447, div. H, title V, Sec. 518, 

Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267, which 

provides that: ‘‘The Director of the 

Office of Management and Budget and 

all Federal agencies shall hereafter 

consult with Alaska Native Corporations 

on the same basis as Indian tribes under 

Executive Order No. 13175.’’ 

As stated previously under Tribal 

Consultation and Comment, regarding 

this rulemaking, the Departments held 

joint consultations, starting in January 

2022, with federally recognized Tribes 

of Alaska and various Tribal Consortia. 

Later during October–November 2022, 

DOI leadership and the Department of 

Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, held joint 

consultations with various federally 

recognized Tribes in Alaska regarding 

fisheries. 

Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211 requires 

agencies to prepare statements of energy 

effects when undertaking certain 

actions. However, this rule is not a 

significant regulatory action under E.O. 

13211, affecting energy supply, 

distribution, or use, and no statement of 

energy effects is required. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
83628 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects 

36 CFR Part 242 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish and shellfish, 

National forests, Public lands, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Wildlife. 

50 CFR Part 100 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish and shellfish, 

National forests, Public lands, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Wildlife. 

Regulation Promulgation 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Secretaries amend title 

36, part 242, and title 50, part 100, of 

the Code of Federal Regulations, as set 

forth below. 

PART ll—SUBSISTENCE 

MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR 

PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA 

■ 1. The authority citation for both 36 

CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 

continues 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 B—Program Structure 

■ 2. In subpart B of 36 CFR part 242 and 

50 CFR part 100, amend § ll.10 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b), and 

(d)(2); and 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (d)(11) through 

(13). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ll.10 Federal Subsistence Board. 

(a) Authority. The Secretary of the 

Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 

hereby establish a Federal Subsistence 

Board (Board) and delegate to it the 

authority for administering the 

subsistence taking and uses of fish and 

wildlife on public lands and the related 

promulgation and signature authority 

for regulations of subparts C and D of 

this part. The Secretaries retain their 

existing authority to restrict or eliminate 

hunting, fishing, or trapping activities 

that occur on lands or waters in Alaska 

other than public lands when such 

activities interfere with subsistence 

hunting, fishing, or trapping on the 

public lands to such an extent as to 

result in a failure to provide the 

subsistence priority. The Secretaries 

also retain the ultimate responsibility 

for compliance with title VIII of 

ANILCA and other applicable laws and 

maintain oversight of the Board. 

(b) Membership. (1) The voting 

members of the Board are: A Chair who 

possesses personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska to be appointed by the 

Secretary of the Interior with the 

concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture; five public members who 

possess personal knowledge of and 

direct experience with subsistence uses 

in rural Alaska, three of whom shall be 

nominated or recommended by 

federally recognized Tribal governments 

in Alaska and shall possess personal 

knowledge of and direct experience 

with subsistence uses in rural Alaska 

(including Alaska Native subsistence 

uses), to be appointed by the Secretary 

of the Interior with the concurrence of 

the Secretary of Agriculture; the Alaska 

Regional Director, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; the Alaska Regional 

Director, National Park Service; the 

Alaska Regional Forester, U.S. Forest 

Service; the Alaska State Director, 

Bureau of Land Management; and the 

Alaska Regional Director, Bureau of 

Indian Affairs. Each Federal agency 

member of the Board may appoint a 

designee. 

(2) Public Board members serve at the 

will of the Secretaries. The Secretaries 

maintain their authorities for 

replacement of Federal agency 

members, public Board members, or any 

designees. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) A quorum consists of five 

members when the total number of 

Board members is nine or fewer and six 

members when the total number of 

Board members is 10 or higher. 

* * * * * 

(11) The Secretary of the Interior, or 

the Secretary of Agriculture with respect 

to a unit of the National Forest System, 

retains authority to (at any time) stay, 

modify, or disapprove any action taken 

by the Board. 

(12) Special actions of the Board are 

not effective unless ratified by the 

Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary 

of Agriculture with respect to a unit of 

the National Forest System. To allow an 

opportunity for the Secretaries to 

modify, disapprove, stay, or expressly 

ratify any emergency or temporary 

special action taken by the Board, such 

Board actions generally will not become 

effective until 10 calendar days after the 

date of the action (or any longer period 

specified by the Board when taking the 

action), unless the Board determines 

that the situation calls for responsive 

action within a shorter period of time. 

If no action is taken by the Secretary to 

modify, disapprove, stay, or expressly 

ratify within 10 days (or the longer or 

shorter period specified by the Board), 

the emergency or temporary special 

action will be deemed automatically 

ratified for purposes of this subpart. The 

Secretaries may revisit a prior 

ratification (express or automatic) of a 

Board action at any time. For other 

Board actions (i.e., actions that follow 

the regular adoption process in § ll

.18), the Secretaries retain, and will 

exercise when appropriate, their 

authority to modify or disapprove 

actions prior to publication in the 

Federal Register, as is the current 

practice. 

(13) For Board actions such as cyclic 

regulation revisions, customary and 

traditional use determinations, 

subsistence resource regions, rural 

determinations, and requests for 

reconsideration, when the Secretaries 

deem appropriate, they will exercise 

their authority to modify or disapprove 

the actions prior to publication of the 

actions in the Federal Register. The 

Board’s special actions, both emergency 

and temporary, are often based on timesensitive harvest opportunities for rural 

Alaskans or critical conservation 

concerns for a species and are valid 

upon decision by the Board. However, 

the Secretaries may at any time rescind, 

modify, disapprove, or stay a special 

action by the Board. 

(14) The Secretaries may establish 

term limits for service of Board 

members in such circumstances as the 

Secretaries deem appropriate. 

* * * * * 

Joan Mooney, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, 

Exercising the Delegated Authority of the 

Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management 

and Budget, Department of the Interior. 

Dr. Homer Wilkes, 

Undersecretary, Natural Resources and 

Environment, Department of Agriculture. 

[FR Doc. 2024–24088 Filed 10–15–24; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4334–13–P; 3410–11–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 9 

[PS Docket Nos. 21–479, 18–64; FCC 24– 

78; FR ID 250243] 

Facilitating Implementation of Next 

Generation 911 Services (NG911); 

Location-Based Routing for Wireless 

911 Calls; Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1