Document wpDRmKaXvpxBpYvMov8o2NR3

Title: Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Action Plan for Secretary's Order (SO) 3419 - Delivering Emergency Price Relief for American Families and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis Summary: In accordance with Secretary's Order 3419, the National Park Service (NPS) reviewed its programs and regulations to identify those that may result in higher costs for the American people. While the NPS does not have regulatory authority for activities that occur beyond park boundaries that directly or indirectly increase costs of housing, healthcare, home appliances, energy, or the cost of food, the top priorities below will ensure the NPS is supporting relief to American families and defeating the cost-of-living crisis. Top priorities: List up to the top 5 priorities for this SO and provide justification for each recommendation. (b) (5) 1 (b) (5) 11 Title: Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Action Plan for SO 3423 and SO 34 - Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resources Potential Summary: Consistent with Executive Order 14153, the NPS will rescind the rule titled "Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves" (89 Fed. Reg. 55059) ("2024 Rule") and reinstate the rule titled "Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves" (85 Fed. Reg. 35181) ("2020 Rule"). Top priorities: List up to the top 5 priorities for this SO and provide justification for each recommendation. Rescind the 2024 Rule and reinstate the 2020 Rule. This will ensure compliance with EO 14153 and SO 3422. Additional Information: On October 23, 2015, the National Park Service (NPS) published a final rule titled "Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves" (80 Fed. Reg. 64325) ("2015 Rule") prohibiting certain harvest practices on national preserves in Alaska, such as taking bears over bait and shooting swimming caribou. In 2018, the NPS was directed to revisit the 2015 Rule, resulting in publication on June 9, 2020, of a final rule titled "Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves" (85 Fed. Reg. 35181) ("2020 Rule"), which rescinded the 2015 Rule. On February 17, 2022, the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks directed the NPS to initiate a rulemaking to reconsider the 2020 Rule and further directed the NPS to conduct tribal consultation to inform a new rule. This direction resulted in the publication on July 3, 2024, of a final rule titled "Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves" (89 Fed. Reg. 55059) ("2024 Rule"). The 2024 Rule became effective on August 2, 2024. The 2024 Rule contained two substantive changes from the 2020 Rule. The 2024 Rule prohibited bear baiting in national preserves in Alaska and clarified trapping regulations (allowing the use of firearms to dispatch a wounded animal). On January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14153 titled "Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential" directed the NPS to rescind the 2024 Rule and reinstate the 2020 Rule, in its original form. On February 3, 2025, the Secretary of the Interior issued Secretary's Order No. 3422 directing the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, within 15 days of the issuance of the Order, to submit an action plan that describes the necessary and appropriate steps to execute the direction in EO 14153 to rescind the 2024 Rule and reinstate the 2020 Rule. Rescinding one rule and reinstating another requires a new notice and comment rulemaking process that involves publication of a proposed rule in the Federal Register, receipt and consideration of comments on that rule, revision of the proposed rule as 1 (b) (5) 4 Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Action Plan for SO 3417 - Addressing the National Energy Emergency, and SO 3418 - Unleashing American Energy Summary: In accordance with Secretary's Orders 3417 and 3418, the National Park Service (NPS) reviewed its relevant emergency and other legal authorities that pertain to the energy and critical minerals identification, permitting, leasing, development, production, transportation, refining, distribution, exporting, and generation capacity of the United States, and identified ways to reduce barriers and streamline processes. The NPS does not have regulatory authority for activities that occur beyond park boundaries, including energy development. The NPS does work cooperatively with other agencies, jurisdictions, and stakeholders to promote clean and safe energy development while providing decision-makers with information about National Park System resources. This engagement is advisory and collaborative and promotes more efficient and effective energy development while avoiding potential impacts to national park resources. Through this engagement, the NPS does not implement or introduce any regulatory requirements on energy development. The most significant statutory direction that guides NPS engagement in energy development is the NPS Organic Act of 1916 (54 U.S.C. 100101). Under this statute, the NPS is directed to manage units of the National Park System "to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." Recognizing that units of the National Park System are part of broader communities and landscapes, the NPS carries out statutory direction by working cooperatively with other federal agencies, states, industry, private landowners, and other stakeholders to collectively identify strategies that can avoid or reduce potential impacts to park resources and values. Other federal statutes also guide NPS engagement with other agencies, including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act. When appropriate, the NPS may also participate in state actions under state law and regulations in carrying out the NPS mission. Top priorities: List up to the top 5 priorities for this SO and provide justification for each recommendation. 1 (b) (5) Additional Information: The NPS has the following additional authorities and programs that support and facilitate energy development within park units. A. 9A REGULATIONS - 36 CFR PART 9, SUBPART A, MINING AND MINING CLAIMS Legal And Emergency Authorities Available to Facilitate and Expedite Energy Production Actions 2 Mining claims are authorized under the General Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. 21 et seq. Although park units are withdrawn by law from the location of new mining claims, approximately 1,102 mining claims remain in 15 park units, primarily in Alaska and the California desert. Most of these rights pre-date the creation of the park units. These rights include mining claims, leasing of federal minerals, and other nonfederal minerals such as sand and gravel. The laws and regulations which apply to a particular mining operation depend on the nature of the underlying property right and the minerals that a prospective operator is seeking to develop. The Mining in the Parks Act of 1976, 16 U.S.C. 1901 et seq., directed the NPS to promulgate regulations to control activities related to mining claims in parks. Codified at 36 C.F.R. Part 9, Subpart A, these regulations direct mining claimants to obtain NPS approval of a plan of operations for mineral exploration, access, development, and reclamation. The regulations also require that operators post a bond to ensure that reclamation will be completed at the operator's, rather than the taxpayer's, expense. An approved plan of operations serves as a claimant's permit to operate. Operations on mining claims in park units are rare; currently less than five operations are taking place across the National Park System. Federal Mineral Leasing Federal mineral leasing is allowed in three units of the National Park System: Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV), Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (UT), and the Whiskeytown unit of the Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity National Recreation Area (CA). Leasing and subsequent site-specific development can occur under Bureau of Land Management regulations at 43 CFR Parts 3100-3500 with the consent of the NPS, if the NPS determines that the leasing and subsequent development would not have a significant adverse impact on park resources and administration. No federal mineral leasing has occurred in these park units for over four decades, nor has there been industry interest. The Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976, as amended (30 U.S.C. 201), and implementing regulations prohibit the issuance of federal leases for coal in any unit of the National Park System. Non-federally-Owned Minerals 3 Approximately 100 parks contain other types of nonfederal minerals, such as sand, rock, and gravel. Whether or not these rights will ever be developed depends on a variety of factors such as the concentration and extent of the nonfederal mineral deposit, proximity, and available transportation to processing facilities and markets, and commodity price. The NPS has not promulgated a specific regulation for these types of mineral activities. Instead, the NPS applies its "business operation" regulations at 36 CFR Parts 1 and 5. The Part 5 regulations require a special use permit for activities taking place in these areas, such as business operations, commercial vehicle access, and construction of roads, structures and other facilities. Special use permits contain terms and conditions that protect park resources and public safety. Surface coal mining within any unit of the National Park System is prohibited by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) subject to "valid existing rights." No nonfederal coal mining currently exists in parks. B. 9B REGULATIONS - 36 CFR PART 9, SUBPART B, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND NON-FEDERAL OIL AND GAS RIGHTS Legal And Emergency Authorities Available to Facilitate and Expedite Energy Production Actions The 36 CFR Part 9 Subpart B (9B) regulations allow for development of nonfederal oil and gas resources in national parks outside of Alaska* while assuring that the public interest in preserving and protecting the natural and cultural resources of these areas is maintained. The 9B regulations were first promulgated in 1978 and revised in 2016. These regulations govern non-federal oil and gas rights within park boundaries. Approximately 2,600 oil and gas wells exist in at least 75 units of the National Park System. An estimated 340 of these wells are actively operating, while the remaining wells are inactive, plugged, abandoned, or orphaned. Currently, 12 park units have active operations. Wells within the National Park System are associated with nonfederal (private and state held) oil and gas mineral rights that were established prior to creation of the park unit. There are no federally owned oil and gas leases within the National Park System. Abandoned and orphaned oil and gas wells that no longer have a viable operator are plugged and reclaimed dependent on availability of funds. 4 Under the 9B regulations, operators provide information regarding proposed operating methods and conditions. The NPS must complete an Initial Review of an Operator's Permit application within 30 days of receipt of the application to determine if all required information is included. As part of the permit review process, the NPS is required to comply with all applicable laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Historic Preservation Act. Once these legal requirements have been met, the NPS must take Final Action on the operator's permit application within 30 days. The average time to reach Final Action can take from two months to one year depending on the scope and complexity of the proposed operation, the responsiveness of the operator in providing the required information, and the time it takes the NPS to comply with other applicable laws. Production from wells in the National Park System accounted for 0.004 percent of the total crude oil and 0.002 percent of the total natural gas produced in the United States in 2024. The NPS has never denied an application for an operations permit. Cost-Benefit Analysis The 9B regulations do not impose a significant economic impact upon any operator conducting oil and gas activities in parks. The NPS' Cost-Benefit and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (September 21, 2015) found that the cost of compliance was 0.03 percent of average annual receipts for such an operator. Information Collection The NPS has one energy-related information collection under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 1024-0274, for information collection associated with 36 CFR part 9, subpart B, General Provisions and Non-Federal Oil and Gas Rights (covered under Section 7 of EO 13783). There are no forms associated with this information collection. Information collected is used to: evaluate proposed operations; ensure that all necessary mitigation measures are employed to protect park resources and values; and ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. The NPS reviewed this information collection and found that it does not potentially burden development or use of domestically produced energy resources. * Through the public comment process for the 2016 revisions to the 9B regulations, the NPS decided not to apply the 9B regulations to parks in Alaska. This exempts 54 million acres or approximately two-thirds of NPS lands from the regulations. C. ACQUISITION POLICY AND REGULATIONS 5 The NPS does not have any restrictions in acquisition policy or regulations that would potentially burden development or use of domestically produced energy resources. D. GRANT PROGRAMS The NPS does not manage any grant programs that would potentially burden development or use of domestically produced energy resources. E. HYDROPOWER Legal And Emergency Authorities Available to Facilitate and Expedite Energy Production Actions The NPS Hydropower Assistance Program (HAP) is a technical assistance program that provides assistance to national parks and partners engaged in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing of non-federal hydropower projects. The NPS HAP works to ensure alignment with Secretary and Administration policies and principles. In FY24, the HAP supported 92 projects, 74 of which have an NPS park or program nexus. These projects generated nearly 15,000 MW of energy. To advance energy production goals, the HAP: a. Provides technical assistance to hydropower operators, parks, and Tribes navigating the FERC process to facilitate energy production, assuring compatible outdoor recreation where appropriate, and protection of nationally designated park resources. b. Provides technical assistance to hydropower operators in identifying and developing the information that is needed for FERC to complete their reviews and ensure their applications are processed in a streamlined manner. c. Facilitates meetings with all parties to align shared interests and ensure mutually beneficial outcomes. d. Provides training, tools, and coordination to help parks, hydropower industry, and partners with the FERC process. Applicants for FERC licenses consult with the NPS when a project has the potential to affect NPS-managed areas or resources. In accordance with the Federal Power Act, as amended, FERC regulations (18 CFR 4.38(a), 18 CFR 5.1(d), 18 CFR 16.8(a)) and (18 CFR 4.51(f)(5)) also direct hydropower license applicants to consult with the NPS on 6 recreation. The NPS authority to consult and provide technical assistance regarding recreational resources is in the Outdoor Recreation Act of 1963 (PL 88-29, 16 USC 4601-1(d)), Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (PL 90-542, as amended), the Organic Act (54 USC 100101) and NPS site-specific enabling legislation. FERC is charged with determining whether a proposed hydropower project is "best adapted" to a "comprehensive plan" and gives equal consideration for power and non-power resources in deciding whether to authorize a hydropower project. FERC regulations call for considering the ultimate development of recreation resources consistent with the needs of the area and consistency with the primary purpose of the project. The FERC typically issues licenses for 30-50 years. Engaging in the process can be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to assist parties moving through the licensing process and development of reliable energy production with considerations of recreational, natural, and cultural resources. F. NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT Legal And Emergency Authorities Available to Facilitate and Expedite Energy Production Actions The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) was signed into law on October 15, 1966. It establishes a national preservation program and a system of procedural protections, which encourage both the identification and protection of historic resources, including archeological resources, at the federal level and indirectly at the state and local level. The National Historic Preservation Act (Pub. L. No. 89-665) was established at 16 U.S.C. 470a-470w-6 et. seq. It was amended four times: 1976 (Pub. L. No. 94-422, 90 Stat. 1320), 1980 (Pub. L. No. 96-515, 94 Stat. 2987), 1992 (Pub. L. 102-575, 106 Stat. 4753), and 2016 (Pub. L. No. 96-515). In 2014, Public Law 13-287 moved the Act's provisions from Title 16 of the United States Code to 54 U.S.C. 300101, et seq., with minimal and non-substantive changes to the text of the Act and a re-ordering of some of its provisions. NHPA established the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), an independent federal agency that advises the President and Congress on historic preservation matters. The Council and its staff also advise federal agencies on their roles in the national historic preservation program, especially their compliance with Section 106 of NHPA. Like all federal agencies, NPS is responsible for complying with the ACHP's Section 106 implementing regulations, which can be found at 36CFRPart800_as_amended2004_web.doc). 7 Section 106 establishes a process for review of Federal undertakings and their effects on historic properties. The provision requires Federal agencies to consider the effects on historic properties of projects they carry out, assist, fund, permit, license, or approve. More specifically, Section 106 requires Federal agency heads to take into account the effects of their proposed undertakings on historic properties (which are defined as properties eligible for listing or listed in the National Register of Historic Places) prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license. Section 106 also requires Federal agency heads to provide the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment. While it does not mandate preservation, Section 106 is related to other NHPA provisions designed to further national historic preservation policy goals. Emergency Procedures Under Section 106 The Section 106 regulations (36 CFR 800.12) exempt immediate activities necessary to preserve life and property and provide for expedited review for other projects in the period immediately following a disaster declaration. In addition, Programmatic Agreements and other program alternatives can also provide expedited procedures for disaster response and recovery. All of NPS's program alternatives include provisions to address emergencies (see below). Termination If an undertaking will or may adversely affect historic properties (any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places), the Section 106 regulations at 36 CFR 800.6(b)(1)(i-iv) call for the federal agency to consult with the State and/or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO, THPO) and other parties to negotiate and execute a Section 106 agreement document that sets out the measures the federal agency will implement to resolve those adverse effects. Section 106 agreements are legally binding and evidence an agency's completion of its Section 106 obligations. In instances where the consulting parties cannot reach agreement, a required signatory may terminate consultation and request formal comments from the ACHP in conformance with the requirements set forth in 36 CFR 800.7: Where the agency and the SHPO/THPO cannot agree on the terms of the agreement, the agency official shall request the ACHP to join the consultation and provide to the ACHP appropriate documentation as specified in 36 CFR 800.11(g). If the ACHP decides to join the consultation, the agency shall proceed to consult further with the SHPO/THPO, ACHP, and any other consulting parties to reach agreement. If the ACHP elects not to join the consultation, it shall notify the agency and proceed to comment in accordance with 36 CFR 800.7(c). 8  Where the ACHP is already participating in the consultation and the agency terminates consultation, the head of the agency or the assistant secretary or other officer with major department-wide or agency-wide responsibilities shall request the ACHP comment and shall notify all consulting parties of this request. If the ACHP terminates consultation, the ACHP shall notify the agency official, the agency's Federal Preservation Officer (FPO), and all consulting parties and proceed to comment. The ACHP may consult with the agency's FPO prior to terminating consultation to seek to resolve issues concerning the undertaking and its effects on historic properties. Program Alternatives The ACHP's Section 106 regulations allow federal agencies to develop "program alternatives" that tailor the Section 106 review process to ensure its requirements are satisfied in a way that balances historic preservation concerns with other federal mission requirements and needs. Program alternatives can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Section 106 reviews and streamline routine interactions while focusing effort on the more complex projects or historic properties most important to communities. NPS currently has three program alternatives: Nationwide Programmatic Agreement with the ACHP and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) (November 14, 2008): o Provides parks with an efficient method to streamline the Section 106 process for 16 repetitive operational activities when certain conditions are met. o On average, approximately 70% of NPS undertakings utilize the streamlined review process allowable under the 2008 PA. NPS Nationwide Programmatic Agreement of Cultural Resources Grants and Financial Assistance between NPS, ACHP, and NCSHPO (September 6, 2024): o Facilitates the Section 106 process across multiple NPS financial assistance programs that support the preservation and interpretation of cultural resources, by establishing a consistent Section 106 review process and clarifying the timing of the Section 106 process within the Federal financial assistance process. Also provides programmatic allowances acknowledging the existing financial assistance requirements for many of these programs. o Execution of this Programmatic Agreement will greatly streamline compliance for all NPS cultural resource grants, including disaster supplemental funds. 9 If the "active emergency" has ended and there are additional actions that need to be taken (e.g., a fire is no longer burning but a park needs to take post-fire actions or to take action to minimize the threat of additional fires) a park should use a CE if applicable or initiate an EA or EIS to comply with NEPA for those actions. The NPS is also expected to comply with as many of the NEPA requirements as possible as part of their alternative arrangements (see CEQ's Emergencies and the National Environmental Policy Act Guidance, 2024). In addition, typically agencies are expected to state how long alternative arrangements are in place for, and to complete a "normal" NEPA process at some point for actions that span a lengthy time-period. Therefore, when a park thinks it will need to take actions over the course of years, eventually an EA or EIS will need to be prepared absent Congressional direction to the contrary. NPS is currently in litigation over alternative arrangements that were meant to be in place for two to three years and for which no additional NEPA has been completed. Alternative arrangements can usually be agreed upon with DOI in days, and with CEQ within a week or two. When seeking alternative arrangements, DOI and CEQ will ask about compliance with other laws such as the Endangered Species Act and National Historic Preservation Act. Those laws must be complied with as applicable, and each have their own emergency action provisions that could be invoked. H. RIGHTS OF WAY Legal And Emergency Authorities Available to Facilitate and Expedite Energy Production Actions The NPS has streamlined and enhanced the Bureau's Right-of-Way (ROW) program. Under the first Trump Administration, NPS released Reference Manual 53B (RM 53B) in January 2021. Following release of RM 53B, the NPS implemented new practices designed to provide clarity to both staff and applicants and remove impediments to the ROW permitting process. NPS continues to explore other streamlining efforts to support the administrative priority. This streamlining will enable, where applicable, greater consistency in the allowance of energy transmission infrastructure through NPS units. Key actions undertaken since January 2021 include: Releasing updated ROW Regulations found at 36 CFR Part 14. These regulations were last updated as an Interim Rule in 1980, and they provide greater flexibility, update statutory references, and enhance consistency with other federal land management agency regulations. The NPS anticipates it will reduce the burden for applicants that have infrastructure crossing lands managed by multiple federal jurisdictions, such as the Greenlink West Project. 11  Conducting annual ROW Program Reviews in accordance with an OIG Evaluation recommendation, which was successfully closed in 2022. Establishing dedicated ROW Coordinator positions in each region to support parks and permittees. Refining the program's data management system (Use Manager) to enhance accountability, track projects, and meet statutory broadband reporting requirements. 12 (b) (5) (b) (5) 14 (b) (5) 15 (b) (5) 16 Projects That Advance Energy Goals and Priorities In addition to the priorities identified above, various energy infrastructure projects have been completed, are underway and planned across NPS fund sources, including with key funding provided by the Great American Outdoors Act Legacy Restoration Fund, which is funded by non-appropriated revenue from energy development and royalties from offshore oil and natural gas leases. Nearly all energy infrastructure design and implementation work are carried out by private-sector contractors or utility companies while the federal government plays a key oversight and management role (currently key positions needed for implementation are frozen as well as private sector contracts to increase capacity). These energy infrastructure projects improve both the capacity and reliability of energy delivery to our parks - which in turn supports increasing visitation, economic activity, and infrastructure modernization that requires more capable and reliable power in these relative rural areas. Completed Projects Glacier Bay Park and Preserve - Alaska 6.5 million (Line-Item Construction) This project constructed a 15 kilovolt, three phase electrical intertie with a communication link between the privately owned Falls Creek hydroelectric plant in Gustavus and the park's Bartlett Cove power generation plant. With this intertie, it is anticipated the local power company, Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), will provide 100 percent of the Park's power needs. Yosemite National Park -- California Critical Repair and Replacement of 70KV Transmission Line from Parkline to Hwy 140 Powerhouse 11.8 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project addressed critical failing electrical infrastructure including high voltage transmission lines that serve multiple areas. It replaced a transmission line and the supporting structures, originally constructed in the 1930s, and associated components. Carlsbad Caverns National Park -- New Mexico Replace Failing Primary Electrical Distribution Infrastructure 11.6 million (Line-Item Construction) 21 This project replaced aged electrical infrastructure that is unreliable, unsafe, and undersized to meet industry standards. Primary service lines were buried to code-compliant depths to meet industry standards. Projects Underway - FY 2021 - FY 2031 Predominantly through the initial authorization of Great America Outdoors Act Legacy Restoration Fund, NPS has investments underway to improve the reliability of our energy distribution systems, and where possible shepherd them into private utility operations and maintenance, reducing the NPS responsibilities. Bandelier National Monument -- New Mexico Rehabilitate Underground Utilities 29.0 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is replacing the park's 60-year-old utility distribution and collection systems to address maintenance/repair work and code deficiencies. Work includes improving underground primary and secondary potable water distribution for required storage and fire flow improving electrical and natural gas distribution for anticipated loads and upgrading communication systems to meet current and future demands. An integrated utility corridor is being constructed under roads and existing conduit routes are being reused. Catoctin Mountain Park -- Maryland Replace Parkwide Utility Infrastructure 22.3 million (Line-Item Construction) This project is replacing park utility infrastructure including water, sanitary sewer, primary electrical, and communications system. Primary electric power distribution replacement includes transformers and primary feeders. Chickasaw National Recreation Area -- Oklahoma Address Critical Repairs in the Platt and Buckhorn Developed Areas 38.6 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project includes repair or replacement of water and wastewater systems, improvement and relocation of electrical infrastructure, replacement of lift stations, and rehabilitation of park comfort stations. Gateway National Recreation Area -- New York Address Deferred Maintenance at Multiple Sites 22 40.0 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project replaces electrical services, repairs or removes structures at multiple park locations. Work includes replacement of electrical service at Staten Island's Fort Wadsworth by replacing degraded, buried steel conduit. Features may include replacement of main switchgear replacement of transformers installation of underground conduit installation of a central switchgear and replacement of duct banks and wiring. Gateway National Recreation Area -- New Jersey & New York Rehabilitate Deteriorated and Failing Mission-Critical Utility System Infrastructure - Phase I 34.2 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project includes rehabilitation of critical water, wastewater, stormwater, and electrical utility systems at multiple park locations. Phase I includes repairing or replacing the infrastructure of the water, wastewater and storm water systems at Fort Wadsworth on Staten Island, as well as the underground relocation of electric power transmission lines, and ancillary equipment at Sandy Hook. Phase II addresses the electrical distribution system at Fort Tilden in Jamaica Bay. Golden Gate National Recreation Area -- California Rehabilitate Unsafe and Inadequate Primary Electrical System at Fort Mason 20.1 million (Line-Item Construction) This project is upgrading the existing park-owned 2,400-volt electrical distribution system serving Upper Fort Mason, to the Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) standard for a 12,000-volt system. The NPS intends to transfer the entire system to PG&E when the project is complete. The project replaces a substation, transformers, feeders, and main switchgear. Underground secondary service cables are being installed other work replaces underground transformers, switches, and equipment at ground level locations. Grand Canyon National Park -- Arizona Rehabilitate the North Rim and Roaring Springs Utility Systems 180.6 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project addresses critical system deficiencies associated with the North Rim and Roaring Springs water, wastewater, electrical, and communication systems, along with their associated equipment, components, and support 23 structures. Critical and obsolete aspects of these utility systems are being replaced and rehabilitated to meet code requirements. These utility systems support visitor services and administrative operations. Kalaupapa National Historical Park -- Hawaii Rehabilitate Unsafe and Failing Electrical System for Settlement 16.0 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is repairing the Settlement s single and three-phase electrical overhead distribution system to correct safety deficiencies and improve system reliability. Work includes upgrading the single-phase components to three phase power elements, replacing overhead power transformers and power poles, and adding new sections to establish a looped system allows for grid isolation and back-feed. Mammoth Cave National Park -- Kentucky Repair and Replace Utility Infrastructure - Phase I 29.7 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is repairing and/or replacing multiple critical utility systems. Phase I work includes replacement of the cave's communications systems. The surface system components located outside the cave are also being rehabilitated including replacement of damaged fiber optics cables, electronic switching systems, and Wi-Fi equipment. Scheduled future Phase II work will rehabilitate water and sewer systems. Rocky Mountain National Park -- Colorado Rehabilitate Headquarters East Water System and Moraine Park Campground Electrical Distribution 27.0 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is rehabilitating the Headquarters (H ) East water system which includes the Moraine Park Campground water distribution systems and wastewater system. The project addresses sewer pipes, manholes, the well, water treatment system, and water tanks serving the campground, Beaver Meadows Visitor Center, H East, and High Drive. Most of the existing primary power supply was installed in 1965 and is well past the components' typical service life. Saint-Gaudens National Historical Park -- New Hampshire Replace Electrical, HVAC, and Alarm Systems, and Rehabilitate Four Historic Structures 14.4 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) 24 This project is replacing mission critical fire and security systems, providing data connectivity to various facilities, updating electrical infrastructure, and replacing heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems at multiple buildings of the park's Aspet unit. Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore -- Michigan Rehabilitate Facilities on Manitou Islands $52.8 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is rehabilitating historic structures, utilities, and marinas on South and North Manitou Islands. Utility systems are being rehabilitated and obsolete systems replaced. This includes water, wastewater, fuel, and electrical power system components. Voyageurs National Park -- Minnesota Replace Power Distribution Line Connecting Kettle Falls Hotel 13.9 million (Legacy Restoration Fund) This project is replacing the main underwater high voltage cable and multiple transformer boxes that run from the mainland to the Kettle Falls district. Pad-mounted switchgear, sectionalizing enclosures, elbow terminations, as well as individual and other associated components are being replaced as needed. An improved level of emergency backup generation for critical loads at Kettle Falls Area is being installed. I>C- TBD The NPS has identified future year project lists for major construction funding as part of the regular planning process. The information below is currently embargoed as part of the budget process underway. (b) (5) 25 (b) (5) IZiC These investments have been approved by the NPS Bureau Investment Review Board as sound investments in energy generation or distribution for national park units, however, funding has not been identified. Projects have been developed to varying degrees cost estimates have not been fully verified and schedules for design through construction need refinement. (b) (5) 26 (b) (5) 27 (b) (5) Z(CZ Another area of NPS investment in energy is contracting with private sector energy and utility providers for upgrades to improve energy reliability and/or electrical capacity. Here are examples of these types of projects: 28 (b) (5) 29 Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Action Plan for Secretarial Orders 3417 - 3422 Table of Contents SO 3417--Addressing the National Energy Emergency ..................................................................................................... 2 Submit a plan that identifies all relevant emergency and other legal authorities available to expedite the completion of all authorized and appropriate infrastructure, energy, environmental, and natural resources projects within their jurisdiction to perform or to advance, including use of all authorities to facilitate the supplying, refining, transporting, and exporting of energy. ................................................................................................................................ 2 SO 3418--Unleashing American Energy........................................................................................................................... 4 Migratory Bird Permits Authorizing the Incidental Take of Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................................. 4 Permanent Withdrawal of Solicitor Opinion M-37050 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act Does Not Prohibit Incidental Take, M-37065 and associated Regulations governing Take of Migratory Birds Revocation of Provisions ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Identify existing, proposed, and planned administrative withdrawals from the mineral leasing laws relevant to NWRS lands................................................... 6 Submit an action plan to consider how to comply with the policy stated in Unleashing American Energy and steps that, as appropriate, will be taken to suspend, revise, or rescind the 3 ESA regulations finalized in 2024. ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Submit an action plan to consider how to comply with the policy stated in Unleashing American Energy and review and, as appropriate, revise all relevant critical habitat designations promulgated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that such actions are based on the best scientific data available and that they take into consideration the economic impact and impact on national security, and in consideration of the Secretary s statutory authority to exclude areas as outlined in section 4(b )(2) of the Endangered Species Act.....................................................................................................................................10 SO 3419--Delivering Emergency Price Relief for American Families and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis......................12 SO 3420--Announcing President Trump's Revocation of Former Outer Continental Shelf Withdrawals..............................13 SO 3421--Achieving Prosperity through Deregulation .....................................................................................................14 Review the hunting and fishing regulations for NWRS lands and identify potential regulations for elimination........................................................................14 SO 3422--Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential ....................................................................................15 Facilitate the expedited development of a road corridor between the community of King Cove and the all-weather airport located in Cold Bay.......................15 Deny the pending request to the USFWS to an establish indigenous sacred site in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge .............................17 Consider the Alaskan cultural significance of hunting and fishing and the statutory priority of subsistence management required by the ANILCA, to conduct meaningful consultation with the State fish and wildlife management agencies prior to enacting land management plans or other regulations that affect the ability of Alaskans to hunt and fish on public lands, and to ensure to the greatest extent possible that hunting and fishing opportunities on Federal lands are consistent with similar opportunities on State lands...........................................................................................................................................................20 1 (b) (5) 7 (b) (5) 9 (b) (5) 11 (b) (5) 16 (b) (5) 19 (b) (5) 21