Opinion ID: 203581
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Preemption by Federal Agency Action

Text: FitzGerald falls back on the proposition that the Maine statute is nonetheless preempted by federal agency action, even if not by the statute. See Geier v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861, 120 S.Ct. 1913, 146 L.Ed.2d 914 (2000). The proposition that federal agency action, taken pursuant to its interpretation of a statute, may itself preempt is quite correct. But a review of the interpretation of the WSRA by the relevant agencies further undercuts FitzGerald's preemption claim. FitzGerald relies on correspondence from the National Park Service (NPS) to the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) regarding Maine's request for permits from the ACE relating to the replacement of the Henderson Brook Bridge, one of the six bridges mentioned in Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 1882(4). We will assume, in FitzGerald's favor, that such correspondence can be pertinent federal regulatory action. In a letter dated June 29, 2007, Chysandra Walter, NPS Acting Northeast Regional Director, stated: [T]he State's 1970 application for federal designation, as well as the applicable state statutes upon which that application and today's management are based, highlight the affirmative responsibility of the State to manage the Allagash Wilderness Waterway for wilderness recreational opportunities, and to affirmatively develop maximum wilderness character. . . . . The State of Maine ... is responsible for managing and administering the Allagash Wilderness Waterway in a manner consistent with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. In addition to issues associated with Section 7 (federally assisted water resource development projects) and Section 2 (classification) that have been noted above, all administering agencies have the responsibility to further the purposes of the Act as articulated in Section 1 (purposes) and Section 10 (management direction). Later, NPS Northeast Regional Director Dennis R. Reidenbach wrote in a letter dated November 15, 2007: As a river designated as a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System under Section 2(a)(ii) of the Act (16 U.S.C. § 1273(a)(ii)), the State of Maine is responsible for administering the Allagash Wilderness Waterway in such manner as to protect and enhance the values which cause it to be included in [the System] pursuant to Section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. § 1281(a)). FitzGerald argues that these statements from the NPS form an independent basis for preemption. But these statements provide no stronger basis for preemption than the text of the WSRA itself. The sections of the NPS letters upon which FitzGerald relies do little more than recite the text and structure of the WSRA. Indeed, the record of federal regulatory action under the WSRA undercuts FitzGerald's preemption argument. Even before the issue of the permit for the Henderson Brook Bridge arose, the guidelines issued by the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture recognized that the management policies for rivers under the WSRA may vary depending upon whether the river is state-or federally-administered. See 47 Fed.Reg. 39,454, 39,459 (Sept. 7, 1982) (Managing agencies will implement [the principles from section 10(a) of the WSRA] to the fullest extent possible under their general statutory authorities and existing Federal, State and local laws. Because of these limitations, however, implementation of the principles may differ among and within components of the system depending on whether the land areas involved are federally, State, locally or privately owned.). Reports from the Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council also recognize that the WSRA is deferential to the states regarding the management of section 2(a)(ii) rivers. See, e.g., Interagency Wild & Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council, Protecting Resource Values on Non-Federal Lands 4 (1996), available at http://www.rivers.gov/publications/non-federal-lands-protection.pdf ([T]here are no explicit standards for resource protection on non-federal lands in the [WSRA] or Interagency Guidelines.); Interagency Wild & Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council, A Compendium of Questions and Answers Relating to Wild and Scenic Rivers 42 (1997), available at http://www.rivers. gov/publications/q-a.pdf (Although the [WSRA] includes provisions encouraging the protection of river values through state and local government land use planning, there are no binding provisions on local governments.). Moreover, as to the AWW itself, the federal regulatory action regarding the ACE permit for the Henderson Brook Bridge contradicts FitzGerald's claim of preemption. Indeed, Reidenbach's November 15, 2007 letter, on which FitzGerald relies, went on to say: The State of Maine is responsible for deciding how to best administer the Allagash Wilderness Waterway to protect and enhance the values which caused it to be designated under Section 10 of the Act. He determined that [b]ecause the bridge existed at the time of the Waterway's classification as `wild,' we conclude that replacing the bridge as proposed by the Bureau will not degrade the Waterway's `wild' character as compared to the condition at the time of designation (and existing presently), noting that the WSRA does not require that a water resources project enhance the wilderness character of a wild river area. Additionally, on October 9, 2007, the ACE issued a permit to Maine for the work relating to the Henderson Brook Bridge without noting any objections from any of the federal agencies concerned. [5] Because both the NPS and the ACE approved Maine's plans for the Henderson Brook Bridge, it cannot be said that the Maine statute authorizing the permanent bridges over the AWW is preempted by federal agency action.