- Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 232 1 Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

(FRL1349-4; Docket No. OAQPS-79-09]

National Visibility Goal for Federal

Class I Areas; Identification of

Mandatory Class I Federal Areas

Where Visibility Is an Important Value

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency.,

ACTION: Final action.

SUMMARY: Section 169A(a)(2) of the

Clean Air Abt'requires EPA to -

promulgate, after consultation with the

Secretary of the Department of the

Interior (DOI), a list of mandatory class I

Federhl areas where visibility is an

important value. On February 12, 1979

(44 FR 8909) the Environmental -

Protection Agency (EPA) proposed, after

consultation with DOI, a list of .

mandatory class I Federal areas where

visibility is an important value.'EPA is

today promulgating the proposed list

without a change.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 21, 1979.

ADDRESSES: This promulgation and

background information relevant to it

are available for public inspection

during normal business hours at the EPA

Central Docket Section CDocketNo.

OAQPS-79-09] Room 2903B, 401 Mvf

Street S.W.,. Washington, D).C. 20460. A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATIO CONTACT:

Johnnie L. Pearson, Standards

Implementation Branch, Control

Programs Development Division; Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency (MD--

15), Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina 27711. Phone: (919) 541-5497.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Clean Air Act Amendments of

1977 added Section 169A. to the Clean

Air Act. In this Section, Congress

established, as a national goal, "the

prevention of any future, and the

remedying of any existing, impairment

of visibility in mandatory class I Federal

areas which impairment results from

manmade air pollution." Mandatory

class I Federal areas are composed of all

international parks, all national

wilderness areas and-memorial parks

which exceed 5,000 acres in size and all

national parks which exceed 6,000 acres

in size. These areas must have been in

existence on the date of enactment of

the 1977.amendments and may notbe

redesignated. There are 158 such areas.

,An iniftfal step in developing programs

which make reasonable progress toward

meeting this national goal is set out in

Section 169A(a)(2), which requires that

DOL in consultation with otherFederal

Land Managers, review all mandatory

class I Federal areas and identify those

areas where visibility is an important

value. EPA, after consulting'with DOL

must promulgate a list of mandatory

class I Federal areas in which it

determines visibility is an important

value.

On October 14, 1977 (42 FR 55280) DOI

published notice seeking public

comment on its preliminary

determination that 153 of the 159

mandatory class I Federal areas

possessed visibility as aninportant

value. These 153 areas were identified

by a task force, of whichEPA was a

consulting member, that created and

applied the following criteria:

1. Does the legislation for the area

indicate that scenic value was an

important consideration for establishing

the area? or,

Is the area possessed of scenic values

that are-important to public enjoyment?

2. Are sceniovalues of the area

primarily in the form of panoramic

background, intermediate or foreground

views?

3. Do natural sources of visibility

impairment seriously affect the ability of

the public to appreciate visibility as an

important value?

4.For those areas in which natural

sources of vfsibility impairment

seriously affect public appreciation of

scenicvalues, is the magnitude of scenic

value sufficient to warrant protection

from man-caused sources?

Theprocessby which the criteria was applied to each Federal mandatory class

I area involved (1) the participation: of

the individual park superintendents and

forest rangers who surveyed each area,

and (2) a review of the park

superintendents' and forest rangers'

recommendations by the regional staffs

responsible for the class I areas in their

region and by the Washington, D.C. staff

who consulted with the regional staffs.

Through this consultation process, each

of the 158 mandatory-class I Federal

areas was evaluated and tested against

the criteria.

-- Review and analysis of public,

comments and DOI's preliminary

findings produced one change in the

criteria used to identify whether

visibility is an important value. The

Character of the Scenic Values (Step 31

used in the logic network for evaluating

class I areas was changed so that only

those areas which possess no sweeping

view of background features,

panoramas, or views of middleground or

background features would fail to be

identified to possess visibility as an

important'value in this step. Underithe

preliminary criteria, an area was'

identified as not possessing visibility as

an important value if views were

primarily, or mostly, of foreground

features less than one mile distant,

although one of more background or

middleground view.or panorama was

present. The one-mile cutoff Is used

because it is the shortest distance at

which a broad perception of an area is

possible,,i.e., it allows an individual to

observe overall patterns, shapes, and

textures of the area. The one-mile cutoff

is consistent with definitions of

foreground, middleground, and

background presented in the USDA,

Forest Service Landscape Management

Book, Volume I.

The application of the revised criteria

identified three areas which possess

visibility as an important value In

addition to the 153 areas so Identified In

the preliminary findings. The three

additional areas are: Mammoth Cave

National Park, Kentucky; Moosehorn

Wilderness, Maine; and Medicine Lake

Wilderness, Montana. DOI published

this final list of 156 areas on February

24, 1978 (43 FR 7721).

On February 12, 1979, EPA proposed

to list these same 156 areas.

EPA RevieW

From the earliest stages of

development, EPA followed DOI's

progress in developing and applying the

criteria by which the list of class I

visibility protection areas was

produced. EPA also reviewed'the

criteria and the comments obtained from,

public meetings conducted throughout

the country. Finally, the workbooks,

containing narratives provided by

Federal Land Managers, were reviewed

with particular attention paid to the

logic behind the application of criteria to

specific areas and the extensive public

comment received. It is EPA's judgment

that the Federal class I areas meeting

visibility protection requirements as

determined by DOI are correct.

Therefore, EPA is promulgating the

proposed list without any changes In

designations. It should be noted,

however, that the February 12, 1979

proposal of this action (44 FR 89009)

contained an error. Although Minarets

Wilderness in California was evaluated

as having visibility as an important

value, it was inadvertently omitted from

the February 12, 1979 proposal and is

properly listed in this promulgation.

Since Minarets Wilderness was

Included on the twice published DOI list

69122

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69122 1979
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 232 / Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

of potentially eligible areas, and since

EPA's proposal specifically mentioned

the only two negative identifications on

that list. EPA does not believe it is

necessary to repropose Minarets

Wilderness and as such promulgates it

at this time.

Significant Comments

Both written comments and comments,

from the public hearings conducted by

DOI were considered in this

promulgation. The significant comments

are discussed below.

Most speakers at the public hearings

disagreed with the premise that a

mandatory class I area could exist

where visibility is not an important

value. The commenters felt the intent of

Congress and the national goal was to

include all mandatory class I Federal

areas in the visibility protection

program.

EPA has found that visibility is an

important value in 156 out of 158

mandatory class I areas. The two

wildernesses which were shown not to

have visibility as an important value

(Rainbow Lake, Wisconsin and

Bradwell Bay, Florida) did not meet the

criteria established by DOL In requiring

an analysis of the visibility values in all

mandatory class I-Federal areas before

determining whether visibility

protection is necessary, Congress

clearly did not necessarily intend that

visibility be identified as-animportant

value in all class I areas. See also HR.

Rep. No. 95-294, 95th Cong., ist Sess. 205

(1977).

The greatest number of comment

letters received pertained to the lack of

information concerning the impact of

listing an area as one where visibility is

an important value. The* commenters

expressed concern over the extent of

social and economic impacts on

communities surrounding class I areas.

Commenters felt that there was a need

to'evaluate more fully the impact of

natural sources, investigate the existing

air quality in and around class I areas,

and list sources which may potentially

be required to install Best Available

Retrofit Technology (BART).

Specifically, two commenters opposed

the designations of Mount Zirkel

Wilderness, Rawah Wilderness, and

Rocky Mountain National Park as areas

where visibility is an important value

due to the uncertainty of how the

designations would affect the local

economy. In addition, groups in the

Pacific Northwest protested the

reduction or abolition of prescribed

burning. One commenter expressed the

same concern for forest products

industries located near Cohutta

Wilderness, Okefenokee Swamp, and

Wolf Island Wilderness.

As many commenters recognize, to

assess, at the present time, the impact of

a future regulatory program under

Section 169A is neither possible nor

required by law. In Section 169A

Congress explicitly called for the listing

of areas subject to regulation far in

advance of the time when EPA must

develop specific regulations for the

States which contain guidelines and

techniques for making reasonable

progress towards the national goal.

Congress revealed its sensitivity to the

economic impact of any Section 169A

regulations by making a cost and energy

analysis part of the control technology

standard and providing the possibility

for exemption to that standard.

However, there is no indication that

economic impacts be solnehow

considered-in advance of the

regulations themselves-In compiling

the Section 169A(a)(2) list. A regulatory

analysis is being prepared and these

issues, along with those pertaining to

prescribed burning, will be dealt with

there. This analysis will also address

the elements of economic impact set out

in Section 317.

The second most mentioned commbnt

was the subjective nature of the

evaluation criteria. Two commenters felt

key terms such as "important." "scenic

value," "public appreciation," and "seriously affect" should have been

defined prior to the evaluations. Other

comments expressed concern over the

dependence of the criteria upon highly

vafiable human judgments, and felt a

need to measure objectively the

visibility of vistas from their associated

viewpoints and incorporate such

measurements Into the evaluation.

While EPA acknowledges that in

some respects the established criteria

are subjective, it believes that the

subjectiveness of these evaluations is to

some extent inherent in the task of

assigning "value" to the visibility of an

area. Congress required DOI and EPA to

accomplish this task in a very short time

and did not anticipate that technical

problems involved in objective

measurements of visibility impairment

would be solved before the task could

be completed. Since a technical base

broad enough to more quantitatively

assess the class I area evaluations was

not available in the time frame specified

by Congress, criteria agreed on by EPA

and DOI were developed which

established certain priorities and were

readily available for use by Federal

Land Managers. Sections 165(d) and

169A which, among other things, charge

Federal Land Managers with an

"affirmative responsibility" to protect

visibility values, together show the great

weight Congress intended the judgment

of Federal Land Managers to have. A

technical base for use in future

regulations in response to Section 169A

Is now being established which will

quantify and define many of the

concerns mentioned above.

One commenter, noting that the effect

of the listing will not be precisely known

until the Section 169A regulations are

proposed, suggested that promulgation

of the final list be postponed-until after

the hearing on the proposed regulations

and that the public record be left open

during the interim. EPA believes such an

approach would be contrary to the

Congressional scheme-clearly set out

in Section 169A-of promulgating the

list of areas in advance, even of the

report to Congress containing the

technical outline for the eventual

visibility regulations.

This does not mean, however, that

future public comment and its

consideration byEPA as to the specific

visibility objectives, values, and

important vistas of each area is

precluded. EPA recognizes that the

future rulemaking under Section 169A

will require such additional areaspecific Snalysis. At EPA's request. DOI

and the Forest Service have conducted a

preliminary analysis of the range of

scenic vistas, the nature of visual values

and a preliminary estimate of the degree

of existing natural and man-made

visibility Impairment found in each area.

EPA expects that the future proposal of

visibility regulations will require States

and Federal Land Managers to develop

such additional area-specific

assessments. Both this process, and the

proposal itself. will be subject to public

comment. 'o the extent that further

comment and additional analysis (or

anything else) affects the basis for the

list. EPA will propose appropriate

revisions.

Several comments asserted that

Section 169A is limited to vistas wiqhin

the boundaries of mandatory class I

Federal areas, and. accordingly, that the

EPA and DOI lists are defective because

there is no indication that this alleged

"jurisdictional limit" was observed by

the persons engaged In the identification

process. This observation overlooks

DOrs specific discussion of this issue in

Its February 24.1978, notice (43 FR 7721,

7724). DOI acknowledged the dispute as

to whether vistas without the

boundaries of the subject class I areas

are protected, but noted that it need not

reach the issue because the 156

mandatory class I Federal areas

identified were based on views within

69:123

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69123 1979
69124- Federal Register'/ Vol. 44, No. 23 / Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

the areas- seen from within the areas.

The two areas not identifiedpossessed

no out-of-area vistas which woul&

otherwise qualify them for the list.

EPA also recognizes that there is an

issue as tothe asserted "jurisdictional

limits" of Section 169A. EPA is,

announcing its preliminary position and

soliciting comments on a number of

issues in the Advance Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, published

elsewhere in this Federal Register For

the purposes of this list under'Section.

169(a](2], however, EPA has adopted

DO's, approach and considered only

vistas within an area as observed from a

location within, the same area. The two

mandatory class IFederal areas

identified. as not possessfngvisilility as

an importantvalue do not have out-ofpark vistas which, if considered, would

warrant their listing.

-Both written comments and those

received from public hearings felt

criterion 4 (for those areas in which,

natural sources of visibility impairment

seriously affect public appreciation of

scenic values, is the magnitude of the

scenic value sufficient to warrant

protection from man-made causesl wasvague. One written, comment suggested

the elimination of criterion 4, calling it

"inappropriate and illogical." This

commenter felt that controlling manmade sources when natural sources'of

impairment degrade the scenic value

uuch that public enjoyment is

,diminished is not valid. Onr the other

hand, comments obtained from the"

public hearings expressed the opinorr

that man-made pollution cart

significantly increase visibility

inipairment even when natural sourcesare present.

It is important- to consider that while

natural visibility impairment does exist

in some class I areas, it will not only'

vctry in magnitude, but also in duration.

The criterion was established to

recognize natural sources of impairment

which may be of consequence, but it

also allows areas with particularly

significant scenic values protection from

man-made impairment While the

magnitude and duration of natural

impairment may be great, the imposition

of man-made impairment can

significantly reduce the visual

appreciation of an area even though it is

experiencing some form of natural

visibility impairment. Therefore. EPA

agrees with the comment that ever in

areas with substantial natural visibility

impairment, important visibility values

exist and cam be enhanced by control of

man-made sources of visibility'

impairment.

DOI public hearings received

numerous comments, on the importance

of nighttime sky 'viewing. Many

commenters felt this should. be included

in the criteria to evaluate the importance

of visibility to a class I area. EPA

acknowledges that nighttime skis, are

an importantpart of the wildnerness:

experience, especially to campers, and

backpackers. EPA feels that this aspect

can be considered a visibility value for

use in establishing visibility objectives

by theFederal Land Managers. Itis not

considered, however, a major factor in

distinguishing between class I areas or

evaluating the importance of visibility in

one class. I area as oppose&to another.

Indeed EPAreceived no written

,comments suggesting that the two areas

excluded from the listpromulgated,

today should have been. included

because of their nighttime skies.

Several comments received discussed

individual wildernesses and reasons

why they should or shouldnotbe

included as areas warranting visibility

protection. Whilemost questions are

answered in. the evaluations of the

workbooks, a few will be discussed

here.

Although Brigantine Wilderness is

used primarily for fshing and

bfrdwatching, the"scenIc value of the

wilderness cannot be separated from. the

total enjoyment of the park. Even though

fishing is the primary attraction, the

views one sees are part of the iotal

experience which the public-has come- to

enjoy. Therefore, visibility is an

important value contributingtd the total

enjoyment of this area'.

Breton. Wilderness was another area

for which one commenter urged

deletion. Er response to the comment

that the area is not eligible because of

size limitations. EPA has noted that DOI

promulgated Breton at 5000 acres and it

therefore meets the size requirements

set by Congress. The comment also

mentioned the poormaintenance of thearea. Poor maintenance, however, is

irrelevant to whether Congress intended:

visibility to be protected. in the nation's

wildlife areas. Breton Wilderness meets

the requirements set forth-in the criteria,

and it is EPA's responsibility., to

.acknowledge this- and designate it as an area warranting visibility protection.

In the preliminary evaluation by the

National Park Service, Mammoth Cave

National7Park was excluded from the

list of areas having visibility as an

importantvalue. Evidencewas

presented attthe public hearings which

supported the inclusion of the parkin

the list. This evidence includedlegislative history which. showed the

surface area was a major consideration.

in the designation of Mammoth Cave as

a national park and. as a result thfis park

was proposed by DOI and EPA.

Comment was also received

concerning the! independence of EPA's

evaluation of class I areas under

consideration for visibility protection.

One commenter felt. "EPA should not

parrot DOI's list" and another

commenter did not want EPA to "rubber

stamp" DOa's designations. EPA has,

however, conducted an independent and

thorough: evaluation of the workbooks

submitted. by the Federal Land

Managers and hasi taken into

consideration. comments supplied at the

public hearings held around the country.

Numerous other written and oral

comments, were received which

concerned the upcoming regulations.

These commenters did not object, to the

list, but were more concerned with the

potenti l impact- it would cause. These

questions will be reviewed and

discussed in the regulatory procedure

under Sections 165 and 169A of the

Clean Air Act.

This promulgation is issued under the

authority granted in Sections 101(b)(1),

110, 169A(a](2), and 301(al of the Clean

Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 74 ]b).

7410, 7491(a](Z]. 7601(al.

Rated- November 21, 1979.

Iouglas M. Costle,

A inistraton

PART 81-DESIGNATION OF AREAS

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING

PURPOSES

Part 81 of Chapter I. Title, 40 ofthe

Code of Federal Regulations is amended

by adding Subpart D as follows:

Subpart D-tdentflication of Mandatory

Crass t Federat Areas Where Visibility Is sn

Important Value.

e=

81.400

81.401.

81.402

81.403.

81.404

81.405

81.405

81A07

81.408

81.409:

81.410

81.411

81.412.

81.413

81.414

81.415

81.41&

81.417

81.418

8:.419

81.420

81.421

81.422

81.423

81.424

81.425

81.426

Scope.

Alabama.

Alaska.

Arizona.

Arkansas.

California.

Colorado.

Florida.

Georgia.

Hawaii.

Idaho.

Kentucky'.

Louisiana.

Maine.

Michigan.

Minnesota.

Missouri.

Montana.

Nevada.

New Hampshire.

Newlersey.

New Mexico.

North Carolina.

North Dakota.

Oklahoma.

Oregon.

South Carolina.

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69124 1979
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 232 / Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations 69125

81.427 South Dakota.

81.428 Tennessee.

81.429 Texas.

81.430 Utah.

81.431 VermonL

81.432 Virgin Islands.

81.433 Virginia.

81.434 Washington.

81.435 West Virginia.

81.436 Wyoming.

81.437 New Brunswick, Canada.

Authority.-Seds. 101(b) (1), 110, 169A(a) (2),

and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended

(42 U.S.C. 7401(b), 7410, 7491(a)(2), 7601(a)).

Subpart D-dentification of

Mandatory Class I Federal Areas

Where Visibility Is an Important Value

§ 81.400 Scope.

Subpart D, § § 81.401 through 81.437

lists those mandatory Federal Class I

areas, established under the Clean Air

Act-Amendments of 1977, where the

Administrator, in consultation with the

Secretary of the Interior, has determined

visibility to be an important value. The

following listing of areas where

visibility is an important value

represents an evaluation of all

international parks (IP), national

wilderness areas (Wild) exceeding 5,000

acres, national memorial parks (NMP)

exceeding 5,000 acres, and national

parks (NP) exceeding 6,000 acres, in

existence on August 7,1977.

Consultation by EPA with the Federal

Land Managers involved: the

Department of Interior (USD1), NationalPark Service (NPSj, and Fish and

Wildlife Service (FWS); and the

-Department of Agriculture (USDA),

Forest Service (FS).

§ 81.401 Alabama.

PubLc law Federa land

Area nare Acreage estatlshing manager

S-9sey Wild 12.646 93-622 USDA-FS

§ 81.402 Alaska.

Pulc Law Federal land

Area name Acreage estabig mager

Being Sea WId- 41.113 91-622 USDI-FWS

Mount McKinley NP_ 1.949,493 64-353 USDI-NPS

Simeonof Wild - 25.141 94-557 USDI-FWS

Tuxedrni Wid 6.402 91-504 USDI-WS

§ 81.403 Arizona.

Public Law Federal land

- Area name Acreage ealashing Manager

Chcahua National

Monurnent WildChcahua Wld

Galiuro VWddGrand Canyon UP..-

Mazat;1 l-- -

Mount Baldy WildForst

Petrified Foreat NP.....

9.440

18.000

52717

1,176.913

205.137

6.975

93.493

94-567

88-577

88-577

65-277

88-577

91-504

85-58

USD1-UPs

USDA-FS

USDA-FS

USD-4IS

USDA-FS

USDA-FS

USDI-NPS

Pubic Law Federal land

Ara na Aceg -d") MePine Mountain Wid- 2D.061 92-2 USDA-S

Saguaro Wild _- 71.400 94657 USOD-FS

Sierra Ancha Wild. 20.0 88-577 USDA-FS

Suporstiton Wld - 124.117 8W-577 USOA-FS

Sycamor Canyon Wild 47.757 92-241 USa-FS

§ 81.404 Arkansas.

Pubki law Federal land

Area name Acreage estakig maager

Camey ek WCdrook _ 14344 93-822 USOA-FS

Upper Buffalo Wid-_ 9.912 93-22 USDA-FS

81.405. CalIfornia.

Area name Acreage Putft Law Federal land

Agus T21A 15.934 93-.... USDA-PS.

Ca'bou Wild. 19,080 88-87"/__ USDA-FS.

Cucanonga 9022 86-77.- USDA-S.

Desolation 63.469 91-82- USOA-S.

Dome Land 62.206 88-"77 USD-S

EngWant wld. 104.311 93-32- USDA-S

Ho seo-$.. 47.916 85,5-87.. USDA-PS

John Mui 484,673 W-77_ USOA-PS.

wil

Joshua Tree 429.690 94-67_ USD-PS

WaL

KaserV ,d..- 22.45 94-M-7 US1PS

lrrgs Canyon 459.994 7&-424- US06

NP.

Lassen 105.800 64-184-.. USP -. volcanic NP.

Lava Beds 25.640 92-493 -_ USD S

WA(L

Mable 213.743 88-7" UDAMountain

Minarets Wd. 109484 -77 USDAMoketume 50.400 85-7 _ USDA-FS.

WILi

Pinnacles Wild 12,952 9448W -. USD6-UPS

Point Reyes 25,37o S4-544.... USD6-oPS.

Wild. 94-5W7

Redwood NP. 27.792 90-545- USD.

SanGaiel 38.137 90-318 -. USDA-S.

Vld.

San Gorgonio 34.644 88-77 USDA-FS.

San Jacnlo 20,564 86 577- USAWI&

San Rated 142.722 90-271- USDAwild.

Sequoia NP... 3K8642 26 StatL9U7 USD6-NI'S. (51st

Cong.). South Warner 68,507 86-577 USAThousand 15,695 88-577 - USOA-FS

Lakes Wild.

VentanaWid. 95,152 91-58_ USOA-MS.

Yolla-olly. 109.091 88-577_ USDA-FS.

Yosernit NP-- 759.172 58-49- USOD-NIS.

§ 81.406 Colorado.

Area nme Acreage Pubic Law Federal land

W" 'nanager

Black Canyon of the

Gunnison WWL Eagles Nest Wild_

Flat Tops Wild -

Great Sand unes W'd

La GstaWd Wl- Maroon BellsSnowmas Wild11,160 LSD6-N

133,910 94-352 USDA-FS.

23.30 4-148 USDA-S

33.450 94-557 USD-S

48.436 88-577 USDA-FS.

71.060 68-577 USDA-PS

Area trm Acreage Puic: Law Federal land

estatb irg nager

Mea Verde NP -- 51,488 .59-353 USo-UPS.

mot i ra w 72.472 88-577 USARawah Wid- 26.674 83-77 USDA-FS.

RockY Mcwah NP-- 353.138 63-238 USDNIPS.

Wn~ache Vad. 400=90 93-=3 USDA-PS.

West Elkl ~d _ 61.412 88-6"77 USOA-FS.

§ 81.407 Florida.

Aream 're Acreage Pubcl* a w Federal land

estabbal*ng manager

Cah&36aOhtkaWil d 23,3o S4-657 USD-FWS.

E"r s NP-.. 1.397,429 73-267 USDk4S

St. Marks Wld 17.745 93-632 USDtWS

§81.408 Georgia.

Am an. Acreage Pubc Law Federal Land -stk* Maagm

Cdxxwd _- 33=7 93-22 -USDA-FS

Okaknokee 1Wid- 343,85 s329 USm.Fm

Wc klWand Wild 5.126 93-632 USDIfWS.

§ 81.409 HawaLl

Ararrw Acreage Pubichma Federalland -alhn manager

Haleakala NP_ 27.208 87-74 USD-4PS.

Hawa8 Vol arm . 217029 64-171 USD6-PS

§ 81.410 Idaho. -

Ame Hare Acreage Pubic Law Federal Land ESstiv~ UMger

Oilers of th 43,243 91-504 __ USD1-N&S.

Moon VS&

HFAf Canyon 8380 94-199-_ USOA-MS

W~ild . Salooth Wild 216383 9-400__ USDA-PS.

Salaay- 988770 88-677-. USDA-MS

Yelowslone 31.488 17 StaL 32-

NP %

(42nd Ccrg.). USD6-NS.

a el Canyom Widemes 19270 acres overalL ofwhffa

10M.90 acres ame Ina Oreona and 83.0 acres are im Idaho,

b SdwaY itlterrootWilderness.24wo. acres oreralt~of

which Oft7=0 aces are I Idaho and z50 acres are lix

c yelows toe Nations! Par 2.219=3 acres overal of

whIch Z =5 Acres are in Wymin& 167.8=4 acres are in

.6fntarna. and 31.48 acres are in Idaho.

§81.411 Kentucky.

Area am Acreage Pub:c law Federal land e manager

Manrroe Cave NP._ 51303 69-283 USES-NS.

§ 81.412 Louisiana.

Area m Acreage Putic law Federalland

G$Mbt*. _ manage r

Brelon Wid 5.000+ 93-m3 USD(-EwS.

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69125 1979
69126 Federal Register / Vol. 44, No. 232 / Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

§ 81.413 Maine;

Area name Acreage" Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Acadia NP................. 37,503 65-278 USDI-NPS. Moosehom Wild .......... 7.501 USDI--WS.

(Edmunds Unit)...... (2,782) 91-504 (Baring Unit) .............. (4,719) 93-632

N

§ 81.414 Michigan.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Isle Royale NP. 542.428 71.-835 USDI-NPS. Seney Wild............. 25,150 91-504 USDI-FWS.

§81.415 Minnesota. -

Area name ACreage Public law Federal land

esiablishing manager

Boundary Waters

Canoe Area Wild.- 747.840 99-577 USDA-FS.

Voyageurs NP .......- 114,964 99-261 USDI-NPS.

§ 81.416 Missouri.

Area name Acreage Public Law Federal land

establishing manager

Hercules-Glades Wild. 12315 94-557 USDA-FS.

Mingo Wild.......... -- 8,000 94-557 USDI-fWS.

§ 81.417 Montana.

Area name Acreage Public Law - Federal land

establishing manager

Anaconda. 157.603 88-577.- USDA-FS.

Pintlar Wil

Bob Marshall 950,000 88-577..-." USDA-FS.

Wild.

Cabinet 94,272 88-577 .... USDA-FS.

Mountains

Wid.

Gates of the 28,562 88-577.... USDA-FS. Mt Wild.

Glacier NP.... 1.012.599 61-171--. USDI-NPS.

Medicine Lake 11.366 94-557- USDI-FWS.

Wild.

Mission 73,877 93-632.-- USDE-FS.

Mountain

Wild.

Red Rock 32,350 94-557.... USDI-FWS.

Lakes Wild.

Scapegoat 239.295 92-395.- USDA-FS.

Wild.

Selway. 251,930 88-577..... USDA-FS.

Bitterroot

Widd*.

U. L Bend '20,890 94-557..... USDI-FWS.

Wild.

Yellowstone 167,624 17 Stat 32 USDI-NPS.

NP b (42nd

Cong.).

a Selwoy-Blitterroot Wilderness, 1.240.700 acres overall, of

which 0a8,770 acres are in Idaho and 251.930 acres are in

Montana.

b Yellowstone National Park. 2219,737 acres overall of which 2,020.625 acres are in Wyoming. 167,624 acres are in

Montana, and 31,488 acres are in Idaho.

§81.418 Nevida. "

Area name -Acreage Public Law Federal land

estabui~dng manager

Jarbldge Wild........, 64,667 88-577 USDA-FS.

§ 81.419 New, Hampshire.

Area name Acreage Public Law Federal land

establishing manager

Great Gulf Wild....... 5,552 88-577 USDA-FS.

Presidential Range-Dry'

River Wild............. 20,000 93-622 USDA-FS.

§ 81.420 New Jersey

Area name Acreage Public Law Federal land

establishing manager

_Blrigantine Wld...... 6,603 93-632 USDI-FWS.

§ 81.421 New Mexico

Area name Acreage Public Law Fedelal land

establishing manager

Bandelier Wild-........ 23,267 94-567' USDI-NPS.

Bosque del Apache

Wild.......... 80,850 93-632 USDI-FWS.

Carlsbad Caverns NP- 46,435 71-216 USDI-NPS.

Gila Wild............ 433.690 88-577 USDA-FS.

Pecos Wild-.......... 167.416 88-577 USDA-FS.

-Salt Creek Wild.__8.. 8500 , 91-504 USDI-FWS.

San Pedro Parks Wild. 41,132 88-577 USDA-FS.

Wheeler Peak Wild-- 6,027 88-577 USDA-FS.

White Mountain Wild...- 31,171 88-577 USDA-FS.

§ 81'425 Oregon.

Area name Acreage Publiclaw Federal land.

establishing manager

Crater Lake NP ....... 160.290 57-121 USDANPS.

Diamond Peak Wild.-.... 36,637 88-577 'USDA-FS.

Eagle Cap Wild...... 293.476 88-577 USDA-FS.

Gearhart Mountain

Wild. ........... 18.709 .88-577 USDA-Ft.

Hells Canyon Wild._ 108,900 94-199 USDA-FS.

Kalmipsls Wild..... 76,900 88-577 USDA-FS.

Mountain Lakes Wild..-, 23,071 88-577 USDA-FS.

Mount Hood Wild _.." 14.160 88-577 USDA-FS.

Mount Jefferson Wild. 100,206 90-548 USDA-FS.

Mount Washington

Wild .................... 46,116 88-577 USDA-FS.

Strawberry Mountain Wild ................ 33,003 88-577 USDA-FS.

Three Sisters Wild....... 199.902 88-577 USDAFS.

a Hells Canyon Wilderness. 192.700 acres overall, of which

108,900 acres are In Oregon. and 83,800 acres are In Idaho.

§ 81.426 South Carolina.

7 Area name Acreage' Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Cape Remain Wild..... 28,000 -93-632 USDI-FWS.

§ 81.427 South Dakota.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

estabishing manager

Badlands Wild. .......... 64,250 94-567 USDI-NPS.

Wind Cave NP...-...... 28.090 57-16 USDI-NPS.

§ 81.428 Tennessee.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing nManager

Great Smoky

Mountalns NP ......... 241,207 6-268 USDI-NPS.

Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wild b ......................... 3,832 93-622 USDANPS.

a Joyce Kilmer.Sllckrock Wilderness. 14,033 acres overall, of

which 1021 acres are in North Carolina. and 3.0b3 acres are in Tennessee.

b Great Smoky Mountains National Park. 514,763 acres overall, of which 273,551 acres are In North Carolina, and

"41.207 acres are In Tennessee,

§ 81.429 Texas.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal Land

establishing Manager

Big Bend NP ................ 708,118 74-157 USDI-NPS.

Guadalupe Mountains

NP. ............... 76,292 89-667 USDI-NPS

§ 81.430 Utah.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establtshing manager

Arches NP ................ 65,098 92-155 USDI-NPS.

Bryce Canyon NP...-.... 35,832 68-277 USDI-NPS,

Canyonlands NP ....... 337.570 88-590 USDI-NPS,

Capitol Reef NP ........ 221,896 92-507 USDI-NPS.

Zion NP................. 142462 68-3 USDI-NPS,

§ 81.431 Vermont

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Lye Brook Wild.......... 12,430 93-622 USDA-FS

§ 81.432 Virgin Islands.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Virgin Islands NP .......... 12.295 84-925 USDI-NPS,

§ 81.433 Virginia.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

James River Face Wild 8,703 93-622 USDA-FS, Shenandoah NP...... 190.535 69-268 USDI-NPS,

§ 81.434 Washington.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Alpine Lakes 303,508 94-357......... USDA-F

Wild.

Glacier Peak 464,258 9-577 ........... USDA-FS.

Wild.

Goat Rocks t2680 88-577 ........ USDA-FS.

Wild.

Mount Adams 32,356 88-577........ USDA-FS.

Wild.

Mount Raner 235,239 30s tal 993 USDI-NPS

NP. (55th

Cong.).

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69126 1979
Federal Register / Vol. 44,

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establshing manager

-North 503,277 90-554 - USDI-NPS.

Cascades

NP.

Olymprc NP_ 892,578 75-778 . USDI-NPS.

Pasayten id. -505.524 90-544 USDA-FS.

§ 81.435 West Virginia.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing mager

Dolly Sods Wkd._.. 10.215 * 93-622 USDA-FS.

Otter Creek Wid.:. 20,000 93-622 USDA-PS.

§ 81.436 Wyoming.

Area name -Acreage Public law Federal land

establihing manager

BddgerWild. 392.160 88-77 - USDA-FS.

Fidzpatrick 191.103 94-567.....-.. USDA-FS.

Wild.

Grand Teton 305.504 81-787 - USD,-NPS.

NP.

North 351.104 88-577 - USDA-PS.

Absaroka

Wild.

Teton Wild 557.311 SS-S77 USDA-PS.

Washalde Wild 688.584 92-476 - USDA-PS.

Yellowstone 2,020,625 17 Stat. 32 USDI-NPS.

NP =. (42d

Cong.).

a YellowstoneNational Park. 2 7219,37 acres overall, of

which 2,o20,625 acres are in Wyomin .167,624 acres are in

Montana. and 31,488 acres axe in Idaho.

§ 81.437 New Brunick, Canada.

Area name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Roosevelt Campobello

International Park- 2721 - 88-363 Not appliesbie.

§ 81.422 'North Carolina.

Area name Acreage, Public law Federal land

estabishing manager

Great Smoky

Mountains NP *_ 273.551 69-268 USDI-NPS.

Joyce Kilmer-Slickock

Wild b 10,201 93-622 USDA-FS.

tinvlte Gorge Wild- 7.575 68-577 USDA-FS.

Shining Rock Wild- 13.350 88-577 USDA-FS.

Swanguarter Wild 9.000 94-557 USDI-FWS.

a Great Smoky Mountains National Park. 514.758 acres

overall, of which 273,'51 acres are in North Carolina. and

241.207 acres are in Tennessee.

b Joyce Kllmer-Slickrock Wilderness, 14.033 acres overalL

of which 10.201 acres are in North Carolina. and 3.32 acres

are in Tennessee.

§ 81.423 North Dakota.

Area Name Acreage Public law Federal land

establishing manager

Lostwood Wild- ._- 557 93-632- USDI-WS.

Theodore Roosevelt,

NMP, 69.675 80-38 USDI-NPS.

No. 232 / Friday, November 30, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

§ 81.424 Oklahoma.

Area Nuns Acreage P btw Federal lad

Wichita Mountans Wid 6900 91-504 USDI-WS.

[FR Do. 79-351 Filed 21-194 -Vt &A5 am]

BILLING CODE 6580-01-1

69127

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 69127 1979