|
Editor’s note: We are grateful to community members who are willing to write stories for WSEN. Normally we encourage them to write under their own byline. Sadly, however, a number of people in our community are intimidated by fear of punishment by the National Park Service, and while willing to speak out, they would prefer to remain anonymous. |
|
By CC (Concerned Citizen) |
|
We’ve heard a lot about the need for access permits in the Wrangell-St. Elias Park. With the passage of Federal Regulation 51 FR 31619 on September 4, 1986, ANILCA Regulations were outlined for access across National Park land in Alaska for transportation and utility systems, inholdings, and for special and temporary uses, all which require a permit. Let’s take a look at their permitting process. |
|
First is the pre-application process [Section 36.3] to establish early contact with federal agencies to discuss details and schedules. In areas administered by NPS, a permit must be obtained before pre-application can begin. |
|
Section 36.4 requires the filing of an SF299 application with each federal agency having jurisdiction in the permit area; all filings must be completed within 15 days [on the same day, if possible] after paying “any filing fee required.” |
|
Section 36.5 specifies that the agency having jurisdiction over most of the trail or area will be the lead coordinating agency. Upon receipt of an application, the lead agency reviews it. If the 15day filing deadline is not met, the application is returned to the applicant. If the required information is missing or incomplete, each federal agency has 60 days to inform the applicant, who has 30 days to respond. Failure to respond will result in the return of the application “without further action.” An incomplete response causes the application to be rejected and returned with a list of deficiencies. When all information is complete, the application is reinstated and filed. |
|
Section 36.6[a] states, “The provisions of the National Environmental Protection Agency and the Council for Environmental Quality regulations [40 CFR Parts 15001508] will be applied to determine whether an Environmental Assessment [EA] or Environmental Impact Statement [EIS] is required, or that a categorical exclusion applies.” The lead agency then has nine months to complete an EA or draft EIS, or longer if extensions are applied. If an EIS is not required, a Finding of No Significant Impact is prepared. If an EIS is necessary, public hearings must be held in Washington, D.C. and in Alaska; the EIS must be completed within one year of the application filing date. |
|
Section 36.6[c] requires the applicant to reimburse costs for application processing and “reasonable administrative” and other costs of EIS preparation! [a trip to Washington, surveys, and one year of administrative NPS permitrelated work?] |
|
The decision process granting access to an area within the National Wilderness Preserve System is explained in 36.7[b]. Each federal agency involved has four months to “tentatively approve or disprove each rightofway permit,” providing a statement of reasons and findings to the applicant, along with a copy of the final EIS. No appeal procedure is allowed for denials of access within Park boundaries. |
|
Once an application is approved, a rightofway permit is issued after all fees and charges have been paid [Section 36.9[a]], subject to at least the following conditions: [a] rightofway use compatible with the purposes of the park, [b] requirements for restoration, revegetation, and erosion prevention, [c] respect for air and water quality standards, [d] possible requirements for minimum necessary width of trails, [e] prevention of damage to fish and wildlife habitat or public property, [f] hazards to public health and safety, [g] protection of interests of other resource users of the area, and [h] use of measures to avoid or minimize adverse environmental, social, or economic impacts. |
|
Inholder access is addressed specifically in Section 36.10. In addition to going through all of the procedural steps outlined above in Sections 34.4, 34.5, and 34.6, an inholder application must include additional proof of property ownership, a detailed description of the use of the inholding, and proof that the land is essentially enclosed by park land. |
|
A rightofway permit is then issued, unless it is determined that: [a] there would be significant adverse impact on natural or other values of the area, [b] public health or safety is jeopardized, [c] adequate feasible access exists elsewhere, [d] the route is inconsistent with the Park Management Plan, or [e] the route is unnecessary to accomplish the applicant’s land use objectives. If any federal agency finds one or more of the above conditions in existence, another alternate route or method of access will be specified to provide “adequate and feasible” access. |
|
For over 20 years, many of us have lived a peaceful, subsistence lifestyle within the Park boundaries and have continued our customary and traditional use of our Staterecognized rightofway trails. Now, we are expected to go through this lengthy, arduous and expensive maze of federal red tape just to reach our homes. |
|
|