Nprm Published

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
local transportation costs, which would
not be affected by a change in the longdistance transportation costs. Id.
d. The air-related costs (for both cuberelated and weight-related costs) are
adjusted based on the percentage change
in the proportion of Priority Mail
transported on air for that zone. Id.
e. The distance-related surface costs
are adjusted based on the percentage
change in the proportion of Priority
Mail transported on surface for that
zone. Id. at 4.
The Postal Service states that this
methodology can be updated and
applied monthly to ensure that the
transportation costs reflect the most
recent operational conditions as
operational changes occur throughout
the year. Id.
The Postal Service also states that
there are two exceptions to this
methodology. First, for any NSAs filed
during January, the transportation
adjustment from November will be used
instead of the adjustment from
December. Id. The Postal Service
explains that this is because the air and
surface proportions during peak season
are considerably different from the rest
of the fiscal year and would not be
predictive of the costs that would be
incurred during the first full year of the
NSA. Id. Second, for Priority Mail NonPublished Rates agreements filed in
Docket No. CP2020–170, instead of
applying the adjustment every month,
the adjustment will only be applied
when the price floors are updated every
year. Id.
The Postal Service notes that this
methodology would only be used for
forward-looking financial projections,
and NSA cost coverage reported during
the ACR would still be calculated using
the average costs for the FY. Id. at 4–5.
Rationale. The Postal Service explains
that due to the changes in transportation
network in FY 2023, the FY 2022 costs
for Priority Mail may no longer be
predictive of the expected costs for
Priority Mail NSAs being negotiated
through the end of calendar year 2023.
Id. at 5. The Postal Service states that
similarly, the FY 2023 costs may also
not be predictive of the costs for Priority
Mail NSAs being negotiated during
calendar year 2024, because of network
changes scheduled to take place
throughout FY 2024. Id. The Postal
Service asserts that Proposal Four
provides a methodology that uses
current census data from PTR to adjust
the base FY transportation costs to
reflect the most recent operational
changes, which will be an improvement
in the accuracy of the projected cost
coverage of NSAs. Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

Impact. According to the Postal
Service, the proposed changes have no
impact on any product-level costs such
as those that would have been reported
in the FY 2022 Public Cost and Revenue
Analysis Report, because the proposal
concerns only the reporting of Priority
Mail transportation costs by zone. Id. at
5–6. The Postal Service provides the
impact for each component by zone and
the combined impact in Library
Reference USPS–RM2023–9–NP1 under
seal. Id. at 5.
III. Notice and Comment
The Commission establishes Docket
No. RM2023–9 for consideration of
matters raised by the Petition. More
information on the Petition may be
accessed via the Commission’s website
at http://www.prc.gov. Interested
persons may submit comments on the
Petition and Proposal Four no later than
September 29, 2023. Pursuant to 39
U.S.C. 505, Madison Lichtenstein is
designated as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this proceeding.
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. RM2023–9 for consideration of the
matters raised by the Petition of the
United States Postal Service for the
Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider
Proposed Changes in Analytical
Principles (Proposal Four), filed August
28, 2023.
2. Comments by interested persons in
this proceeding are due no later than
September 29, 2023.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the
Commission appoints Madison
Lichtenstein to serve as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this docket.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this order in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023–19361 Filed 9–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62025

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 2360
[BLM_HQ_FRN_MO4500173644]
RIN 1004–AE95

Management and Protection of the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:

The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) is proposing a new
rule to govern the management of
surface resources and Special Areas in
the National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska (NPR–A), consistent with its
duties under the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act (NPRPA),
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act (FLPMA), and other authorities. The
proposed rule would revise the
framework for designating and assuring
maximum protection of Special Areas’
significant resource values, and would
protect and enhance access for
subsistence activities throughout the
NPR–A. It would also incorporate
aspects of the NPR–A Integrated
Activity Plan (IAP) approved in April
2022. The proposed rule would have no
effect on currently authorized oil and
gas operations in the NPR–A. We solicit
comments on all aspects of this
proposed action.
DATES: Please submit comments on this
proposed rule to the BLM on or before
November 7, 2023. The BLM is not
obligated to consider any comments
received after this date in making its
decision on the final rule.
Information Collection Requirements:
This proposed rule includes existing
and a proposed new informationcollection requirement that must be
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). If you wish to
comment on the information-collection
requirements, please note that such
comments should be sent directly to the
OMB, and that the OMB is required to
make a decision concerning the
collection of information contained in
this proposed rule between 30 and 60
days after publication of this document
in the Federal Register. Therefore, a
comment to the OMB on the proposed
information-collection revisions is best
assured of being given full consideration
if the OMB receives it by November 7,
2023.
ADDRESSES:
Mail, Personal, or Messenger Delivery:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Director
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62026

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

(630), Bureau of Land Management,
1849 C St. NW, Room 5646,
Washington, DC 20240, Attention:
1004–AE95.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Searchbox,
enter ‘‘RIN 1004–AE95 and click the
‘‘Search’’ button. Follow the
instructions at this website.
For Comments on Information—
Collection Activities
Written comments and suggestions on
the information-collection requirements
should be submitted by the date
specified (see DATES) to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Find this specific information-collection
by selecting ‘‘Currently under Review—
Open for Public Comments’’ or by using
the search function. If you submit
comments on these informationcollection burdens, you should provide
the BLM with a copy at one of the
addresses shown earlier in this section,
so that we can summarize all written
comments and address them in the final
rulemaking. Please indicate ‘‘Attention:
OMB Control Number 1004–XXXX (RIN
1004–AE95) regardless of the method
used to submit comments on the
information collection burdens.
Comments not pertaining to the
proposed rule’s information-collection
burdens should not be submitted to
OMB. The BLM is not obligated to
consider or include in the
Administrative Record for the final rule
any comments that are improperly
directed to OMB.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Tichenor, Advisor—Office of the
Director, at 202–573–0536 or jtichenor@
blm.gov with a subject line of ‘‘RIN
1004–AE95.’’ For questions relating to
regulatory process issues, contact Faith
Bremner at fbremner@blm.gov.
Individuals in the United States who
are deaf, deafblind, 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. For a
summary of the proposed rule, please
see the proposed rule summary
document in docket BLM–2023–0006 on
www.regulations.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Comment Procedures
II. Background
A. Introduction
B. Brief Administrative History of the
NPR–A
C. Statutory Authority for Managing the
NPR–A

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

D. Current Conditions
E. Need for the Rule
III. Section-by-Section Discussion
IV. Procedural Matters

I. Public Comment Procedures
If you wish to comment on this
proposed rule, you may submit your
comments to the BLM by mail, personal
or messenger delivery during regular
hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.), Monday
through Friday, except holidays, or
through https://www.regulations.gov
(see the ADDRESSES section).
Please make your comments on the
proposed rule as specific as possible,
confine them to issues pertinent to the
proposed rule, explain the reason for
any changes you recommend, and
include any supporting documentation.
Where possible, your comments should
reference the specific section or
paragraph of the proposal that you are
addressing. The BLM is not obligated to
consider or include in the
Administrative Record for the proposed
rule comments that we receive after the
close of the comment period (see DATES)
or comments delivered to an address
other than those listed earlier (see
ADDRESSES).
Comments, including names and
street addresses of respondents, will be
available for public review at the
address listed under ADDRESSES. Before
including your address, telephone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, be advised that your entire
comment, including your personal
identifying information, may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can ask us in your comment to
withhold from public review your
personal identifying information, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
II. Background
A. Introduction
This proposed rule would revise the
management framework for surface
resources throughout the NPR–A and
Special Areas in the NPR–A. The BLM
has not updated this framework in the
more than 45 years since the original
and still current rule for management of
NPR–A surface resources and Special
Areas was promulgated in 1977. 42 FR
28721 (June 3, 1977). Currently, the
legal standards and procedures that
govern the NPR–A are scattered
throughout several statutes, regulations,
plans, and guidance documents. This
proposed rule would provide a more
comprehensive guide to managing the
NPR–A. It would improve upon the
existing regulations’ standards and
procedures to balance oil and gas

PO 00000

Frm 00041

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

activities with the protection of surface
resources in the NPR–A; designate and
assure maximum protection of Special
Areas’ significant resource values; and
maintain and enhance access for longstanding subsistence activities. The
proposed rule would also implement
statutory provisions that post-date the
current regulations, including the
Department of the Interior
Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 1981,
which directed the Secretary to
‘‘conduct an expeditious program of
competitive leasing of oil and gas’’ in
the NPR–A, while ‘‘provid[ing] for such
conditions, restrictions, and
prohibitions as the Secretary deems
necessary or appropriate to mitigate
reasonably foreseeable and significantly
adverse effects on . . . surface resources
. . . .’’ Public Law 96–514, 94 Stat.
2957 (1980). The proposed rule would
not affect existing leases in the NPR–A.
B. Brief Administrative History of the
NPR–A
In the early 20th century, the Federal
government established several naval
petroleum reserves on public land,
including the NPR–A, which President
Warren G. Harding designated in 1923.
Exec. Order 3797–A. The NPR–A
extends from the north slope of the
Brooks Range to the Arctic Coast and
encompasses approximately 23 million
acres of public land.
In the decades that followed, the U.S.
Navy began exploring for oil and gas in
the NPR–A; however, by the 1970s, as
Congress began debating the role of the
naval petroleum reserves within the
context of the nation’s changing energy
needs, the NPR–A remained ‘‘largely
unexplored and almost completely
undeveloped.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 94–156, at
3 (1975). In 1976, Congress passed the
NPRPA, which transferred management
of the NPR–A to the Department of the
Interior (DOI) and directed the President
to prepare a study to ‘‘determine the
best overall procedures’’ for exploring,
developing, and transporting the
reserve’s oil and gas resources. Public
Law 94–258, section 105 (1976)
(codified at 42 U.S.C. 6505(b)).
In the NPRPA, Congress sought to
strike a balance between exploration
and ‘‘the protection of environmental,
fish and wildlife, and historical or
scenic values’’ in the NPR–A. It did so
by directing the Secretary to
‘‘promulgate such rules and regulations
as he [or she] deems necessary and
appropriate for the protection of such
values within the reserve.’’ 42 U.S.C.
6503(b). The Conference Report
explained that the Act would
immediately vest responsibility for
protection of the NPR–A’s ‘‘natural, fish

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
and wildlife, scenic and historical
values . . . in the Secretary of the
Interior . . . so that any activities which
are or might be detrimental to such
values will be carefully controlled.’’
H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 94–942 (1976). The
report stated the Conference
Committee’s expectation ‘‘that the
Secretary will take every precaution to
avoid unnecessary surface damage and
to minimize ecological disturbances
throughout the reserve.’’ Id.
In the same Act, Congress directed
that ‘‘[a]ny exploration within the
Utukok River, the Teshekpuk Lake
areas, and other areas designated by the
Secretary of the Interior containing any
significant subsistence, recreational, fish
and wildlife, or historical or scenic
value, shall be conducted in a manner
which will assure the maximum
protection of such surface values to the
extent consistent with the requirements
of this Act for the exploration of the
reserve.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6504(a). The
Conference Report elaborated that the
Act would ‘‘immediately authorize the
Secretary to require that the exploration
activities within these designated areas
be conducted in a manner designed to
minimize adverse impacts on the values
which these areas contain.’’ H.R. Conf.
Rep. No. 94–942 (1976). The ‘‘maximum
protection’’ standard is an unusually
high protective bar in comparison to
other statutes granting authority to the
BLM. See, e.g., 43 U.S.C. 1632; 16 U.S.C.
7202(c)(2).

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

1. Special Area Designations
There are currently five Special Areas
in the NPR–A that protect a wide range
of significant subsistence, recreational,
fish and wildlife, historical, and scenic
values. Responding to the congressional
mandate to protect the values of highly
sensitive areas in the NPR–A,
particularly Teshekpuk Lake and the
Utukok River Uplands, which the
NPRPA specifically identified for
protection, the Secretary in 1977
delineated the boundaries of those two
congressionally designated Special
Areas and also designated a third: the
Colville River Special Area. 42 FR
28723 (June 3, 1977). The Secretary
specifically identified the significant
resource values to be protected for each
of the three Special Areas:
• Colville River: ‘‘The central Colville
River and some of its tributaries provide
critical nesting habitat for the Arctic
peregrine falcon, an endangered species.
The bluffs and cliffs along the Colville
River provide nesting sites with the
adjacent areas being utilized as food
hunting areas. . . . A total area of
approximately 2,300,000 acres within

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

the reserve is identified for inclusion in
the Colville River special area.’’ Id.
• Teshekpuk Lake: ‘‘The Teshekpuk
Lake and its watershed are an important
nesting, staging, and molting habitat for
a large number of ducks, geese, and
swans. Because of its importance to
these migratory birds and numerous
other waterbirds, a total of
approximately 1,734,000 acres is
identified as the Teshekpuk Lake
special area.’’ Id.
• Utukok River Uplands: ‘‘The
Utukok River Uplands special area
contains critical habitat for caribou. The
critical decline in the population level
of the western Arctic caribou herd (from
70,000 in 1975 to 35,000 in 1976)
necessitates maximum protection of this
area, which is ordinarily the calving
territory for this herd. . . . Because of
the nomadic nature of the caribou, a
large area encompassing approximately
4,032,000 acres is included within this
area.’’ Id.
In 1999, the Secretary expanded the
Colville River and Teshekpuk Lake
Special Areas. The Secretary added
‘‘much of the Kikiakrorak and
Kogosukruk Rivers and an area
approximately two miles on either side
of these rivers’’ to the Colville River
Special Area, increasing its size to 2.44
million acres.1 The Secretary also added
the 10,000-acre Pik Dunes Land Use
Emphasis Area to the Teshekpuk Lake
Special Area.2
In 2004, the Secretary designated a
fourth Special Area, Kasegaluk Lagoon,
which encompasses 97,000 acres. 70 FR
9096 (Feb. 24, 2005). The Kasegaluk
Lagoon Special Area is located in the
northwestern corner of the NPR–A and
includes important habitat for marine
mammals, among other values.3
In 2013, the Secretary made several
decisions concerning Special Areas.
First, the Secretary designated a fifth
Special Area: Peard Bay. The 107,000acre area was designated to ‘‘protect
haul-out areas and nearshore waters for
marine mammals and a high use staging
and migration area for shorebirds and
1 BLM, Colville River Special Area (CRSA)
Management Plan Environmental Assessment (EA)
1 (July 2008), available at https://
eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/nepa/5251/
160692/196467/Colville_River_Special_Area_
EA.pdf; Designation of Additions to Special Areas
in NPR–A; Alaska, 64 FR 16,747 (April 6, 1999).
2 64 FR 16747; BLM, NPR–A Final Integrated
Activity (IAP) Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) 355 (Nov. 2012), available at
https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/nepa/
5251/41003/43153/Vol1_NPR-A_Final_IAP_
FEIS.pdf.
3 BLM, Northwest NPR–A IAP/EIS Record of
Decision (ROD) 4 (Jan. 2004), available at https://
web.archive.org/web/20041204130751/http://
www.ak.blm.gov/affairs/press/pr2003/Final_
Northwest_NPR-A_ROD.pdf.

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62027

waterbirds.’’ 4 Second, the Secretary
expanded the Teshekpuk Lake Special
Area by 2 million acres ‘‘to encompass
all the roughly 30-to-50-mile band of
land valuable for bird and caribou
habitat between Native-owned lands
near Barrow and Native-owned lands
near Nuiqsut . . . .’’ 5 Third, the
Secretary expanded the Utukok River
Uplands Special Area to 7.1 million
acres ‘‘to more fully encompass prime
calving and insect-relief habitat within
the NPR–A . . . .’’ 6 Finally, the
Secretary broadened the purpose of the
Colville River Special Area to include
the ‘‘protect[ion of] all raptors, rather
than the original intent of protection for
arctic peregrine falcons.’’ 7
The BLM currently manages all five
Special Areas in accordance with the
NPR–A IAP Record of Decision (ROD) of
April 2022. The IAP provides for the
management of the NPR–A, designates
areas within the NPR–A for oil and gas
leasing, infrastructure, and special
protections, and identifies stipulations
and required operating procedures to
mitigate the impact of oil and gas and
other permitted activities.8 The first
IAP, which the BLM finalized in 1998,
addressed management of the northeast
NPR–A. This IAP superseded a 1983 oil
and gas leasing environmental impact
statement (EIS), which, until 1998,
controlled leasing decisions throughout
the NPR–A. In 2004 the BLM issued a
separate IAP for the northwest NPR–A,
and in 2013, the BLM approved an IAP
that addressed activities and resources
throughout the NPR–A.
The current IAP, adopted in April
2022, was informed by a Final EIS
issued by the agency in 2020. The EIS
evaluated a range of alternatives for
managing oil and gas activities and
resources in the NPR–A. These
alternatives were informed and shaped
by extensive outreach efforts with the
public and stakeholders, including:
• Scoping: During the scoping period
from November 21, 2018, to February
15, 2019, the BLM held eight public
meetings in Alaska and received
approximately 56,000 comment
submissions, including form letters.
• Public Review of the Draft IAP/EIS:
During the comment period for the Draft
IAP/EIS from November 25, 2019,
4 BLM, NPR–A IAP ROD 4 (Feb. 2013), available
at https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/nepa/
5251/42462/45213/NPR-A_FINAL_ROD_2-2113.pdf.
5 Id. at 19.
6 Id. at 4.
7 Id.
8 BLM, NPR–A IAP ROD 2–3 (Apr. 2022),
available at https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_
projects/117408/200284263/20058238/250064420/
2022_NPRA_IAP_ROD_508.pdf.

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62028

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

through February 5, 2020, the BLM held
eight public meetings in Alaska and
received more than 82,000 comments,
including form letters and signed
petitions.
• Comments received after the Final
IAP/EIS was released and prior to the
ROD: In reaching the decision in the
2022 ROD, the BLM reviewed and fully
considered comments received after
distribution of the Final IAP/EIS on
June 26, 2020. The comments did not
identify any significant new
circumstances or information related to
environmental concerns bearing upon
the proposed action or its impacts.
Instead, they generally reflected
concerns already raised by comments
submitted during scoping and the
public’s review of the Draft IAP/EIS.
In addition to the above, the current
IAP benefited from suggestions and
careful review of the analysis in the
IAP/EIS by several cooperating agencies:
the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management, In˜upiat Community of the
Arctic Slope, National Park Service,
North Slope Borough, State of Alaska,
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
During the IAP/EIS process, the BLM
consulted with:
• Tribes as required by a Presidential
Executive Memorandum dated April 29,
1994;
• Communities, Tribal organizations,
and Native corporations on the North
Slope;
• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration—
Fisheries pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act; and
• Alaska’s State Historic Preservation
Office pursuant to the National Historic
Preservation Act.
Pursuant to Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)
section 810(a)(1) and (2), the BLM also
conducted hearings in North Slope
communities to gather comments
regarding potential impacts to
subsistence use resulting from the
alternatives considered in the IAP/EIS.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

2. Oil and Gas Leasing in the NPR–A
In 1980, Congress authorized
competitive leasing of Federal oil and
gas resources in the NPR–A. Public Law
96–514 (1980) (codified at 42 U.S.C.
6506a(a)). The BLM held two NPR–A
lease sales in 1982 and one each in 1983
and 1984.9 After receiving no bids
during the 1984 lease sale and
determining that the oil and gas
industry had ‘‘little interest in another
9 U.S. Geological Survey, The NPR–A Data
Archive 2 (Mar. 2001), available at https://
pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs024-01/fs024-01.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

lease sale,’’ the BLM discontinued sales
in the NPR–A for the next 15 years.10
In the 1990s, following technological
advances and successful development
on nearby State lands, industry
expressed a desire to resume leasing in
the NPR–A.11 The BLM restarted lease
sales in 1999 and, over the next 2
decades, held a total of 15 sales for the
NPR–A. These sales initially generated
considerable bonus bid revenue for the
Federal government and the State of
Alaska, as the BLM collected an average
of $74 million in bonus bids at sales
held in 1999, 2002, and 2004.12
However, bid revenue dropped off
significantly as lands in the NPR–A
with the highest potential for
development were leased. Between 2006
and 2019, the BLM received an average
of just $6 million in bonus bids per sale,
and millions of acres offered for lease
went unsold. Between 1999 and 2019,
the BLM offered nearly 60 million acres
of leases in the NPR–A but received bids
on just 12 percent of that acreage.13
C. Statutory Authority for Managing the
NPR–A
1. NPRPA
The NPRPA is the primary source of
management authority for the NPR–A.
Under the NPRPA, the Secretary must
‘‘assume all responsibilities’’ for ‘‘any
activities related to the protection of
environmental, fish and wildlife, and
historical or scenic values’’ and
‘‘promulgate such rules and regulations
as he [or she] deems necessary and
appropriate for the protection of such
values within the reserve.’’ 42 U.S.C.
6503(b).
Congress has also directed the
Secretary to ‘‘conduct an expeditious
program of competitive leasing of oil
and gas’’ in the NPR–A. Id. at 6506a(a).
But the Secretary must ensure that all
activities taken pursuant to the NPRPA
‘‘include or provide for such conditions,
restrictions, and prohibitions as the
Secretary deems necessary or
appropriate to mitigate reasonably
foreseeable and significantly adverse
effects on the surface resources’’
throughout the NPR–A. Id. at 6506a(b).
The NPRPA also authorizes the
Secretary to designate Special Areas to
protect ‘‘significant subsistence,
recreational, fish and wildlife, or
10 BLM, Northeast NPR–A Final IAP/EIS (Aug.
1998), available at https://web.archive.org/web/
20001018022001/http:/aurora.ak.blm.gov/npra/
final/html/contents_vol1.html.
11 Id.
12 BLM, NPR–A Sale Statistics 1999 to Present,
available at https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/
files/documents/files/Oil_Gas_Alaska_NPR-A_
LeaseSale_Statistics_1999toPresent.pdf.
13 Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

historical or scenic value[s]’’ in the
NPR–A and provides that any
‘‘exploration’’ in Special Areas ‘‘shall be
conducted in a manner which will
assure the maximum protection of such
surface values to the extent consistent
with the requirements of this Act for the
exploration of the reserve.’’ Id. at
6504(a). Congress enacted that provision
in 1976, prior to its authorization of
competitive leasing in 1980. As a result,
that provision expressly references only
‘‘exploration’’ and not leasing or other
oil and gas activities. Nonetheless, the
BLM has long interpreted that language
to require maximum protection of
Special Areas’ significant resource
values from the impacts of all oil and
gas activities.14 In 1980, when Congress
authorized the Secretary to lease oil and
gas in the NPR–A, it expressly required
the BLM to ‘‘mitigate reasonably
foreseeable and significantly adverse
effects on surface resources’’ throughout
the NPR–A. 42 U.S.C. 6506a(b). That
mandate mirrored the 1976 Conference
Committee’s statement that ‘‘it . . .
expected . . . the Secretary will take
every precaution to avoid unnecessary
surface damage and to minimize
ecological disturbances throughout the
reserve’’ and not solely in Special Areas.
H.R. Rep. 94–942, at 21 (1976). The
1980 Act also provided that ‘‘any
exploration or production undertaken
pursuant to this section be in
accordance with section 104(b) of the
Naval Petroleum Reserves Production
Act of 1976.’’ 90 Stat. 2965. The
referenced section of the NPRPA is the
maximum protection provision codified
at section 6504(a), and thus the
maximum protection provision applies
to production activities as well as
exploration. In any event, it would make
little sense for Congress to require
maximum protection of surface values
from exploration while requiring lesser
protection from the greater impacts of
oil and gas development. Accordingly,
in the BLM’s longstanding view, reading
14 See, e.g., BLM, NPR–A Final IAP/EIS at 3–338
(June 2020), available at https://eplanning.blm.gov/
public_projects/117408/200284263/20020421/
250026625/Volume%202_Appendices%20B-Y.pdf;
BLM, Northeast NPR–A IAP/EIS ROD 13 (Oct. 1998)
BLM, Amendment to the Northeast NPR–A IAP/EIS
ROD 22 (Jan. 2006) (‘‘Maximum protection of
important surface resources is provided in Special
Areas designated by the Secretary through a
combination of prohibitions, restrictions, and
stipulations restricting oil and gas facilities and
other activities that might adversely impact wildlife
habitat and subsistence use areas.’’)., available at
https://web.archive.org/web/20170212030656/
https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/ak/aktest/
planning/ne_npra_final_supplement.Par.
62144.File.dat/npra_final_app_l.pdfhttps://
web.archive.org/web/20170301153536/https:/
www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/ak/aktest/
planning/ne_npra.Par.77875.File.dat/nerod_
122205final.pdf.

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
those two provisions (42 U.S.C. 6504(a)
and 6506a(b)) together, Congress
intended that BLM would provide for
heightened (i.e., maximum) protection
from the impacts of all oil and gas
activities in Special Areas, but provide
for lesser protection (mitigating
reasonably foreseeable significant
impacts) elsewhere throughout the
Reserve. Interpreting the special areas
provision (6504(a)) to apply only to
exploration activities—when Congress
chose not to repeal that provision when
it authorized leasing,—would lead to
the illogical result that BLM is required
to apply a higher standard of protection
for exploration, only to allow the greater
impacts of oil and gas development to
harm those same resources. That is, in
the BLM’s longstanding view,
inconsistent with Congressional intent.
2. Other Authorities
Other authorities that guide
management of the NPR–A include
FLPMA and the ANILCA. Although
Congress in 1980 exempted the NPR–A
from FLPMA’s land use planning and
wilderness study requirements, 42
U.S.C. 6506a(c), it did not exempt the
NPR–A from FLPMA’s other mandates.
Hence, the BLM must still ‘‘take any
action necessary to prevent unnecessary
or undue degradation’’ of all BLMadministered public lands, including
within the NPR–A. 43 U.S.C. 1732(b).
Under section 810 of ANILCA, the
BLM must ‘‘evaluate the effect’’ of
proposed oil and gas activities ‘‘on
subsistence uses and needs . . . .’’ 16
U.S.C. 3120(a). If such activities will
‘‘significantly restrict subsistence uses,’’
then the BLM must hold hearings in
affected communities, limit activities to
‘‘the minimal amount of public lands
necessary,’’ and take ‘‘reasonable steps
. . . to minimize adverse impacts upon
subsistence uses and resources . . . .’’
Id. Fulfilling section 810’s requirements
is of crucial importance for the NPR–A,
as over 40 communities utilize its
resources for subsistence purposes.15

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

D. Current Conditions
Conditions in the NPR–A are
changing rapidly, as the Arctic
continues to warm more than twice as
fast as the rest of the Earth.16 This is
causing disruptions to natural
ecosystems, Native communities, and

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

caribou herd, an important subsistence
resource for nearby Alaska Native
communities.23 Significant surface
resources are found throughout the
NPR–A, but are concentrated in the
Teshekpuk Lake Special Area and the
other Special Areas. These resources
include:
• Caribou: Because caribou exhibit
high fidelity to calving grounds, herds
are identified based on the location of
those grounds.24 The NPR–A contains
extensive calving grounds for two herds:
the Teshekpuk Caribou Herd and the
Western Arctic Caribou Herd.25 During
most years, the highest density of
calving and post-calving use for the
Teshekpuk herd occurs southeast of
Teshekpuk Lake. Based on the results of
a 2022 photo-census, the Teshekpuk
herd population appears stable in spite
of low birth rates and high harvest
levels.26 The principal calving grounds
of the Western Arctic herd are located
in the Utukok River Uplands Special
Area. After reaching a recorded peak
population of 243,000 animals in the
1970s, the Western Arctic herd has
declined in recent years.27 According to
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game,
the Western Arctic herd population now
stands at roughly 164,000 animals. For
this reason, the Western Arctic Caribou
Herd Working Group recently
designated the herd as ‘‘Preservative,
Declining’’—a management designation
that triggers harvest and other
restrictions—and recommended
strengthening protections for the
Western Arctic’s calving grounds in the
NPR–A.28
• Birds: Concentrations of shore and
waterbirds in the NPR–A are among the
highest in the Arctic coastal plain. In
recognition of this, the National
Audubon Society has identified seven
Important Bird Areas in the NPR–A,
including three within the Colville
River, Kasegaluk Lagoon, and
Teshekpuk Lake Special Areas. The East
23 Id.
24 Willow

17 BLM,

15 BLM, Determination of NEPA Adequacy
(DNA): NPR–A IAP 2020 Final EIS Evaluation 9
(Apr. 2022), available at https://eplanning.blm.gov/
public_projects/117408/200284263/20058231/
250064413/NPRA%20IAP%20DNA%20signed
%20508.pdf.
16 National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 2022 Arctic Report Card, available
at https://www.arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/ReportCard-2022.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

subsistence use patterns throughout the
NPR–A. Notable changes include
accelerating permafrost degradation;
impairment of sensitive wildlife habitat
and movement corridors, particularly
for caribou; alterations in plant
communities; and impacts on
subsistence activities.17 From a
management standpoint, climate change
is ‘‘introduc[ing] substantial
uncertainty,’’ particularly ‘‘in predicting
demographic trends of species in the
area[,] and will make the predicted
impacts of development more difficult
to accurately assess.’’ 18
At the same time, oil and gas
development is continuing in the NPR–
A, and this proposed rule would have
no effect on existing activities.
Approximately 2.5 million acres of the
NPR–A are currently leased. The bulk of
existing leases are clustered within an
area of high development potential
between Teshekpuk Lake and the
Colville River.19 Outside of this area, the
NPR–A’s development potential is
medium and low.20 Production is
occurring on two pads in the Greater
Mooses Tooth (GMT) Unit immediately
west of the community of Nuiqsut.
Additional development is planned in
the Beartooth Unit, including under the
Willow Master Development Plan
(MDP), which the BLM approved on
March 12, 2023. When fully built out,
the Willow project will include three
pads with up to 199 wells, a network of
roads and pipelines, a central
processing facility, and an operations
center.21 In conjunction with the
approval of the Willow MDP, the project
proponent voluntarily agreed to
relinquish approximately 68,000 acres
of leases in the NPR–A, including
approximately 60,000 acres in the
Teshekpuk Lake Special Area.22 This
relinquishment, along with additional
provisions adopted in the Willow MDP
ROD, will create an additional buffer
from exploration and development
activities near the calving grounds and
migratory routes for the Teshekpuk Lake
Willow Master Development Plan (MDP)
Supplemental EIS (SEIS) 37–38, 148–49, 415–16,
422 (Jan. 2023), available at https://
eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/109410/
200258032/20073121/250079303/Willow
%20FSEIS_Vol%201_Ch%201-Ch%205.pdf.
18 Id. at 413–14.
19 2020 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at B–3 (June 2020).
20 Id. at B–5.
21 BLM, Willow MDP ROD 3 (Mar. 2023),
available at https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_
projects/109410/200258032/20075029/250081211/
2023%20Willow%20MDP%20Record%20of
%20Decision.pdf.
22 DOI, Interior Department Substantially Reduces
Scope of Willow Project (Mar. 13, 2023), available
at https://doi.gov/pressreleases/interiordepartment-substantially-reduces-scope-willowproject.

PO 00000

Frm 00044

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62029

MDP SEIS at 224.
NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–180.
26 Willow MDP SEIS at 224.
27 2020 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–181–82; see
also Western Arctic Caribou Herd Working Group,
Draft—2022 Meeting Summary 16–17, available at
https://westernarcticcaribou.net/wp-content/
uploads/2023/02/2022-WACH-WG-MeetingSummary-DRAFT-for-WACHWG-approval-at-20232.14.2023.pdf. ‘‘Primary causes of mortality are
predation, ‘unknown’. . . . Since 2005, the herd
has had more years of decline than increase or
stability, with cow mortality higher and calf
recruitment lower.’’
28 Western Arctic Caribou Herd Working Group,
Draft—2022 Meeting Summary 16–17, available at
https://westernarcticcaribou.net/wp-content/
uploads/2023/02/2022-WACH-WG-MeetingSummary-DRAFT-for-WACHWG-approval-at-20232.14.2023.pdf.
25 2020

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62030

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership
(EAAFP) has also designated the
Qupa5uk EAAFP Flyway Network Site
within the Teshekpuk Lake Special
Area.29 The lake contains an
‘‘exceptional’’ breeding and molting
ground for geese and other waterfowl, as
an estimated 573,000 birds breed at the
lake. The NPR–A also provides habitat
for two threatened species—the
spectacled eider and the Alaska
breeding population of Steller’s eider—
and 11 BLM Alaska special status
species. Many of the bird populations
breeding in the Arctic have been in
decline since the 1980s; shorebirds as a
group have declined by about half and
land-birds by about 20 percent.30
• Fish: Fish are widely distributed in
the NPR–A’s extensive network of lakes,
ponds, alluvial and beaded streams, and
adjacent wetlands. The most common
fish species are Arctic grayling, broad
whitefish, burbot, least cisco, Arctic
cisco, Arctic flounder, round whitefish,
humpback whitefish, and ninespine
stickleback. The NPR–A also provides
‘‘essential’’ habitat for several species of
Pacific salmon.31 Many fish species,
particularly anadromous species,
migrate both locally and extensively
between major drainages to access
habitats that support various life history
stages.32 Most of these habitats currently
exhibit few, if any, impacts from human
activities.33
• Marine mammals: Eleven species of
marine mammals are found in or near
the NPR–A, including six cetaceans
(bowhead whales, minke whales, gray
whales, killer whales, beluga whales,
and narwhals), four pinnipeds (pacific
walrus, bearded seals, spotted seals, and
ringed seals), and the polar bear; four of
these species are listed as threatened or
endangered under the ESA. Special
Areas provide important habitat for
many marine mammals, including
spotted seals and walruses, which
utilize haul-out areas in the Kasegaluk
Lagoon and Peard Bay Special Areas,
and polar bears, which are increasingly
using terrestrial habitats in the
Teshekpuk Lake Special Area due to
receding sea ice. Overall, the
implications of climate change for
marine mammals in the Arctic are
substantial. Continued arctic warming
29 East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership,
Qupa5uk Flyway Network Site [EAAF133]—East
Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership, available at
https://www.eaaflyway.net/qupaluk-flywaynetwork-site-eaaf133-east-asian-australasianflyway-partnership/.
30 2020 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–137–46.
31 2020 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–122, M–2, M–
3.
32 Willow MDP SEIS at 165.
33 2020 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–119.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

and the resulting deterioration of sea ice
pose a major threat to marine mammals
and their prey in the Arctic.34
• Cultural resources: Although less
than 3 percent of the NPR–A has been
surveyed for cultural resources, nearly
2,000 sites have been identified.
Additionally, there are 925 documented
Traditional Land Use Inventory sites in
the NPR–A, which are important place
names, landmarks, traditional land use
sites, travel routes, and other places of
cultural importance to the North Slope
In˜upiat. These sites have ongoing
spiritual and cultural importance to
residents of the North Slope. Protecting
cultural resources sites, both
documented and undocumented, is of
concern to the In˜upiat. However, early
exploration and development projects
on the North Slope had a greater
potential to affect cultural resources due
to the less stringent regulations and
identification requirements than those
in place today. For example, oil
exploration trails have been associated
with some damage to the Qalluvuk site,
a traditional fishing and hunting area
that also served as a trading station in
the 1930s. Other observations,
testimony, and traditional knowledge
from local residents have documented
experiences associated with cultural
resource impacts, including the
potential disturbance of gravesites and
camps from winter seismic exploration
activities.35
• Recreation resources: The NPR–A
offers numerous unique and primitive
recreational opportunities, including
backpacking, boating, sight-seeing,
hunting, fishing, tourism, and offhighway vehicle use. Because most of
the NPR–A is considered an unmodified
natural environment, individual users
rarely, if ever, encounter other
recreationists. Guided expeditions for
backpacking, sight-seeing, and hunting
primarily occur in the Utukok River
Uplands. Similar recreational activities
also occur in the vicinity of Teshekpuk
Lake and Umiat.36
Over 40 communities harvest
subsistence resources from the NPR–A,
including many of the resources
described earlier. Six communities in
particular—Anaktuvuk Pass, Atqasuk,
Nuiqsut, Point Lay, Utqiagvik, and
Wainwright—harvest all or nearly all of
their subsistence resources from the
NPR–A, including large land mammals
(primarily caribou or moose), furbearers
and small land mammals, non-salmon
fish, waterfowl, upland game birds, and
vegetation. Marine mammals and
34 Id.

at 3–208–222.
at 3–249–51.
36 Id. at 3–319.

salmon harvesting is less common in the
NPR–A; instead, they are harvested in
nearshore areas, such as Peard Bay,
Elson Lagoon, and Kasegaluk Lagoon.37
Subsistence harvesting is the
cornerstone of the traditional
relationship of the In˜upiat people with
their environment. Residents of
communities in and around the NPR–A
rely on subsistence harvests of plant and
animal resources for nutrition and their
cultural, economic, and social wellbeing. Activities associated with
subsistence—processing; sharing;
redistribution networks; cooperative
and individual hunting, fishing,
whaling, and gathering; and ceremonial
activities—strengthen community and
family social ties, reinforce community
and individual cultural identity, and
provide a link between contemporary
Alaska Natives and their ancestors.
These activities are guided by
traditional knowledge based on a longstanding relationship with the
environment.
Traditional In˜upiaq values remain
strong on the North Slope and include
respect for nature, humility, love and
respect for elders, cooperation, hunting
traditions, knowledge of language, and
family and kinship. These values are
embedded within all facets of In˜upiaq
society, including subsistence hunting
and harvesting traditions. The ability to
pass on these values through the
continuation of traditional subsistence
activities in traditional places is critical
to maintaining In˜upiat cultural identity.
Sharing is one of the core values of
In˜upiaq society and culture, which
serves to maintain and strengthen
familial and social ties both within and
between communities on the North
Slope. Traditional feasts such as
Nalukataq (the spring Whale Festival)
and Kivgiq (the Messenger Feast)
revolve around the bringing together of
communities and the distribution of
subsistence foods throughout the
community and region. Extensive
sharing networks exist between North
Slope communities, and between the
North Slope and other regions in
Alaska. In˜upiaq people continue to
identify with the places of their
ancestors and return to these places to
hunt, fish, camp, gather, and process
wild foods. Subsistence activities help
maintain the relationship between
In˜upiaq people and the land, as do
stories, In˜upiaq place names, trails and
travel routes, and landmarks. Thus, to
the In˜upiat, protection of traditional
lands, waters, and the wild resources
that inhabit them is essential to

35 Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00045

Fmt 4702

37 Id.

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

at 3–262.

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

maintaining cultural traditions,
traditional knowledge, and identity.38
Impacts on subsistence are occurring
on the North Slope with greater
frequency as development expands
across the region. Nuiqsut, the
community closest to current oil and gas
development on the North Slope, has
experienced the most impacts.
Subsistence impacts and concerns have
also been documented for Point Lay,
Wainwright, Utqiagvik, Atqasuk, and
Anaktuvuk Pass. Many of these
concerns are related to effects of
development, including seismic activity
and oil and gas-related research,
pipelines, and traffic, on caribou and
other terrestrial species.
Overall, future infrastructure, oil and
gas development, and other activities in
the NPR–A area could have lasting
effects on cultural practices, values, and
beliefs. The potential impacts of
development could result in reduced
harvests, changes in uses of traditional
lands, and decreased community
participation in subsistence harvesting,
processing, consuming, sharing, and
associated rituals and feasts. Because of
this, communities could experience a
loss of cultural and individual identity
associated with subsistence, a loss of
traditional knowledge about the land,
damaged social and kinship ties, and
effects on spirituality associated with
degradation of the NPR–A.39
The BLM solicits comments on this
section. Specifically, BLM welcomes
comment from the regulated community
including industry, residents of
communities in and around the NPR–A,
and Alaskan natives and indigenous
Tribes who may benefit or bear costs
from this proposed rule.
E. Need for the Rule
The BLM is proposing this revision
because the regulatory framework
governing the management and
protection of surface resources and
Special Areas in the NPR–A needs
updating. Conditions throughout the
Arctic have changed dramatically since
1977, when the BLM issued the current
regulations for management of surface
resources and Special Areas in the
NPR–A. As discussed in greater detail in
Section II.D, the impacts of climate
change on the NPR–A’s natural
environment and Native communities
are intensifying. Conditions are
changing rapidly in the Arctic, making
it necessary and appropriate for the
BLM to develop new regulations that
account for and respond to these
changing conditions. Thus, the
38 Willow
39 2020

MDP SEIS at 303.
NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 3–265–66, 3–280.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

proposed rule would direct the BLM to
regularly address changing conditions.
Among other things, it would require
the BLM to conduct an evaluation of
Special Areas at least once every 5 years
and update Special Area designations to
include new resource values. It also
would require the BLM to account for
any uncertainty concerning the effects
of proposed activities.
New and revised standards and
procedures are also needed to ensure
that the BLM is fulfilling its statutory
duties under the NPRPA, FLPMA, and
other authorities to the best of its ability.
For example, the BLM has a
responsibility to ‘‘provide for such
conditions, restrictions, and
prohibitions as the Secretary deems
necessary or appropriate to mitigate
reasonably foreseeable and significantly
adverse effects [of oil and gas activities]
on the surface resources’’ throughout
the NPR–A.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6506a(b). The
current regulations, however, provide
little detail on the standards and
procedures the BLM should use to
implement these important
requirements.
The BLM also has an obligation to
‘‘assure the maximum protection of . . .
surface values’’ within Special Areas ‘‘to
the extent consistent with the
requirements of [the NPRPA] for the
exploration of the reserve.’’ 42 U.S.C.
6504(a). The proposed rule would
improve upon the standards and
procedures that implement this
requirement. For example, the current
regulations identify specific measures
the BLM may take to assure maximum
protection but provide no further
guidance on the evaluation and
selection of such measures.
In addition, the current regulations do
not reflect the full management regime
for the NPR–A. This proposed rule
would provide a more comprehensive
guide to managing the NPR–A.
Currently, the applicable legal standards
and procedures are scattered throughout
several statutes, regulations, plans, and
guidance documents. For example, the
existing regulations do not integrate
with the use of IAPs, which BLM has
used either on a regional or area wide
basis for the NPR–A for over two
decades. Although the BLM is not
required to plan for the use of the NPR–
A, see 42 U.S.C. 6506a(c), it has chosen
to produce the IAP through a public
process and has analyzed it in an
Environmental Impact Statement. The
IAP allocates land uses in the NPR–A
and details oil and gas lease stipulations
and infrastructure restrictions for
Special Areas. The overlay of a
regulatory regime to govern the NPR–A,
including the development and use of

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62031

IAPs, would enhance consistency and
certainty, particularly with respect to
protection of surface resources and
Special Areas.
III. Section-by-Section Discussion
The proposed rule would change the
section designations from the current
regulations to implement Office of the
Federal Register requirements. Some
provisions of the existing regulations
would not change; we do not discuss
those provisions here.
Section 2361.1 Purpose
Section 2361.0–1 would be
redesignated to § 2361.1. The existing
provision states that the purpose of the
regulations is ‘‘to provide procedures for
the protection and control of
environmental, fish and wildlife, and
historical or scenic values’’ in the NPR–
A. As proposed, § 2361.1 would
establish a two-part purpose for the rule
to more accurately and completely
reflect the scope of the regulations. The
first purpose would be to provide
standards and procedures to implement
42 U.S.C. 6506a(b), which requires the
Secretary to ensure that ‘‘[a]ctivities
undertaken pursuant to this Act include
or provide for such conditions,
restrictions, and prohibitions as [she]
deems necessary or appropriate to
mitigate reasonably foreseeable and
significantly adverse effects on the
surface resources of the [NPR–A].’’
The second purpose outlined in this
section would be to provide standards
and procedures to implement 42 U.S.C.
6504(a), under which any exploration in
Special Areas ‘‘shall be conducted in a
manner which will assure the maximum
protection of such surface values to the
extent consistent with the requirements
of this Act for the exploration of the
[NPR–A].’’ The standards and
procedures to implement these two
provisions would also fulfill BLM’s
mandate to take action necessary to
prevent unnecessary or undue
degradation under FLPMA, 43 U.S.C.
1732(b).
Section 2361.0–2 Objectives
The existing § 2361.0–2 states the
objectives of the regulations. We
propose to remove this section because
our proposed revision of § 2361.1 would
make it redundant.
Section 2361.3 Authority
Section 2361.0–3 would be
redesignated to § 2361.3. The existing
provision lists the NPRPA as the
statutory authority for the regulations.
We propose to add the Department of
the Interior Appropriations Act, Fiscal
Year 1981 (Pub. L. 96–514), which

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62032

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

amended the NPRPA and instructed the
Secretary to mitigate reasonably
foreseeable and significantly adverse
effects on the surface resources in the
NPR–A.
Section 2361.4

Responsibility

Section 2361.0–4 would be
redesignated to § 2361.4. This section
would modify the existing statement
that, under the NPRPA, the BLM is
responsible for managing surface
resources in the NPR–A to add that BLM
is now also responsible for managing
the subsurface mineral resources in the
NPR–A. It would also add that the BLM
is responsible for assuring maximum
protection of Special Areas’ significant
resource values. Paragraph (b) would be
deleted because the U.S. Geological
Survey is no longer responsible for
managing exploration in the NPR–A.
Secretarial Order 3071, 47 FR 4751 (Feb.
2, 1982); Secretarial Order 3087, 48 FR
8982–83 (Mar. 2, 1983).
Section 2361.5

Definitions

Section 2361.0–5 would be
redesignated to § 2361.5. In this section,
the BLM would update the definition
for ‘‘exploration’’ to ensure consistency
with NPRPA’s definition of
‘‘petroleum.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6501. The BLM
would also update the definition of
‘‘Special Areas’’ for consistency with
other proposed changes to the
regulations. Finally, the BLM would
also incorporate a new definition for
‘‘Indigenous Knowledge,’’ consistent
with the guidance set forth in the
Memorandum issued by the Council on
Environmental Quality’s Office of
Science and Technology Policy on
November 30, 2022.40 New definitions
would also be added for ‘‘Integrated
Activity Plan,’’ ‘‘infrastructure,’’ and
‘‘significant resource value.’’

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Section 2361.6

Effect of Law

Section 2361.0–7 would be
redesignated to § 2361.6. The BLM is
proposing to update this section to
conform to existing legal authorities,
including adding provisions to
implement the Department of the
Interior Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year
1981, Public Law 96–514 (Dec. 12,
1980), 94 Stat. 2957, 2964, in revised
paragraph (a), and the Barrow Gas Field
Transfer Act of 1984, Public Law 98–
366 (July 17, 1984), 98 Stat. 468, 470, in
new paragraph (b)(4).
40 Council on Environmental Quality, Guidance
for Federal Departments and Agencies on
Indigenous Knowledge (Nov. 30, 2022), available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/
2022/12/OSTP-CEQ-IK-Guidance.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

Section 2361.7

Severability

This proposed new section would
establish that if any provision of part
2360 is invalidated, then all remaining
provisions would remain in effect. The
various components of the proposed
rule are distinct. For example, many of
the proposed provisions would simply
update the regulations to bring them
more into line with the BLM’s statutory
duties. Those updates would function
independently of the rest of the
proposed rule. The procedural
requirements in proposed § 2361.10(b)
for protecting surface resources in the
NPR–A also would stand alone, as
would the codification of existing
Special Areas in § 2361.20, the
procedural requirements in § 2361.30,
and other provisions.
Section 2361.10
Resources

Protection of Surface

Section 2361.1 would be redesignated
to § 2361.10, and the title would be
changed from ‘‘protection of the
environment’’ to ‘‘protection of surface
resources’’ to more closely track with
the BLM’s statutory authority under 42
U.S.C. 6506a(b), which directs the BLM
to ‘‘provide for such conditions,
restrictions, and prohibitions as the
Secretary deems necessary or
appropriate to mitigate reasonably
foreseeable and significantly adverse
effects on the surface resources of the
[NPR–A].’’
The proposed rule would establish
new standards and procedures for
managing and protecting surface
resources in the NPR–A from the
reasonably foreseeable and significantly
adverse effects of oil and gas activities.
In 1980, Congress authorized the
Secretary to mitigate those effects
through ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’
‘‘conditions, restrictions, and
prohibitions.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6506a(b).
Existing paragraph (a) requires the
authorized officer to take action ‘‘to
mitigate or avoid unnecessary surface
damage and to minimize ecological
disturbance throughout the reserve to
the extent consistent with the
requirements of the Act for the
exploration of the reserve.’’ We propose
to amend paragraph (a) to mirror the
statutory language. As amended,
paragraph (a) also would provide further
clarification by recognizing that, in
some circumstances, the BLM may
delay or deny proposed activities that
would cause reasonably foreseeable and
significantly adverse effects on surface
resources.
Existing paragraph (b) would be
deleted. It concerns coordination
between the BLM and the U.S.

PO 00000

Frm 00047

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

Geological Survey, which is no longer
relevant because the Geological Survey
is no longer responsible for managing
exploration in the NPR–A.
Paragraph (b) in the proposed rule
would spell out new procedures for
protecting surface resources in the NPR–
A. As explained above, Congress
assigned the BLM the duty to protect the
surface resources in the NPR–A, but
BLM regulations do not fully explain
the scope of that duty. The proposed
rule would fill that gap.
In paragraph (b)(1), the proposed rule
would direct the BLM to manage oil and
gas activities in accordance with the
IAP. In doing so, the proposed rule
would enshrine longstanding BLM
practice into regulations. As explained
above, the NPR–A is exempt from
FLPMA’s planning requirements.
Nonetheless, since 1998, the BLM has
prepared several IAPs to primarily
govern oil and gas activities in the NPR–
A. The IAP is a form of land use plan
that ‘‘addresses a narrower range of
multiple use management than a
resource management plan.’’ 41 In the
BLM’s experience, the IAP provides an
invaluable means of evaluating
management options, engaging the
public, and guiding decision-making,
consistent with the BLM’s duties under
NPRPA and the National Environmental
Policy Act. Accordingly, the proposed
rule would require the BLM to maintain
an IAP, which would help guide BLM
use authorizations in the NPR–A but
would give way to the regulations in the
event of a conflict.
Paragraph (b)(2) would require the
BLM, in each decision concerning oil
and gas activity in the NPR–A, to adopt
measures to mitigate the reasonably
foreseeable and significantly adverse
effects on surface resources, taking
particular care with surface resources
that support subsistence. The BLM
would do so by documenting for each
decision its consideration of effects and
how those effects informed the choice of
mitigation measures. Paragraphs (b)(3)
and (4) would specify that the BLM’s
effects analysis would include any
reasonably foreseeable effects, including
indirect effects (those that are ‘‘later in
time or farther removed in distance’’),
cumulative effects (those ‘‘that result
from the incremental effects of proposed
activities when added to the effects of
other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable actions’’), and ‘‘any
uncertainty concerning the nature,
scope, and duration of potential
effects.’’ For example, if the BLM
determined that a proposed lease sale’s
effects on subsistence resources—when
41 2013

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

NPR–A IAP ROD at 17.

08SEP1

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
added to the effects of other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable
actions—could be significantly adverse,
then under this proposed section, the
BLM would need to adopt measures to
mitigate those effects.
Existing paragraphs (c) and (d) would
be deleted. Existing paragraph (c)
requires the BLM to take maximum
protection measures on all actions
within Special Areas and identify the
boundaries of Special Areas on maps. It
also describes some requirements that
may constitute ‘‘maximum protection
measures.’’ Existing paragraph (d)
concerns designation of new Special
Areas. This material would be
addressed in §§ 2361.20, 2361.30, and
2361.40. Moving this material to those
new sections would provide
clarification by focusing § 2361.10 on
protection of surface resources
throughout the NPR–A.
Proposed new paragraph (c) would
clarify that for surface resources in
Special Areas, the BLM also would have
to comply with the provisions governing
Special Areas in §§ 2361.20 through
2361.60. Moving the provisions
concerning Special Areas to different
sections makes that cross-reference
necessary.
Proposed new paragraph (d) would
require the BLM to include in each oiland gas-related decision or
authorization, ‘‘such terms and
conditions that provide the Bureau with
sufficient authority to fully implement
the requirements of this subpart.’’ That
provision would ensure that the BLM
incorporates into decision documents
whatever language is necessary to
enable it to implement any final rule.
Existing paragraph (e)(1) provides that
‘‘the authorized officer may limit,
restrict, or prohibit use of and access to
lands within the Reserve, including
special areas.’’ The existing rule
conditions that authority by requiring it
to be exercised ‘‘consistent with the
requirements of the Act and after
consultation with appropriate Federal,
State, and local agencies and Native
organizations.’’ The proposed rule
would specify that the authorized
officer has that authority ‘‘regardless of
any existing authorization.’’ That added
language would clarify that existing
authorizations would not prevent the
BLM from limiting, restricting, or
prohibiting access to the NPR–A
consistent with the requirements of the
Act. The proposed rule would retain the
condition that exercises of that authority
must be consistent with the NPRPA, and
it would add ‘‘and applicable law’’ to
clarify that the authorized officer cannot
contradict other legal requirements.
Instead of requiring the authorized

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

officer to consult with ‘‘Native
organizations,’’ the proposed rule would
provide more specificity by requiring
consultation with federally recognized
Tribes and Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act corporations. Consistent
with the BLM’s duty under NPRPA and
ANILCA, paragraph (e)(1) would also be
amended to allow the authorized officer
to limit, restrict, or prohibit use of and
access to the NPR–A to protect
subsistence uses and resources.
Existing paragraph (f) would be
amended to recognize the breadth of
Federal laws that apply to the
management and protection of
historical, cultural, and paleontological
resources in the NPR–A.
Section 2361.20 Existing Special Areas
The existing regulations only identify
the Colville River, Teshekpuk Lake, and
Utukok River Uplands Special Areas by
name (43 CFR 2361.1(c)); they do not
account for the Kasegaluk Lagoon and
Peard Bay Special Areas. Further, the
current regulations do not identify or
describe the significant resource values
associated with each Special Area.
Under the NPRPA, the BLM must assure
maximum protection of each of these
values consistent with exploration of
the Reserve. In pursuit of that
obligation, this new § 2361.20 would
incorporate all five of the existing
Special Areas into part 2360 and would
identify the significant subsistence,
recreational, fish and wildlife,
historical, and scenic values that are
associated with each of them. The
proposed rule would require any lands
designated as a Special Area to continue
to be managed as such for the alreadyidentified values and any additional
values identified through the process set
forth in new § 2361.30. The existing
regulations (43 CFR 2361.1(c)) require
the boundaries of the Special Areas to
be depicted on maps available for public
inspection in the BLM’s Fairbanks
District Office. New § 2361.20 would
specify that a map of each Special Area
is available at the Arctic District Office,
which is now the BLM office that
oversees the NPR–A. The BLM would
also publish and maintain copies of
these maps on its website.
The following briefly summarizes the
existing Special Areas:
• Colville River Special Area: The
Colville River Special Area covers 2.44
million acres along the southeastern
boundary of the NPR–A. The Special
Area encompasses the Colville River
and two of its main tributaries—the
Kogosukruk and Kikiakrorak rivers—
which collectively provide ‘‘one of the
most significant regional habitats for
raptors in North America’’ and ‘‘the

PO 00000

Frm 00048

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62033

North Slope’s single most important
area of raptor nesting habitat.’’ 42 Many
other bird species utilize the river
corridors, including shorebirds, loons,
waterfowl, inland dwelling sea birds,
and several unique trans-Beringian
migrant passerines.43 The Special Area
also ‘‘support[s] the highest
concentration of . . . moose on Alaska’s
North Slope,’’ 44 ‘‘contains world-class
paleontological deposits[,] and is an
important corridor for subsistence and
recreational activities.’’ 45 Finally, the
Special Area includes ‘‘numerous sites
from prehistoric and historic era human
activity.’’ 46
• Kasegaluk Lagoon Special Area:
The Kasegaluk Lagoon Special Area,
which encompasses approximately
97,000 acres, borders the Chukchi Sea in
the northwestern corner of the NPR–A.
It is ‘‘rich in wildlife, including
migratory birds’’ and has especially
‘‘high values for marine mammals.’’ 47
The Special Area also ‘‘features tidal
flats that are rare on the North Slope.’’ 48
These natural resources contribute to an
ecosystem that is ‘‘unique . . . for the
arctic coast.’’ 49 Subsistence activities
take place in the lagoon, which also
‘‘offer[s] primitive recreation
experiences, including kayak and small
boat paddling along the coast.’’ 50
• Peard Bay Special Area: The Peard
Bay Special Area also borders the
Chukchi Sea along the northern
boundary of the NPR–A. The Special
Area covers 107,000 acres and includes
‘‘haul-out areas and nearshore waters for
marine mammals and a high use staging
and migration area for shorebirds and
waterbirds.’’ 51
• Teshekpuk Lake Special Area: The
Teshekpuk Lake Special Area includes
3.65 million acres in the northeastern
corner of the NPR–A. Teshekpuk Lake
provides ‘‘important nesting, staging,
and molting habitat for a large number
of ducks, geese, and swans,’’ ‘‘prime
calving and insect-relief habitat’’ for the
Teshekpuk Caribou Herd, and
‘‘overwintering habitat for fish.’’ 52 ‘‘Of
42 2013

NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 270, 355.
EA at 19.
44 2013 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 355.
45 1998 Northeast NPR–A IAP Final EIS.
46 CRSA EA at 25.
47 2013 NPR–A IAP Final EIS at 17.
48 Id.
49 Id.
50 2004 Northwest NPR–A IAP ROD at 4.
51 2013 NPR–A IAP ROD at 4.
52 43 FR 28723; BLM, Northeast NPR–A Final
Amended IAP/EIS 3–29 (Jan. 2005), available at
https://web.archive.org/web/20060303123155/
http://www.ak.blm.gov/nenpraeis/Final
AmendedIAPEIS/Volume%201/
Chapter%203%20Affected%20Environment.pdf;
2022 NPR–A IAP ROD at 5.
43 CRSA

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62034

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

particular sensitivity are lands nearest
Teshekpuk Lake that are the most
heavily used by calving caribou and
molting geese. . . .’’ 53 The Special
Areas ‘‘is of special importance to
subsistence users because of the caribou
and fish resources in the area and longstanding subsistence use of the area.’’ 54
Additionally, the Special Area includes
the Pik Dunes—‘‘an unusual geologic
feature’’ that ‘‘provide (1) insect-relief
habitat for caribou, (2) habitat for
several uncommon plant species, and
(3) data critical to understanding major
climatic fluctuations over the last
12,000 years.’’ 55
• Utukok River Uplands Special
Area: The Utukok River Uplands
encompasses 7.1 million acres in the
southwestern corner of the NPR–A. The
Special Area includes ‘‘prime calving
and insect-relief habitat’’ and ‘‘the most
intensely used summer movement area’’
for the Western Arctic Caribou Herd.56
‘‘This large herd disperses widely in the
winter, wandering within reach of
subsistence hunters from over forty
villages in northwest Alaska.’’ 57 The
Special Area also includes ‘‘grizzly bear
habitat’’ and ‘‘important wilderness
characteristics.’’ 58
Section 2361.30 Special Areas
Designation and Amendment Process
While the existing regulations
anticipate that the Secretary may
identify new Special Areas, they do not
specify procedures for designating and
amending Special Areas. In the past, the
BLM has typically designated Special
Areas, and received Special Area
recommendations from the public and
stakeholders, through the IAP revision
and amendment process. Enumerating
procedures for designating and
amending Special Areas in the
regulations would provide clarity for
stakeholders and ensure that the BLM
fulfills its statutory obligation to assure
maximum protection of Special Areas’
significant resource values.
This proposed new section would, for
the first time, provide standards and
procedures for designating and
amending Special Areas. Paragraph (a)
would require the BLM, at least once
every 5 years, to evaluate lands in the
53 2013

NPR–A IAP ROD at 20.
Northeast NPR–A IAP/EIS ROD (Oct.
1998), available at https://web.archive.org/web/
20001210191000/http:/aurora.ak.blm.gov/npra/
final/html/rodtitle.html.
55 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve Alaska
Draft IAP/EIS, 62 FR 65440 (Dec. 12, 1997);
Northeast NPR–A Final Amended IAP/EIS at 2–7.
56 2013 NPR–A IAP ROD at 21; 2022 NPR–A IAP
ROD at 5.
57 2013 NPR–A IAP ROD at 22.
58 1998 Northeast NPR–A IAP Final EIS; 2013
NPR–A IAP ROD at 22.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

54 BLM,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

NPR–A for significant resource values
and designate new Special Areas or
update existing Special Areas by
expanding their boundaries, recognizing
the presence of additional significant
resource values, or requiring additional
measures to assure maximum protection
of significant resource values. The BLM
believes that a 5-year timeframe is
reasonable considering how rapidly
conditions across the Arctic are
changing; it is also consistent with the
agency’s timeframe for similar land use
planning evaluations.59 Paragraph (a)(2)
would allow, but not require, the BLM
to conduct this evaluation through the
IAP amendment process. Paragraph
(a)(3) would require the BLM to rely on
the best available scientific information,
including Indigenous Knowledge, and
the best available information
concerning subsistence uses and
resources. Paragraph (a)(4) would
require the BLM to provide meaningful
opportunities for public participation in
the evaluation process, including review
and comment periods and, as
appropriate, public meetings.
Existing § 2361.1(d) concerns the
submission, content, and public review
of recommendations for additional
Special Areas. Proposed paragraph (a)(4)
would retain the basic contours of that
provision but provide additional
specificity. It would allow the public to
participate in the evaluation process,
including by recommending new
Special Areas, new significant resource
values for existing Special Areas, and
measures to assure maximum protection
of Special Areas’ significant resource
values. The proposed rule would
require the BLM to evaluate and
respond to such recommendations.
Similar to existing § 2361.1, proposed
paragraph (a)(4) would specify that
Special Area recommendations should
describe the size and location of the
lands, significant resource values, and
measures necessary to assure maximum
protection of those values.
Paragraph (a)(5) would allow the
authorized officer to implement interim
measures to assure maximum protection
of significant resource values in lands
under consideration for designation as a
Special Area. This provision would
assist the BLM in fulfilling its statutory
duty to protect Special Areas.
Paragraph (a)(6) would require that
the BLM base decisions to designate
Special Areas solely on whether
significant resource values are present
59 See BLM Land Use Planning Handbook H–
1601–1 34 (Mar. 2005) (directing the BLM to
evaluate land use plans ‘‘at a minimum every five
years’’), available at https://www.ntc.blm.gov/krc/
uploads/360/4_BLM%20Planning%
20Handbook%20H-1601-1.pdf.

PO 00000

Frm 00049

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

and would prohibit the BLM from
considering the existence of measures to
protect or otherwise administer those
values. For example, if lands not within
a Special Area contained important
caribou calving habitat and those lands
were already subject to certain
protections under the IAP, the BLM
would not be permitted to consider
those protections during the decisionmaking process for the proposed
designation or update. This change is
needed to align the regulations with the
NPRPA, which authorizes the Secretary
to designate Special Areas based on the
presence of ‘‘any significant subsistence,
recreational, fish and wildlife, or
historical or scenic value . . . .’’ 42
U.S.C. 6504(a).
Paragraph (a)(7) would require the
BLM, when designating a Special Area
or recognizing the presence of
additional significant resource values in
an existing Special Area, to adopt
measures to assure maximum protection
of significant resource values. That
provision mirrors the BLM’s statutory
responsibility under the NPRPA. 42
U.S.C. 6504(a). Paragraph (a)(7) would
provide needed clarification by
specifying that those measures would
supersede any inconsistent provisions
in the IAP.
Paragraph (a)(8) would incorporate
the requirement of existing § 2361.1(c)
that the BLM publish in the Federal
Register a legal description of any new
Special Area. The proposed rule also
would require the BLM to publish in the
Federal Register a summary of the
significant resource values supporting
the Special Area designation. Rather
than requiring publication in local
newspapers as the current regulations
require, the proposed rule would
require the BLM to maintain maps of the
Special Areas on its website. We believe
those proposals would provide more
effective public notice.
Section 2361.30(b) would establish a
framework for removing lands from
Special Area designations. Because
Congress identified the Utukok River
Uplands and Teshekpuk Lake Special
Areas in the NPRPA and required them
to be managed to protect surface
resources, the BLM cannot remove lands
from those Special Area designations
absent statutory authorization. See
Public Law 94–258, sec. 104(b), 90 Stat.
304 (1976). For other Special Areas, the
proposed rule would allow the BLM to
remove lands from a Special Area
designation only when the significant
resource values that supported the
designation are no longer present (e.g.,
if important wildlife habitat that
supported the designation was no longer
present). That provision is consistent

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
with the BLM’s statutory duty to ‘‘assure
the maximum protection of such surface
values consistent with the requirements
of [the NPRPA] for the exploration of
the reserve.’’ Id.
Before removing lands from a Special
Area designation, paragraph (b) would
require the BLM to provide the public
with the opportunity to review and
comment on its proposed decision and
consult with federally recognized Tribes
and Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act corporations. Finally, the proposed
rule would require the BLM to
document its consideration of those
comments. Those requirements would
assure public participation in the dedesignation process.
Section 2361.40 Management of Oil
and Gas Activities in Special Areas
As noted above, the proposed rule
would enhance the specificity of the
current regulations on the mechanisms
for assuring maximum protection of
significant resource values in Special
Areas. The current regulations
paraphrase the maximum protection
requirement of the NPRPA and provide
examples of measures that the BLM
could potentially take to assure
maximum protection. See 43 CFR
2361.1(c). This proposed new section
would establish new standards and
procedures for achieving maximum

are closed, including most of the
Teshekpuk Lake and Utukok River
Uplands Special Areas. The map also
shows areas that are open to leasing, but
subject to no surface occupancy and
areas that are outside the BLM’s
subsurface authority.
Map 4 shows the areas of the NPR–A
that are available and unavailable for
new infrastructure. The map shows that
new infrastructure is prohibited on
approximately 8.3 million acres of the
NPR–A, limited to ‘‘essential’’
infrastructure on approximately 3.3
million acres, and permitted on
approximately 10.8 million acres. The
BLM is considering including in the
final rule the following definition for
the term ‘‘essential,’’ which resembles
provisions of Lease Stipulation K–12
from the 2022 IAP ROD: ‘‘Essential
means the proposed infrastructure is
necessary for development and
production on a valid existing onshore
or offshore lease and no other feasible
and prudent option is available.’’ The
BLM requests feedback on this
approach, as well as any additional
recommendations on defining this term.
The restrictions identified on Maps 2
and 4 that would apply to new oil and
gas leases and infrastructure are detailed
in the 2022 IAP ROD and summarized
in the following table.60

Stipulation

Objective

K–1—River Setbacks ..........................................

Minimize the disruption of natural flow patterns and changes to water quality; the loss of
spawning, rearing, and over-wintering habitat for fish; and impacts to subsistence cabins
and campsites, among other purposes.
Minimize the disruption of natural flow patterns and changes to water quality; the loss of
spawning, rearing or over wintering habitat for fish; and the disruption of subsistence activities, among other purposes.
Protect fish and wildlife habitat; preserve air and water quality; and minimize impacts to subsistence activities and historic travel routes on the major coastal waterbodies.

K–2—Deep Water Lakes ....................................

K–4—Kogru River, Dease Inlet, Admiralty Bay,
Elson Lagoon, Peard Bay, Wainwright Inlet/
Kuk River, and Kasegaluk Lagoon, and their
associated islands.
K–5—Coastal Setback Areas ..............................

K–6—Goose Molting Area ..................................
K–8—Brant Survey Area .....................................
K–9—Teshekpuk Lake Caribou Habitat Area .....

K–10—Teshekpuk
Corridor.

Lake

Caribou

Movement

K–11—Southern Caribou Calving Area ..............
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

protection of Special Areas’ significant
resource values, with a specific focus on
addressing the impacts of oil and gas
activities. Of note, this section would
affirmatively establish that assuring
maximum protection of significant
resource values is the management
priority for Special Areas. Under
proposed paragraph (a), the BLM would
need to comply with this standard and
adopt maximum protection measures for
each significant resource value
associated with a Special Area.
Paragraph (b) would require the BLM
take such steps to avoid the adverse
effects of proposed oil and gas activities
on the significant resource values of
Special Areas, including by
conditioning, delaying action on, or
denying proposals for activities.
Paragraph (c) of this section would
require oil and gas leasing and new
infrastructure to conform to the land use
allocations and restrictions identified on
maps 2 and 4 of the 2022 IAP ROD that
are published along with the final rule,
unless the BLM makes revisions in
accordance with § 2361.30 of these
regulations. Map 2 shows the areas of
the NPR–A that are open and closed to
oil and gas leasing. The map reflects
that approximately 11.8 million acres
are open to leasing subject to the terms
and conditions detailed in the IAP,
while approximately 11 million acres

62035

K–12—Colville River Special Area ......................
K–13—Pik Dunes ................................................

60 2022

Protect coastal waters and their value as fish and wildlife habitat; minimize hindrance or alteration of caribou movement within caribou coastal insect-relief areas; and prevent impacts to
subsistence resources and activities, among other purposes.
Minimize disturbance to molting geese and loss of goose molting habitat in and around lakes
in the Goose Molting Area.
Minimize the loss or alteration of habitat for, or disturbance of, nesting and brood rearing brant
in the Brant Survey Area.
Minimize disturbance and hindrance of caribou, or alteration of caribou movements through
portions the Teshekpuk Lake Caribou Habitat Area that are essential for all season use, including calving and rearing, insect-relief, and migration.
Minimize disturbance and hindrance of caribou, or alteration of caribou movements (that are
essential for all season use, including calving and rearing, insect-relief, and migration) in the
area extending from the eastern shore of Teshekpuk Lake eastward to the Kogru River.
Minimize disturbance and hindrance of caribou, or alteration of caribou movements (that are
essential for all season use, including calving and post calving, and insect-relief) in the area
south/southeast of Teshekpuk Lake.
Prevent or minimize loss of raptor foraging habitat.
Retain unique qualities of the Pik Dunes, including geologic and scenic uniqueness, insect-relief habitat for caribou, and habitat for several uncommon plant species.

NPR–A IAP ROD at A–6 to A–21.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

Frm 00050

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62036

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Stipulation

Objective

K–14—Utukok River Uplands Special Area ........

Minimize disturbance and hindrance of caribou, or alteration of caribou movements through
the Utukok River Uplands Special Area that are essential for all season use, including
calving and rearing, insect-relief, and migration.

Several of the restrictions utilize the
term ‘‘permanent oil and gas facilities,’’
which is defined on page A–3 of the
2022 IAP ROD to mean:

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Permanent Facilities include production
facilities, pipelines, roads, airstrips,
production pads, docks and other bottomfounded structures, seawater-treatment
plants, and other structures associated with
an oil and gas operation that occupy land for
more than one winter season; also included
are material sites such as sand and gravel,
and ‘‘temporary platforms’’ if those platforms
are used for production rather than
exploration. Exploration wellheads and
seasonal facilities such as ice roads and ice
pads are excluded, even when the pads are
designed for use in successive winters. This
definition does not include over-summering
ice pads for exploration purposes.

The BLM is considering incorporating
this definition into the rule and requests
feedback on this approach.
The purpose of requiring leasing and
infrastructure in Special Areas to
conform to IAP maps 2 and 4 is to
codify the existing protections and
restrictions from the 2022 IAP ROD. As
explained above, the BLM developed
that land use plan through a lengthy
public planning process involving all
stakeholders, which stretches back to
the development of the 2013 IAP ROD.
The 2022 IAP ROD, which is based in
large part on the framework set forth in
the 2013 IAP ROD, incorporates aspects
of the 2020 IAP ROD, and reflects nowsettled expectations about the use of the
NPR–A. It also reflects what the BLM
views as the floor of protections for the
NPR–A that grew out of the public
planning process. By incorporating the
two maps into any final rule, the BLM
intends to incorporate the land use
allocations, restrictions, and
stipulations from the 2022 IAP ROD into
the rule without reprinting a lengthy
text. We seek public comment in
particular on whether this approach
accomplishes that goal effectively and
efficiently. Do the maps convey
sufficient information? Are there
additional definitions that should be
included in the rule? Is there a better
way to accomplish our goal?
Paragraph (c) also would establish a
presumption against leasing and new
infrastructure on lands in Special Areas
that are allocated as available for those
activities. That presumption could be
overcome if specific information is
available to the BLM that clearly

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

demonstrates that those activities can be
conducted with no or minimal adverse
effects on the significant resource values
of the Special Area. The intensive
process that led to the IAP resulted in
a comprehensive plan for protection of
the Special Areas in the NPR–A. To
fulfill the BLM’s statutory duty to assure
maximum protection for those areas’
significant resource values, the BLM
believes that plan should be treated as
a regulatory floor, and additional
activities should only be allowed when
maximum protection is assured.
The proposed definition of
‘‘infrastructure’’ in § 2361.5(g) would
exclude ‘‘exploratory wells that are
drilled in a single season; infrastructure
in support of science and public safety;
and construction, renovation, or
replacement of facilities on existing
gravel pads at previously disturbed sites
where the facilities will promote safety
and environmental protection.’’ These
exceptions were specifically analyzed
and adopted in the 2022 IAP ROD.
Proposed § 2361.40(d) would establish
three additional exceptions to the oil
and gas leasing and new infrastructure
prohibitions in paragraph (c). The first
exception would permit leasing and
infrastructure solely to address drainage
of Federal oil and gas resources.
Drainage occurs ‘‘when a well that is
drilled or is in production adjacent to
Federal or Indian leases or unleased
lands is potentially draining Federal or
Indian oil and gas resources.’’ BLM MS–
3160. Surface disturbing activities
would be prohibited on any lease tract
issued for this purpose. The exception
for drainage of Federal oil and gas
resources is included because the
regulations expressly provide for leasing
of tracts that are subject to drainage in
order to prevent loss of United States oil
and gas resources and potential
royalties. See 43 CFR 3130.3. Nosurface-occupancy leases are an option
the BLM may elect to use when the
surface management agency has
determined that surface oil and gas
facilities and operations would pose an
unacceptable risk to the surface
resources. The second exception would
permit the construction of new
infrastructure, including roads,
transmission lines, and pipelines, that
would primarily benefit communities in
and around the NPR–A or would
support subsistence activities. The BLM

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

would still need to adopt measures to
assure maximum protection of any
significant resource values affected by
that infrastructure. We propose to
include that exception because
communities in and around the NPR–A
must have some infrastructure to
survive and thrive. The third exception
would allow the BLM to approve new
infrastructure if essential to support
exploration or development of a valid
existing lease and no practicable
alternatives exist that would have less
adverse impact on significant resource
values of the Special Area. That
exception is necessary to accommodate
the rights of current leaseholders.
Proposed paragraph (e) would require
the BLM to document and consider any
uncertainty regarding potential adverse
effects on Special Areas and ensure that
its actions account for such uncertainty.
That provision will help fulfill the
BLM’s statutory mandate to assure
maximum protection for Special Areas’
significant resource values.
Proposed paragraph (f) would require
the BLM to prepare a Statement of
Adverse Effect whenever it cannot avoid
adverse effects on a Special Area. In
each statement, the BLM would need to
describe the significant resource values
that may be affected; the nature, scope,
and duration of the effects; measures the
BLM evaluated to avoid those effects; a
justification for not requiring those
measures; and measures it would
require to minimize and mitigate the
adverse effects on significant resource
values. The BLM will require mitigation
of adverse effects on significant resource
values of Special Areas that cannot be
avoided or minimized. Measures the
BLM may require include compensatory
mitigation. Such measures will be
developed, evaluated, and, as necessary,
adopted in project-specific analyses.
Proposed paragraphs (g) and (h) would
require the BLM to provide the public
with an opportunity to review and
comment on any Statement of Adverse
Effect and consult with federally
recognized Tribes and Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act corporations that
have ties to the area.
Finally, proposed paragraph (i) would
require the BLM to include in each oiland gas-related decision or
authorization ‘‘terms and conditions
that provide the Bureau with sufficient
authority to fully implement the
requirements of this section.’’ That

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
provision would ensure that the BLM
incorporates into decision documents
the necessary language to implement
any final rule.
The BLM seeks feedback on whether
this proposed rule would ‘‘assure the
maximum protection’’ of significant
resource values in Special Areas ‘‘to the
extent consistent with the requirements
of [the NPRPA] for the exploration of
the reserve.’’ See 42 U.S.C. 6504(a).

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Section 2361.50 Management of
Subsistence Uses Within Special Areas
The BLM recognizes the overriding
importance of subsistence resources to
communities in and around the NPR–A.
There are over 40 communities that use
the NPR–A or the resources it supports
for subsistence purposes, including six
with significant connections:
Anaktuvuk Pass, Atqasuk, Nuiqsut,
Point Lay, Utqiagvik, and Wainwright.61
All of these communities ‘‘rely on . . .
subsistence resources for their physical,
traditional, and social existence,’’ and
many of these resources, including
caribou, fish, and waterfowl, are
concentrated in Special Areas.62
Accordingly, this new section would
require the BLM to manage Special
Areas to protect and support fish and
wildlife and their habitats and the
associated subsistence use of those areas
by rural residents as defined in 50 CFR
100.4, the Department of the Interior’s
subsistence management regulations for
public lands in Alaska. Additionally,
this section would require the BLM to
provide appropriate access to and
within Special Areas for subsistence
purposes while still assuring maximum
protection of the significant resource
values of the Special Areas.
Section 2361.60 Co-Stewardship
Opportunities in Special Areas
This proposed new section would
encourage the BLM to explore costewardship opportunities for Special
Areas, including co-management,
collaborative and cooperative
management, and Tribally led
stewardship. This provision would
advance the Federal government’s
commitment to strengthening the role of
Tribal governments in Federal land
management. (Presidential
Memorandum on Tribal Consultation
and Strengthening Nation-to-Nation
Relationships, January 26, 2021; Joint
Secretarial Order on Fulfilling the Trust
Responsibility to Indian Tribes in the
Stewardship of Federal Lands and
Waters, Order No. 3403, November 15,
2021.)
61 2022
62 2022

NPR–A IAP DNA at C–3–4.
NPR–A IAP ROD at 11.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

Section 2361.70

Use Authorizations

Section 2361.2 would be redesignated
to § 2361.70. Existing paragraph (a)
states that all use authorizations require
approval from the authorized officer
‘‘[e]xcept for petroleum exploration
which has been authorized by the Act.’’
The proposed rule would omit that
exception. The NPRPA of 1976
authorized the Federal government to
conduct exploration activities; those
activities did not require approval by an
authorized officer. Since the 1980
amendments initiated a competitive oil
and gas leasing program, all oil and gas
activities are conducted by oil and gas
companies and require authorization
from a BLM authorized officer.
No substantive changes are proposed
to § 2361.70(b). The BLM would modify
§ 2361.70(c) for clarity purposes, and
would update § 2361.70(d) to recognize
its duties to protect surfaces resources
and assure maximum protection of
Special Areas’ significant resource
values in the NPR–A.
Section 2361.80
and Occupancy

Unauthorized Use

Section 2361.3 would be redesignated
to § 2361.80. No substantive changes
would be made to this section.
IV. Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866, as
Amended by E.O 14094, and 13563)
E.O. 12866, as amended by E.O.
14094, provides that the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) within the OMB will review all
significant regulatory actions. OIRA has
determined that this proposed rule is
significant.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of
E.O. 12866 while calling for
improvements in the Nation’s regulatory
system to promote predictability, to
reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome
tools for achieving regulatory ends. The
Executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. 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. We have developed
this proposed rule in a manner
consistent with these requirements.

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62037

Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule will not have a
significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The BLM is not
required to prepare an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis with this proposed
rule. The BLM welcomes public
comments on the impact of this
proposed rule on small businesses.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) has developed size standards to
carry out the purposes of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. The size standards can be
found in 13 CFR 121.201. For a specific
industry identified by the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS), small entities are
defined by the SBA as an individual,
limited partnership, or small company
considered at ‘‘arm’s length’’ from the
control of any parent company, which
meet certain size standards.
The proposed rule is most likely to
affect business currently operating in
the oil and gas sector in the NPR–A.
There are eight active lessees in NPR–
A. SBA size standards identify small
business in the crude petroleum
extraction (NAICS 211120) and natural
gas extraction (NAICS 211130)
industries to be those with 1,250 or
fewer employees. Some of the eight
active lessees meet the SBA criteria for
small businesses, which is less than a
substantial number of small entities
potentially affected. Further, the
proposed rule will not affect existing
leases and therefore would not have a
significant economic impact on small
businesses holding these leases.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
The proposed rule would not have a
significant or unique effect on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the
private sector. The proposed rule
contains no requirements that would
apply to State, local, or Tribal
governments. The costs that the
proposed rule would impose on the
private sector are below the monetary
threshold established at 2 U.S.C.
1532(a). A statement containing the
information required by the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) is therefore not required for
the proposed rule. This proposed rule is
also not subject to the requirements of
section 203 of UMRA because it
contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, because it contains
no requirements that apply to such

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62038

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

governments, nor does it impose
obligations upon them.
Takings (E.O. 12630)
This proposed rule would not affect a
taking of private property or otherwise
having taking implications under E.O.
12630, as it recognizes and is consistent
with valid existing rights, including oil
and gas leases. This proposed rule
would revise the BLM’s current
management framework for surface
resources and Special Areas in the
NPR–A. The BLM has not substantially
updated this framework since the early
1980s. A takings implication assessment
is not required.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in section 1 of
Executive Order 13132, this proposed
rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation
of a federalism summary impact
statement. A federalism impact
statement is not required. We welcome
public comments on the impact this
proposed rule could have on the State
of Alaska.
The proposed rule would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the levels of
government. It would not apply to
States or local governments or State or
local governmental entities. The
proposed rule would affect the
relationship between operators, lessees,
and the BLM, but it does not directly
impact the States. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132,
the BLM has determined that this
proposed rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This proposed rule complies with the
requirements of E.O. 12988. More
specifically, this proposed rule meets
the criteria of section 3(a), which
requires agencies to review all
regulations to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and to write all regulations to
minimize litigation. This proposed rule
also meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2),
which requires agencies to write all
regulations in clear language with clear
legal standards.
Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175
and Departmental Policy)
The Department strives to strengthen
its government-to-government
relationship with Indian Tribes through
a commitment to consultation with

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

Indian Tribes and recognition of their
right to self-governance and Tribal
sovereignty.
The BLM evaluated this proposed rule
under the Department’s consultation
policy and under the criteria in E.O.
Order 13175 to identify possible effects
of the rule on federally recognized
Indian Tribes. Since the BLM is
responsible for balancing the reserve’s
oil and gas resources with the protection
of surface resources in the NPR–A, the
proposed rule may have significance to
Alaska Native Tribes and Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Corporations.
On August 25, 2023, the BLM sent a
letter to each federally registered Alaska
Tribe and Alaska Native Corporation
informing them of the rulemaking effort.
The letter recognized the unique and
vital input of Alaska Natives and offered
opportunities for participation
throughout the rulemaking process. The
BLM will continue to engage in
outreach efforts to ensure Alaska
Natives are advised of the mechanisms
by which they can participate, including
opportunities for individual
government-to-government consultation
regarding the proposed rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3521) generally
provides that an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and
notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Collections of information
include requests and requirements that
an individual, partnership, or
corporation obtain information, and
report it to a Federal agency. See 44
U.S.C. 3502(3); 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and (k).
This proposed rule contains an
information collection requirement that
is subject to review by OMB under the
PRA. This information collection is
located in § 2361.30(a)(4). One of the
key principles of the proposed rule is
the inclusion of stakeholder and public
notice and participation in the
designation and removal of lands to be
included in a Special Area. To help
ensure that the BLM receives the
information needed to inform its
decision to include lands in a Special
Area, § 2361.30(a)(4) includes a list of
criteria that should be addressed when
a member of the public recommends
lands for such a designation. This
information includes the following:
• The size and location of the
recommended lands;
• The significant subsistence,
recreational, fish and wildlife,
historical, or scenic resource values that

PO 00000

Frm 00053

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

are present within or supported by the
recommended lands;
• Measures that may be necessary to
assure maximum protection of those
values; and
• Any other pertinent information.
The BLM has submitted a request to
OMB for this information collection
requirement under the requirements of
5 CFR 1320.11, Clearance of collections
of information in proposed rules. The
estimated burden associated with this
information-collection is outlined as
follows.
OMB Control Number: 1004–XXXX.
Title of Collection: Management and
Protection of the National Petroleum
Reserve in Alaska—Recommendations
for Special Reserve Areas (43 CFR
2361.30).
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: New collection
(Request for new OMB Control
Number).
Respondents/Affected Public: Persons
who wish to recommend lands to be
designated as a SA in the NPR–A.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion;
at least once every 5 years.
Number of Respondents: 100.
Annual Responses: 100.
Estimated Average Response time: 15
hours.
Annual Burden Hours: 1,500.
Annual Burden Cost: None. If you
want to comment on the informationcollection requirements of this proposed
rule, please send your comments and
suggestions on this information
collection by the date indicated in the
DATES and ADDRESSES sections as
previously described.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
This proposed rule meets the criteria
set forth at 43 CFR 46.210(i) for a
Departmental categorical exclusion in
that this proposed rule is ‘‘of an
administrative, financial, legal,
technical, or procedural nature.’’ They
do not involve any of the extraordinary
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215.
Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O.
13211)
Under Executive Order 13211,
agencies are required to prepare and
submit to OMB a Statement of Energy
Effects for significant energy actions.
This statement is to include a detailed
statement of ‘‘any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use
(including a shortfall in supply, price
increases, and increase use of foreign
supplies)’’ for the action and reasonable
alternatives and their effects.
Section 4(b) of Executive Order 13211
defines a ‘‘significant energy action’’ as

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

‘‘any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that
promulgates or is expected to lead to the
promulgation of a final rule or
regulation, including notices of inquiry,
advance notices of proposed
rulemaking, and notices of proposed
rulemaking: (1)(i) that is a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866 or
any successor order, and (ii) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy; or
(2) that is designated by OIRA as a
significant energy action.’’
This proposed rule would not have a
significant effect on the Nation’s energy
supply. It would restate existing
statutory standards and establish a
procedural framework for ensuring that
the BLM meets those standards. It also
would codify land use restrictions that
already are legally binding in the 2022
IAP ROD. Further, the proposed rule
would presume, in proposed
§ 2361.40(c), that oil and gas leasing or
infrastructure on lands allocated as
available for such activities ‘‘should not
be permitted unless specific information
available to the Bureau clearly
demonstrates that those activities can be
conducted with no or minimal adverse
effects on significant resource values.’’
That presumption merely implements
the BLM’s existing statutory duty to
assure maximum protection of the
significant resource values in Special
Areas. 42 U.S.C. 6504(a). Therefore, the
proposed rule would not change the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
The BLM welcomes public comments
on the impact of this proposed rule on
future energy production.
Clarity of This Regulation (E.O.s 12866,
12988, and 13563)
We are required by E.O.s 12866
(section 1(b)(12)), 12988 (section
3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and
by the Presidential Memorandum of
June 1, 1988, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule
must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and
clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help the BLM revise
the proposed rule, your comments
should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the
numbers of the sections or paragraphs

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

that you find unclear, which sections or
sentences are too long, the sections
where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Laura Daniel-Davis,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land
and Minerals Management.

List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2360
Alaska, Oil and gas activity,
Protection of surface resources, Tribes,
Special Areas.
■ For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Bureau of Land
Management proposes to revise 43 CFR
part 2360 as follows:
PART 2360—NATIONAL PETROLEUM
RESERVE IN ALASKA
Subpart 2361—Management and Protection
of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
Sec.
2361.1 Purpose.
2361.3 Authority.
2361.4 Responsibility.
2361.5 Definitions.
2361.6 Effect of law.
2361.7 Severability.
2361.10 Protection of surface resources.
2361.20 Existing Special Areas.
2361.30 Special Areas designation and
amendment process.
2361.40 Management of oil and gas
activities in Special Areas.
2361.50 Management of subsistence uses
within Special Areas.
2361.60 Co-stewardship opportunities in
Special Areas.
2361.70 Use authorizations.
2361.80 Unauthorized use and occupancy.
Subpart 2362 [Reserved]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6501 et seq. and 43
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.
§ 2361.1

Purpose.

The purpose of the regulations in this
subpart is to provide procedures for
protection and control of the
environmental, fish and wildlife, and
historical and scenic values of the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska,
including mitigating the significantly
adverse effects of oil and gas activities
on the surface resources of the Reserve
and assuring maximum protection of
significant resource values in Special
Areas pursuant to and consistent with
the provisions of the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act of 1976 (90
Stat. 303; 42 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation
Act (94 Stat. 2371, 16 U.S.C. 3101 et
seq.), and other applicable authorities.
§ 2361.3

Authority.

The statutory authority for these
regulations is the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act of 1976, as
amended by the Department of the

PO 00000

Frm 00054

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62039

Interior Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year
1981 (Pub. L. 96–514).
§ 2361.4

Responsibility.

The Bureau of Land Management is
responsible for the surface and
subsurface management of the Reserve,
including protecting surface resources
from environmental degradation and
assuring maximum protection of
significant resource values in Special
Areas. The Act authorizes the Bureau to
prepare rules and regulations necessary
to carry out surface management and
protection duties.
§ 2361.5

Definitions.

As used in this subpart, the term:
Act means the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act of 1976 (as
amended and codified at 42 U.S.C.
6501–6508).
Authorized officer means any
employee of the Bureau of Land
Management who has been delegated
the authority to perform the duties of
this subpart.
Bureau means the Bureau of Land
Management.
Exploration means activities
conducted on the Reserve for the
purpose of evaluating petroleum
resources, including crude oil, gases
(including natural gas), natural gasoline,
and other related hydrocarbons, oil
shale, and the products of any such
resources.
Indigenous Knowledge (IK) means a
body of observations, oral and written
knowledge, practices, and beliefs
developed by Tribes and Indigenous
Peoples through interaction and
experience with the environment. It is
applied to phenomena across biological,
physical, social, and cultural systems.
IK can be developed over millennia,
continues to develop, and includes
understanding based on evidence
acquired through direct contact with the
environment and long-term experiences,
as well as extensive observations,
lessons, and skills passed from
generation to generation. IK is
developed by Indigenous Peoples
including, but not limited to, Tribal
Nations, American Indians, and Alaska
Natives.
Integrated Activity Plan (IAP) means a
land use management plan that governs
the management of all BLMadministered lands and minerals
throughout the Reserve.
Infrastructure means a structure or
improvement that is not built for use by
subsistence hunters, trappers, fishers,
berry-pickers, and other subsistence
users to facilitate subsistence activities
and that is not ephemeral, such as snow
or ice roads. Infrastructure includes

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62040

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

pipelines, gravel drilling pads, and
other improvements built to support
commercial oil and gas activities, but it
does not include exploratory wells that
are drilled in a single season;
infrastructure in support of science and
public safety; and construction,
renovation, or replacement of facilities
on existing gravel pads at previously
disturbed sites where the facilities will
promote safety and environmental
protection.
Reserve means those lands within the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
(prior to June 1, 1977, designated Naval
Petroleum Reserve No. 4) which was
established by Executive order, dated
February 27, 1923, except for tract
Numbered 1 as described in Public Land
Order 2344 (the Naval Arctic Research–
Laboratory—surface estate only) dated
April 24, 1961.
Secretary means the Secretary of the
Interior.
Significant resource value means any
subsistence, recreational, fish and
wildlife, historical, or scenic value
identified by the Bureau as supporting
the designation of a Special Area.
Special Areas means areas within the
Reserve identified by the Secretary or by
statute as having significant resource
values and that are managed to assure
maximum protection of such values, to
the extent consistent with the
requirements of the Act for the
exploration of the Reserve.
Use authorization means a written
approval of a request for use of land or
resources.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

§ 2361.6

Effect of law.

(a) Subject to valid existing rights, and
except as provided by the Department of
the Interior Appropriations Act, Fiscal
Year 1981 (Pub. L. 96–514), all lands
within the exterior boundaries of the
Reserve are reserved and withdrawn
from all forms of entry and disposition
under the public land laws, including
the mining and mineral leasing laws,
and all other acts.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraph (a) of this section, the
Secretary is authorized to:
(1) Make dispositions of mineral
materials pursuant to the Act of July 31,
1947 (61 Stat. 681), as amended (30
U.S.C. 601), for appropriate use by
Alaska Natives and the North Slope
Borough.
(2) Make such dispositions of mineral
materials and grant such rights-of-way,
licenses, and permits as may be
necessary to carry out the Secretary’s
responsibilities under the Act.
(3) Convey the surface of lands
properly selected on or before December
18, 1975, by Native village corporations

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act, as amended (43 U.S.C.
1601, et seq.).
(4) Grant such rights-of-way to the
North Slope Borough, under the
provisions of title V of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43
U.S.C. 1761 et seq.) or section 28 of the
Mineral Leasing Act, as amended (30
U.S.C. 185), as may be necessary to
permit the North Slope Borough to
provide energy supplies to villages on
the North Slope.
(c) All other provisions of law
heretofore enacted and actions
heretofore taken reserving such lands as
a Reserve shall remain in full force and
effect to the extent not inconsistent with
the Act.
(d) To the extent not inconsistent with
the Act, all other public land laws are
applicable.
§ 2361.7

Severability.

If a court holds any provision of the
regulations in this part or their
applicability to any person or
circumstances invalid, the remainder of
these regulations and their applicability
to other people or circumstances will
remain unaffected.
§ 2361.10

Protection of surface resources.

(a) In administering the Reserve, the
Bureau must protect surface resources
by adopting whatever conditions,
restrictions, and prohibitions it deems
necessary or appropriate to mitigate
reasonably foreseeable and significantly
adverse effects of proposed activities.
Such conditions, restrictions, or
prohibitions may involve conditioning,
delaying action on, or denying some or
all aspects of proposed activities, and
will fully consider community access
and other infrastructure needs, after
consultation with the North Slope
Borough and consistent with § 2361.6.
(b) The Bureau will use the following
procedures to protect surface resources
from the reasonably foreseeable and
significantly adverse effects of proposed
activities:
(1) The Bureau will maintain an
Integrated Activity Plan (IAP)
addressing management of all BLMadministered lands and minerals
throughout the Reserve. When issuing a
use authorization, the Bureau must
conform to the IAP and these rules. To
the extent there is any inconsistency
between the IAP and these rules, the
rules govern;
(2) In each decision concerning
proposed activity in the Reserve, the
Bureau will document consideration of,
and adopt measures to mitigate,
reasonably foreseeable and significantly
adverse effects on fish and wildlife,

PO 00000

Frm 00055

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

water, cultural, paleontological, scenic,
and any other surface resource. The
Bureau will take particular care to
account for, and mitigate adverse effects
on, surface resources that support
subsistence uses and needs;
(3) In assessing effects of a decision
concerning proposed activity in the
Reserve, the Bureau will identify and
evaluate any reasonably foreseeable
effects of its decision, including effects
that are later in time or farther removed
in distance, and effects that result from
the incremental effects of the proposed
activities when added to the effects of
other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable actions; and
(4) The Bureau will document its
consideration of any uncertainty
concerning the nature, scope, and
duration of potential effects on surface
resources of the Reserve and shall
ensure that any conditions, restrictions,
or prohibitions on proposed activities
account for and reflect any such
uncertainty.
(c) When affected surface resources
are located in Special Areas, the Bureau
must comply with the procedures and
requirements of §§ 2361.20 through
2361.60.
(d) The Bureau must include in each
decision and authorization related to
proposed activity in the Reserve such
terms and conditions that provide the
Bureau with sufficient ability to fully
implement the requirements of this
subpart.
(e)(1) To the extent consistent with
the requirements of the Act, the terms
of any applicable existing authorization,
and applicable law, and after
consultation with appropriate Federal,
State, and local agencies, federally
recognized Tribes, and Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act corporations, the
authorized officer may limit, restrict, or
prohibit the use of or access to lands
within the Reserve, including Special
Areas. Upon proper notice, as
determined by the authorized officer,
such actions may be taken to protect
fish and wildlife breeding, nesting,
spawning, lambing or calving, or
migrations; subsistence uses and
resources; and other environmental,
scenic, or historic values.
(2) The consultation requirement in
§ 2361.1(e)(1) is not required when the
authorized officer determines that
emergency measures are required.
(f) No site, structure, object, or other
values of historical, cultural, or
paleontological character, including, but
not limited to, historic and prehistoric
remains, fossils, and artifacts, shall be
injured, altered, destroyed, or collected
without authorization under an
appropriate Federal permit and without

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules
compliance with applicable law
governing cultural items, archaeological
resources, and historic properties.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

§ 2361.20

Existing Special Areas.

Any lands within the Reserve
designated as a Special Area as of
[EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL
RULE], will continue to be managed as
a Special Area except as modified
pursuant to § 2361.30, including:
(a) Colville River Special Area. The
Colville River Special Area
encompasses the area within the
boundaries depicted on maps that are
published as of [EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE FINAL RULE], and available for
public inspection at the Arctic District
Office. The Colville River Special Area
shall be managed to assure maximum
protection of the following significant
resource values, as well as additional
values identified through the process set
forth in § 2361.30:
(1) Important habitat for raptor
species, including, but not limited to,
the Arctic peregrine falcon;
(2) Important habitat for other bird
species, including, but not limited to,
neotropical migratory birds, shorebirds,
loons, waterfowl, inland dwelling sea
birds, and passerines;
(3) Important habitat for moose;
(4) Important habitat for fish;
(5) Important subsistence activities;
(6) Important recreational activities;
(7) World-class paleontological
deposits; and
(8) Significant cultural resources,
including numerous sites from the
prehistoric and historic eras.
(b) Kasegaluk Lagoon Special Area.
The Kasegaluk Lagoon Special Area
encompasses the area within the
boundaries depicted on maps that are
published as of [EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE FINAL RULE], and available for
public inspection at the Arctic District
Office. The Kasegaluk Lagoon Special
Area shall be managed to assure
maximum protection of the following
significant resource values, as well as
additional values identified through the
process set forth in § 2361.30:
(1) Important habitat for marine
mammals;
(2) Unique ecosystem for the Arctic
Coast;
(3) Opportunities for primitive
recreational experiences;
(4) Important habitat for migratory
birds; and
(5) Important subsistence activities.
(c) Peard Bay Special Area. The Peard
Bay Special Area encompasses the area
within the boundaries depicted on maps
that are published as of [EFFECTIVE
DATE OF THE FINAL RULE], and
available for public inspection at the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

Arctic District Office. The Peard Bay
Special Area shall be managed to assure
maximum protection of the following
significant resource values, as well as
additional values identified through the
process set forth in § 2361.30:
(1) Haul-out areas and nearshore
waters for marine mammals; and
(2) High-use staging and migration
areas for shorebirds and waterbirds.
(d) Teshekpuk Lake Special Area. The
Teshekpuk Lake Special Area
encompasses the area within the
boundaries depicted on maps that are
published as of [EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE FINAL RULE], and available for
public inspection at the Arctic District
Office. The Teshekpuk Lake Special
Area shall be managed to assure
maximum protection of the following
significant resource values, as well as
additional values identified through the
process set forth in § 2361.30:
(1) Important nesting, staging, and
molting habitat for a large number of
migratory and other waterbirds;
(2) Important caribou habitat;
(3) Important shorebird habitat;
(4) Subsistence hunting and fishing
activities;
(5) Pik Dunes; and
(6) Overwintering habitat for fish.
(e) Utukok River Uplands Special
Area. The Utukok River Uplands
Special Area encompasses the area
within the boundaries depicted on maps
that are published as of [EFFECTIVE
DATE OF THE FINAL RULE], and
available for public inspection at the
Arctic District Office. The Utukok River
Uplands Special Area shall be managed
to assure maximum protection of the
following significant resource values, as
well as additional values identified
through the process set forth in
§ 2361.30:
(1) Important habitat for the Western
Arctic Caribou Herd;
(2) Subsistence hunting activities;
(3) Grizzly bear habitat; and
(4) Important wilderness values.
§ 2361.30 Special Areas designation and
amendment process.

(a) The Bureau must evaluate lands
within the Reserve for the presence of
significant subsistence, recreational, fish
and wildlife, historical, or scenic values
and shall designate lands as Special
Areas containing such values in
accordance with the following
procedures:
(1) At least once every 5 years, the
Bureau must evaluate and determine
whether to:
(i) Designate new Special Areas;
(ii) Expand existing Special Areas;
(iii) Recognize the presence of
additional significant resource values in
existing Special Areas; or

PO 00000

Frm 00056

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

62041

(iv) Require additional measures to
assure maximum protection of
significant resource values within
existing Special Areas.
(2) The Bureau may, but is not
required to, conduct the evaluation and
otherwise designate and amend Special
Areas through amendment of the IAP.
(3) Throughout the evaluation
process, the Bureau must rely on the
best available scientific information,
including Indigenous Knowledge, as
well as the best available information
concerning subsistence uses and
resources within the Reserve.
(4) The Bureau must provide the
public and interested stakeholders with
notice of, and meaningful opportunities
to participate in, the evaluation process,
including the opportunity to
recommend lands that should be
considered for designation as a Special
Area, significant resource values that
the Bureau should consider recognizing
for existing Special Areas, and measures
that the Bureau should consider
requiring to assure maximum protection
of significant resource values within
Special Areas. The Bureau will evaluate
and respond to recommendations that
are made in completing its evaluation.
Such recommendations should identify
and describe:
(i) The size and location of the
recommended lands;
(ii) The significant resource values
that are present within or supported by
the recommended lands;
(iii) Measures that may be necessary
to assure maximum protection of those
values; and
(iv) Any other pertinent information.
(5) If, at any point during the
evaluation process, the authorized
officer determines that interim measures
are required to assure maximum
protection of significant resource values
in lands under consideration for
designation as a Special Area, the
authorized officer may implement such
measures during the period for which
the lands are under consideration.
(6) The Bureau must base its decisions
to designate lands as Special Areas
solely on the presence of significant
resource values and must not consider
the existence of measures that have been
or may be adopted to protect or
otherwise administer those values.
(7) When the Bureau designates lands
as Special Areas or recognizes the
presence of additional significant
resource values in existing Special
Areas, the Bureau must adopt measures
to assure maximum protection of
significant resource values. Once
adopted, these measures become part of
and supersede inconsistent provisions
of the IAP then in effect for the Reserve.

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

62042

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

(8) For any lands designated as a
Special Area, the Bureau will publish a
legal description of those lands in the
Federal Register, along with a concise
summary of the significant resource
values that support the designation. The
Bureau will also maintain a map of the
Special Area on its website.
(b) The Bureau may not remove lands
from the Teshekpuk Lake and Utukok
River Uplands Special Areas unless
directed to do so by statute. The Bureau
may remove lands within other Special
Areas only when all of the significant
resource values that support the
designation are no longer present. When
determining whether to remove lands
from a Special Area designation, the
Bureau must:
(1) Prepare a summary of its proposed
determination, including the underlying
factual findings;
(2) Provide the public and interested
stakeholders with the opportunity to
review and comment on the proposed
determination;
(3) Consult with any federally
recognized Tribes and Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act corporations that
use the affected Special Area for
subsistence purposes or have historic or
cultural ties to the Special Area; and
(4) Issue a determination that
documents how the views and
information provided by the public,
federally recognized Tribes, Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act
corporations, federally qualified
subsistence users, and other interested
stakeholders have been considered.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

§ 2361.40 Management of oil and gas
activities in Special Areas.

Assuring maximum protection of
significant resource values is the
management priority for Special Areas.
The Bureau must fulfill this duty at each
stage in the decision-making process for
oil and gas activities in the Reserve and
in accordance with the following
procedures:
(a) The Bureau will identify and adopt
maximum protection measures for each
significant resource value that is present
in a Special Area.
(b) The Bureau must, to the extent
consistent with the Act, take such steps
as are necessary to avoid the adverse
effects of proposed oil and gas activities
on the significant resource values of
Special Areas. This includes, but is not
limited to, conditioning, delaying action
on, or denying proposals for activities,
either in whole or in part.
(c) Subject to any revisions made
pursuant to § 2361.30, oil and gas
leasing and authorization of new
infrastructure in Special Areas will
conform to the land use allocations and

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

restrictions identified on the maps
published as of [EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE FINAL RULE], and available for
public inspection at the Arctic District
Office. On lands allocated as available
for future oil and gas leasing or new
infrastructure, the Bureau will presume
that those activities should not be
permitted unless specific information
available to the Bureau clearly
demonstrates that those activities can be
conducted with no or minimal adverse
effects on significant resource values.
(d) The following exceptions apply
within lands identified as closed to
leasing or unavailable to new
infrastructure:
(1) The Bureau may issue oil and gas
leases in Special Areas if drainage is
occurring. Any lease issued for drainage
purposes will include provisions that
prohibit surface-disturbing oil and gas
activities on the entire lease tract.
(2) The Bureau may approve new
roads, pipelines, transmission lines, and
other types of infrastructure in Special
Areas provided that:
(i) The infrastructure will primarily be
used by and provide a benefit to
communities located within or in close
proximity to the Reserve or will support
subsistence activities; and
(ii) Appropriate measures are adopted
to assure maximum protection of
significant resource values.
(3) The Bureau may approve new
permanent infrastructure related to
existing oil and gas leases only if such
infrastructure is essential for
exploration or development activities
and no practicable alternatives exist
which would have less adverse impact
on significant resource values of the
Special Area, but only if necessary to
comport with the terms of a valid
existing lease.
(e) The Bureau must document and
consider any uncertainty concerning the
nature, scope, and duration of potential
adverse effects on significant resource
values of Special Areas and shall ensure
that any actions it takes to avoid,
minimize, or mitigate such effects
account for and reflect any such
uncertainty.
(f) If the Bureau determines that it
cannot avoid adverse effects on a
Special Area’s significant resource
values, then it must prepare a Statement
of Adverse Effect, which must describe
the:
(1) Significant resource values that
may be adversely affected;
(2) Nature, scope, and duration of
those adverse effects;
(3) Measures the Bureau evaluated to
avoid the adverse effects;
(4) Justification for not requiring those
measures;

PO 00000

Frm 00057

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

(5) Measures the Bureau will require
to minimize, to the maximum extent
possible, adverse effects on significant
resource values of the Special Area; and
(6) Measures the Bureau will require
to mitigate any residual adverse effects
that cannot be avoided or minimized,
including compensatory mitigation,
along with an explanation of how those
measures will assure maximum
protection of significant resource values.
(g) The Bureau must provide the
public with a meaningful opportunity to
review and comment on any Statement
of Adverse Effect prepared under this
section and must consider and respond
to any relevant matter it receives.
(h) The Bureau must consult with any
federally recognized Tribes and Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act
corporations that use the affected
Special Area for subsistence purposes or
have historic or cultural ties to the
Special Area.
(i) The Bureau must include in each
decision and authorization related to oil
and gas activity in the Reserve terms
and conditions that provide the Bureau
with sufficient authority to fully
implement the requirements of this
section.
§ 2361.50 Management of subsistence
uses within Special Areas.

(a) The Bureau will ensure that
Special Areas are managed to protect
and support fish and wildlife and fish
and wildlife habitat and associated
subsistence use of such areas by rural
residents as defined in 50 CFR 100.4.
(b) The Bureau will provide
appropriate access to and within Special
Areas for subsistence purposes to the
extent consistent with assuring
maximum protection of all significant
resource values that are found in such
areas.
§ 2361.60 Co-stewardship opportunities in
Special Areas.

In accordance with the Bureau’s costewardship guidance, the Bureau will
seek opportunities to engage Tribes in
co-stewardship for Special Areas. Costewardship opportunities may include
co-management, collaborative and
cooperative management, and Triballyled stewardship, and can be
implemented through cooperative
agreements, memoranda of
understanding, self-governance
agreements, and other mechanisms. The
Bureau may also partner with Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act
corporations, local governments, or
organizations as provided by law.
§ 2361.70

Use authorizations.

(a) Use authorizations must be
obtained from the authorized officer

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2023 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Sep 07, 2023

Jkt 259001

as the authorized officer determines to
be necessary to protect the
environmental, subsistence,
recreational, fish and wildlife,
historical, and scenic values of the
Reserve and to assure maximum
protection of significant resource values
within Special Areas.
§ 2361.80 Unauthorized use and
occupancy.

Any person who violates or fails to
comply with regulations of this subpart
is subject to prosecution, including
trespass and liability for damages,
pursuant to the appropriate laws.
Subpart 2362 [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2023–18990 Filed 9–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–27–P

PO 00000

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0065;
FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018–BG18

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status
With Section 4(d) Rule for Brawleys
Fork Crayfish and Designation of
Critical Habitat
Correction
In proposed rule document 2023–
17666 appearing on pages 57292–57327
in the issue of Tuesday, August 22,
2023, make the following correction:
On page 57301, beginning at the top
of the page, Figure 1 is corrected to
appear as set forth below:
BILLING CODE 0099–10–P

Frm 00058

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 9990

E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM

08SEP1

EP08SE23.016

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

prior to any use within the Reserve.
Only uses that are consistent with the
purposes and objectives of the Act and
these regulations will be authorized.
(b) Except as may be limited,
restricted, or prohibited by the
authorized officer pursuant to §§ 2361.1
and 2361.2 or otherwise, use
authorizations are not required for:
(1) Subsistence uses (e.g., hunting,
fishing, and berry-picking); and
(2) Non-commercial recreational uses
(e.g., hunting, fishing, backpacking, and
wildlife observation).
(c) Applications for use authorizations
shall be filed in accordance with
applicable regulations in this chapter. In
the absence of such regulations, the
authorized officer may consider and act
upon applications for uses allowed
under the Act.
(d) In addition to other statutory or
regulatory requirements, approval of
applications for use authorizations shall
be subject to such terms and conditions

62043