Sturgeon v. Frost, No. 14-1209

7/25/2019 Sturgeon v. Frost, No. 14-1209

1/63

SupremeCourt,U.S.FILEDNo.14-1209

NOV162015

In t h eI

______

Supreme(Emirtofthe UnitedStatesOFFICEOFTHECLERK

JOHNSTURGEON,

Pe titioner,

v.

BERTFROST,INHIS OFFICIALCAPACITYAS ALASKAREGIONALDIRECTOROFTHE

NATIONALPARKSERVICE,e tal.,

Respondents .

On Wr it o fCe r t io r a r it o t h e Un it e d S t a t e s Co u r t

o fAp p e a l s f o r t h e Nin t h Cir c u it

PETITIONERS

OPENING

BRIEF

Wil l ia m S.Co n s o v o y J .Mic h a e l Co n n o l l y

Co n s o v o y McCa r t h y

Pa r kPLLC

3033WilsonBoulevard

Suite 700

Arlington,VA22201

Ma t t h e w T.F in d l e y

Counsel ofR ecordE v a R.Ga r d n e r

As h b u r n &Ma s o n ,P.C.

1227W.NinthAvenue

Suite 200

Anchorage,AK99501(907)276-4331

[email protected] h a e l H.Pa r kCo n s o vo y McCa r t h y

Pa r kPLLC

Three ColumbusCircle 15thFloor

NewYork,NY10019

Do u g l a s P o p e

P o p e &Ka t c h e r

421W.FirstAvenue

Suite 220

Anchorage,AK99501

Attorneys forPe titione r

Date:

Novembe r16,2015

261990

0COUNSELPRESS
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/63

I

QUESTIONPRESENTED

WhetherSection

103(c)

of

theAlaska

National

Interest

LandsConservationActof1980prohibitsthe

NationalParkService from exercisingregulatorycontroloverState,NativeCorporation,andprivate Alaska landphysica llylocatedwithinthe bounda ries ofthe NationalParkSystem.

!;

;

ji

f


3/63

II

PARTIES

TO

THE

PROCEEDING

ANDRULE29.6STATEMENT

Petitionerinthis case isJohnSturgeon.

Respondentsare BertFrost,inhisofficialcapacityas

Alaska Regional

Director

ofthe NationalParkService;

Greg

Dudgeon,in

his

official

capacity

as

Superintendent

ofthe

Yukon-Charley

Rivers

National

Preserve;

Andee Sears ,in

herofficialcapacityasaSpecialAgentforthe NationalParkService;SallyJewell,inherofficialcapacityas Secretaryofthe Interior;JonathanJarvis,inhisofficialcapacityasDirectoroftheNationalParkService;the NationalParkService;and the UnitedStates Departmentofthe Interior.


4/63

TABLE

OFCONTENTS

Page

QUESTIONPRESENTED 1

PARTIES TOTHEPROCEEDING ANDRULE29.6STATEMENT 11

TABLE

OFCONTENTS, m

TABLEOF APPENDICES vi

TABLEOFCITEDAUTHORITIES Vll

OPINIONS BELOW 1

JURISDICTION 1

STATUTORYANDREGULATORYPROVISIONS INVOLVED........ 1

STATEMENTOFTHECASE 1

A.

The Allocation

ofLands

to

the State ofAlaska and Alaska Natives 1

B.The Alaska NationalInterestLands ConservationActof1980 4

C.RegulatoryHistory. 10

D.

FactualBackground 14


5/63

IV

Table ofContents

Page

E.ProceedingsBelow 16

SUMMARYOFARGUMENT 17

.21ARGUMENT

I.

ANILCA

P rohibits

NPS

from

RegulatingNonfede ralLandsWithin

Alaska CSUsasThoughTheyWere Partofthe Na tionalParkSystem................... 21

A.Section103(c)

of

ANILCAlimits

NP S s

general

regulatory

control

to

publiclandswithinAlaska CSUs... 22

B.

Congress intendedforSection103(c)topreventNPS from regulatingnonpubliclands in Alaska CSUs a s though theywere partofthe Nationa lParkSystem.... ,28

C.

NPSsconstructionofSection103(c)is

unreasonable.................................. 30

II.

NPS s Alternative Arguments Are BeyondtheQuestionPresentedandProvideNoBasis forAffirmingthe JudgmentBelow.. 33

A.Submergedlands wereconveyedto

the State ofAlaska .......................... 33


6/63

V

Table

ofContents

Page

B.

State

navigablewaters

are

notpubliclands................................ 35

1.Ownershipofsubmergedlands

includescontrolofthewaters

flowingabovethem.................... 35

2.Nofederalreservedwaterrights forsubsistence

jus tifyNPS extending its jurisdiction tostate submergedlands

andnavigable waters ........ 38

CONCLUSION 39


7/63

VI

TABLE

OF

APPENDICES

Page

APPENDIXA16 U.S.C.3103 la

APPENDIXB36C.F.R.1.2 4a

APPENDIXC36C.F.R.2.17 6a


8/63

Vll

TABLE

OF

CITEDAUTHORITIES

Page

CASES

Alas ka v.Ahtna,891F.2d1401(9thCir.1989) 34

Alas ka v.

Babbitt,72F.3d698(9thCir.1995) .38

Alas ka v.Native Vill.ofVenetieTribalGov.,522U.S.520(1998)............................... 3

Alas ka v.UnitedStates,201F.3d1154(9thCir.2000), 14

Am ocoProd.Co.v.Vill.ofGambell,Alas ka,480U.S.531(1987)............................... 5

BedRocLtd.,LLCv.UnitedStates,541

U.S.176(2004).................. 22

BulovaWatch

Co.

v.

UnitedStates,365U.S.753(1961).................. 22

Cappaertv.UnitedStates,426U.S.128(1976).... 38

Chevron,U.S.A.,Inc.v.NaturalResources Defens e Council,Inc.,

467

U.S.

837(1984)............................... 21,27,30


9/63

Vlll

CitedAuthorities

Page

CircuitCityStores,Inc.v.Adams,532U.S.105(2001)................ 31

CityofAngoon v.Marsh,749

F.2d1413

(9th

Cir.

1984)4

Dealv.UnitedStates,508

U.S.129(1993) 26

DeptofNaturalRes.v.Alas ka Riverways ,Inc.,232P.3d

1203

(Alaska 2010)....................... 2

Idaho

v.

UnitedStates,

533U.S.263(2001). 34

Illinois Cent.R .Co.v.Illinois ,146U.S.387(1892)........... .2,36,37

IntlUnion,UnitedAuto.,Aerospace &Agric.

ImplementWorkers ofAm.,UAWv.Johnson

Controls,

Inc.,499

U.S.187(1991)................................ .28

James v.State,950

P2d1130(Alaska 1997) 34

Katie Johnv.UnitedStates,

720

F.3d1214

(9th

Cir.

2013).38

Koniag,Inc.v.KoncorFores tRes.,39

F.3d991(9thCir.1994)........ 4


10/63

IX

CitedAuthorities

Page

Nkenv.Holder,556U.S.418(2009) ,27

Paroline v.UnitedStates,134S.Ct.1710(2014).. 32

Sturgeonv.Mas ica,768F.3d1066(9thCir.2014) 31

Totemoffv.State,905P.2d954(Alaska 1995) 36

Trustees forAlaska v.State,736

P.2d 324

(Alaska

1987) 2

TyonekNative Corp.v.S ecy ofthe Inte rior,836

F.2d1237(9thCir.1988) 34

UnitedStates v.Alaska,

521

U.S.

1

(1997).... 33

UnitedStates v.Brown,36F.3d1103(9thCir.1994) 12

UnitedStates v.California,436U.S.32(1978)........ 36

UnitedStates

v.

Gonzales,

520U.S.1(1997)........ ,28


11/63

X

i

CitedAuthorities

Page

ZuniPub.Sch.Dist.No.89v.DeptofEdue.,550

U.S.81(2007)................................. 21

STATUTES ANDCONSTITUTIONALPROVISIONS

11,1716U.S.C.la-2(h)

1116U.S.C.3

5,616U.S.C.410hh

516U.S.C.460mm

516U.S.C.539

516U.S.C.668dd

516U.S.C.1132i

16U.S.C.1274(a) 5

16U.S.C.3101(b) 5

5,3016U.S.C.3101(d)

516U.S.C.3102(4)

,2716

U.S.C.3103

16U.S.C.3103(c) passim


12/63

XI

CitedAuthorities

Page

16U.S.C.3170 30

16U.S.C.3207(2) 37-38

16U.S.C.3209 5

16U.S.C.3213(a) 5

28U.S.C.1254(1) 1

43U.S.C.1311(a) .2,18,36

43

U.S.C.

1601(b) 3

43U.S.C.1603(b) 3

43U.S.C.1605 3

43

U.S.C.

1607 3

443

U.S.C.

1616(d)(2)

43U.S.C.

1616(d)(2)(D) 4

43U.S.C.1635(o)(l)-(2) 10

43U.S.C.1636(a) 25

54

U.S.C.

100751 11


13/63

Xll

CitedAuthorities

Page

54U.S.C.100751(a) ,22

54U.S.C.100751(b) .22

ActofDec.19,2014,Pub.L.113-287,128Stat.3094

(2014)................ 11

Alaska Admin.Code tit.11,20.990(7) 14

Alaska Admin.Code tit.11,20.990(18) 14

Alaska Const,art.VIII,3 37

Alaska NationalInterestLands ConservationAct,

Pub.L.96-487,94Stat.2371(1980)___pass im

Alaska NativeClaims SettlementAct,

Pub.L.92-903,85Stat.688(1971). passim

Alaska Stat.

38.05.126(a) 37

Alaska Stat.38.05.126(b) 37

Alaska Statehood Act,Pub.L.85-508,72

Stat.

339

(1958)...................... passim

REGULATIONS

36C.F.R.

1.2(a)(3) 13,21

36C.F.R.2.17(e) 12,13,16


14/63

arm

CitedAuthorities

Page

36

C.F.R.9.37 35

36C.F.R.9.38 35

36C.F.R.13.1406 35

36C.F.R.13.25 32

36C.F.R.34.4 35

ApplicabilityofRegulations toNon-Fede ralLands and Waters UnderU.S.Legislative Jurisdiction,

52

Fed.

Reg.

35,238

(Sept.

18,1987)............. 12

GeneralProvisionsandNon-Fede ralOilandGas Rights,80 Fed.Reg.65,572(Oct.26,2015).... 31

GeneralRegulationsforAreas Administeredbythe NationalParkService,48Fed.Reg.30,252(June 30,1983)............. 11,12

GeneralRegulations forAreas Administeredbythe NationalParkServiceandNationalParkSystemUnits inAlaska,61

Fed.Reg.35,133(July5,1996).............13,27,30

NationalParkSystemUnits inAlaska,46Fed.Reg.31,836(June17,2981). 10,11

ProclamationNo.4611,43Fed.Reg.57,009(Dec.5,1978) 4


15/63

XIV

CitedAuthorities

Page

PublicLandOrder4582,

34Fed .Reg.1,025(Jan.23,1969) 3

PublicLandOrder5653,43Fed .Reg.59,756(Dec.21,1978) ,4

PublicLandOrders 5696-5711,45Fed .Reg.

9,562(Feb.

12,1980) ,4

OTHERAUTHORITIES

7,8125Cong.Rec.9,905(1979)

125Cong.Rec.11,158(1979) passim

9,10125Cong.Rec.11,458(1979)

9126Cong.Rec.21,891(1980)

8126Cong.Rec.21,882(1980)

9126Cong.Rec.30,495(1980)

10,29126Cong.Rec.30,498(1980)

7,28,29S .Rep.No .96-413(1979)

9H.R.39,96thCong.(1979)

9H.R.39,96thCong.(1980)


16/63

XV

CitedAuthorities

Page

H.R.Con.Res .452,96thCong.(1980) 9

BlacksLawDictionary(10th ed2014) 34

RichardM.Johannsen,PublicLandWithdrawal

Policy

and

the

Antiquities

Act,

56

Wash.

L.

Rev.439(1981)........................................... 4-5


17/63

1

OPINIONS BELOW

TheopinionoftheUnitedStatesCourtofAppeals forthe NinthCircuitis reported a t768F.3d1066andis reproducedinthe AppendixtothePetition(App)at3a-34a.TheNinthCircuitsorderdenyingrehearingenbancis unreported andis reproduceda tApp.la-2a.The opinionofthe United States DistrictCourtforthe District

ofAlaska is unreportedandis reproduceda tApp.35a-58a.

JURISDICTION

TheUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheNinth Circuitissuedits decisiononOctober6,2014.App.3a .Atimelype titionforrehearingenbancwasdeniedonDecember

16,2014.App.la .

Thepe tition forawritofcertiorariwas timelyfiledonMarch 31,2015,andgrantedonOctober1,2015.This Courtha s jurisdictionunder28U.S.C.

1254(1).

STATUTORYANDREGULATORY

PROVISIONS INVOLVED

The relevantstatutoryandregulatoryprovis ions

are

reproducedinthe appendixtothis brief.

STATEMENTOFTHECASE

A.The Alloca tionofLands to the State ofAlaska and

Alaska Natives

Uponentering the Unionin1959,Alaska receivedthe largestlandgrantinthehistoryoftheUnitedStates.The

Alaska StatehoodActof1958(StatehoodAct)


18/63

2

authorizedAlaska to

selectup

to

102,550,000

acresanarea the sizeofCaliforniafromthe publiclandsofthe UnitedStates which[we]re vacant,unappropriated,andunreservedatthe time oftheirselection.Pub.L.85-508,6(b),72Stat.339,340(1958).This unprecedentedgrant

was drivenbyfearthatthe territorywaseconomically

immatureandthatits small,dispersedpopulationwouldbe unabletosupporta

state government.Trustees forAlaskav.State,736P.2d324,335(Alaska 1987).The landgrantwouldactas anendowmentwhichwouldyieldthe income thatAlaska neededtomeetthe costs ofstatehoodand thus ensure the economicandsocialwell-being ofthe newstate.Id.a t335-36.

The

StatehoodActalsomade the SubmergedLands

Act

of

1953,

which

grantstitle

to

and

ownership

ofthe lands

beneath

navigable

waters

within

the

boundaries ofthe respective States,43U.S.C.1311(a),applicabletothe StateofAlaskasuchthatAlaska shallhavethe same

rights

asdoexistingStatesthereunder,Pub.L.85-508,6(m),72Stat.

343.Alaskatherefore

holds title tothe beds ofnavigablewaters intrustforthe peopleoftheStatethattheymayenjoythenavigation

ofthe

waters,

carry

on

commerce

over

them,

and

have libe rty

offishingthereinfreedfromtheobstructionorinterferenceofprivate pa rties .DeptofNaturalRes .v.AlaskaR iverways ,Inc.,232P.3d1203,1211(Alaska 2010)(quotingIllinois Cent.R .Co.v.Illinois ,146U.S.387,

452(1892)).

Inthedecadefollowingits admissiontotheUnion,

Alaska began

selecting

lands

from

the

public

domain

in accordance withits rights underthe StatehoodAct.Butlanddisputesquicklyarose whentheState attempted


19/63

3

to

select

lands

overwhich

Alaska

Natives

had

assertedaboriginaltitle .BecausetheStatehoodActhadnotextinguishedtheirclaims,Alaska Natives contended thatthe State hadnolegalrighttotheirland.As a result,the Secretaryofthe Interiortemporarilysuspended transferof

unreservedpubliclandstoAlaska.S eePublicLandOrder4582,34Fed.Reg.1,025(Jan.23,1969).

In

1971,

Congress

pa s s e d

the

Alaska

Native

Claims SettlementAct(ANCSA)toresolve these disputes.Pub.L.92-903,85Stat.688(1971).Congress designed ANCSAtosettle Alaska Natives claims ofaboriginaltitle rapidly,withcertainty,inconformitywiththe realeconomicand socialneeds ofNatives ,withoutlitigation,with maximum pa rticipa tion byNatives in decisions affectingtheirrights andprope rty.43U.S.C.1601(b).Atthesame time,Congress wa s intentondoings owithoutestablishing anypermanentraciallydefinedinstitutions, rights,privileges ,orobligationsorcreatingareservationsystemorlengthywardshiportrusteeship.Id.In short,Congress soughttoendthe sortoffederalsupervisionoverIndianaffairs thathad previous lymarked federalIndian policy.Alaska v.Native Vill.ofVenetieTribalGov.,522U.S.520,

523-24

(1998).

Tothat

end,Congressextinguishedtheaboriginallandclaims ofAlaska Natives ,appropriated $962.5 milliontofund various Native regionala nd village corporations,andgrantedthesecorporationstherighttoselectapproximately40millionacresofland.S ee43U.S.C.1603(b),1605,1607,1610-15.Congresscontemplated

thatlandgranted underANCSAwouldbe putprimarilytothree usesvillage expansion,subsistence,and capitalforeconomic development.Ofthese potentia luses ,Congress


20/63

4

clearlyexpectedeconomicdevelopmentwouldbe the mostsignificant.Koniag,

Inc.v.KoncorFores tRes .,39F.3d991,996(9thCir.1994)(internalcitationomitted).Indeed,Congress recognizedthatdevelopmentofthe landwouldallowAlaska Natives toachiev[e]financialindependence andself-sufficiency.CityofAngoonv.Marsh,749F.2d1413,1414(9thCir.1984).

B.

The Alaska Nationa lInterestLandsConservation

Actof1980

InadditiontoresolvingthelandclaimsofNative Alaskans,ANCSAdirected the Secretaryofthe Interiortose taside up to80 million acres ofunreserved federallandwhichthe Secretarydeems are suitable foradditiontoor

creationas units ofthe NationalParkSystemf].43 U.S.C.

1616(d)(2).The Secretaryssubsequentwithdrawals,however,neverreceivedcongressionalapproval.Seeid.1616(d)(2)(D)(providingthatthewithdrawalswouldexpire unless Congress approvedthemwithinfive years).The CarterAdministration(claimingauthorityundertheFederalLandPolicyandManagementActof1976,43U.S.C.1701-1784,andthe Antiquities Actof1906,

16

U.S.C.

431-433)

then

startedwithdrawingland

onanadhocbas is .By1980,the CarterAdministrationhadunilaterallywithdrawnover100millionacresoffederalland.S e e ProclamationNo.4611,43Fed.Reg.57,009(Dec.5,1978);PublicLandOrder5653,43Fed.Reg.59,756(Dec.21,1978);PublicLandOrders5696-5711,45Fed.Reg.9,562(Feb.12,1980).Alaska,whichwas s tillinthe process ofmaking its landselections underthe StatehoodAct,was

outragedbyPresident

Carters

expansive

use of

theAntiquitiesAct,andthe publicoutcryagainstthis massivelandlock-upwassignificant.RichardM.


21/63

5

Johannsen,

Public

Land

Withdrawal

Policy

and

the Antiquities Act,56Wash.L.Rev.439,455(1981).

Inresponse,Congress enactedthe Alaska Na tiona lInterestLands ConservationAct(ANILCA),Pub.L.96-487,94Stat.2371(1980).ANILCArescindedthe CarterAdministration slandwithdrawals,s ee16U.S.C.3209,andmadeanyfuture federalwithdrawals inAlaskaof

more than5,000acres subjecttocongressionalapproval,s ee id.3213(a).Congress thus developed its ownpolicies tofinallycompletethe allocationoffederallands inthe StateofAlaska.AmocoProd.Co.v.Vill.ofGambell,Alaska,480U.S.531,549(1987).Indoingso,Congress soughtto ba lance two objectives:prote cting the nationalinterestinthe scenic,natural,culturalandenvironmentalvalues onthe publiclandsinAlaskaand,asithaddone withthe Alaska Statehood ActandANCSA,ensuringthe economic

andsocialneedsofthe State ofAlaska andits people .16U.S.C.3101(d).

ANILCAplacedmorethan100millionacresinto conservationsystem units (CSUs)in Alaska,expandingtheNa tiona lParkSystembyover43millionacresand

creating numerous newNa tiona lMonuments andWildlife Refuges.

16

U.S.C.

431,

410hh,

668dd,

460mm,

539,1274(a),1132.1The Yukon-CharleyRiversNationalPreserve(Yukon-Charley)isoneoftheseCSUs.

1.ANILCAdefinedaCSUasanyunitinAlaskaofthe NationalParkSystem,NationalWildlife Refuge System,NationalWildandScenicRiversSystems,Nationa lTrailsSystem,NationalWilderness PreservationSystem,oraNationalForestMonument.16 U.S.C.3102(4).Thatdefinitionincludedexistingunits,units established,designated,orexpanded byorunderthe provisionsofthis Act,additions tosuchunits,andanysuchunitestablished,designated,orexpandedhereafter.Id.


22/63

6

Congress

identified

the

Yukon-Charley

as

containing approximatelyonemillionsevenhundreda ndthirteen thousandacres ofpubliclands,asgenerallydepictedon mapnumbered YUCH-90,008,a nddatedOctober1978.16

U.S.C.410hh(10).ANILCA

establishedthe

Yukon-Charleyas a unit[]ofthe Na tiona lParkSystem ...[to]be administeredbythe Secretaryunderthe laws governing the administrationofsuch lands a nd underthe provis ions ofthis Act.Id.

410hh.

BecauseCongresssoughttoincludeanentire ecosystemwithina givenCSU,eachoneencompassed amassiveamountoflandnota llofwhichbe longed tothe federalgovernment.ANILCA

delineatednewCSUbounda rie sthatencompassedroughly28pe rcent

ofa lllandinAlaska.

Na tive

Corporations

a ndthe

State ownedmuch

ofthe

nonfederalland

containedwithin theseCSUs.Asofthis year,Na tive Corporations alone own approximately18millionacres withinCSUs,whichamountto approximately40 percentoftheirtotalANCSAlandselections.S eeBriefofAhtna,Inc.e ta l.asAmiciCuriae Supporting Petitionera t5&Ex.1(Apr.29,2015).

The disposition

ofthese nonfederallands withinthe neworexpandedCSUs received significantcongressionalattention.There was noquestionas toCongress sintent:State,Na tive Corporation,a ndprivate landswerenotpubliclands,were notpa rtofanyCSU,a ndwouldnotbe subjectto federalregulationas iftheywere pa rtofa CSU.

Asthe Senatecommitteechargedwithdrafting responsibilityexplained,[t]hose private lands,andthose publiclands

ownedbythe

State

ofAlaska

...

a re

notto be construedassubjecttothe managementregulations which

maybeadoptedtomanage andadministerany


23/63

7

national

conservation

system

unit

which

is

adjacent

to,orsurrounds,the priva te ornon-Federalpubliclands.S.

Rep.No.96-413,a t303(1979).Rather,onlyFederallaws

andregulations

ofgeneral

applicabilitytobothprivate andpubliclands,suchastheCleanAirAct,the WaterPollutionControlAct,U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineerswetlandsregulations,andotherFederalstatutesandregulations ofgeneralapplicabilitywouldbe

applicable to priva te ornon-Federalpubliclandinholdingswithinconservations systemunits.Id.These generally-applicable statutes andregulations thus were unaffectedbythe passage ofthis bill.Id.

Congress was especiallyconcerned thatANILCAnotdisturbthe landrights grantedtoAlaska Natives underANCSA.

ApplyingfederalconservationregulationstoNative

Corporationlands wouldimperilANCSAs goalofensuringfinancialindependence andself-sufficiencyforAlaska Natives .As Arizona CongressmanMorris Udall,oneofANILCAs primarysponsors,putit:ANILCAwas a directout-growth of[ANCSA],and,as a consequence,itwasimportanttorecallthe relationshipbe tweenthe conservationsystemunits...andthelandswhichthe

Na tive

peoples

ofAlaska

have

received

and

will

receive pursuanttothe [ANCSA]inreturnforthe extinguishmentoftheirclaims ba sedonaboriginaltitle.125Cong.Rec.9,905(1979)(statementofRep.Udall).

CongressmanUdallexplainedthatANILCAwas tohave no

effecton these lands:

We recognize thatthere are certainlands whichhave beenselected byNative Corporations andwhicharewithintheexteriorboundariesof


24/63

8

some ofthe conservationsystem units

....IwanttomakeclearthatinclusionoftheseNative lands

withintheboundariesofconservationsystemunits is notintendedtoaffectanyrights whichtheCorporationsmayhaveunderthis act,[ANCSA],oranyotherlaw,orto

restrictuse

ofsuchlandsbythe owningCorporations nortosubjectthe Nativelandstoregulations

applicable tothe publiclands within the specific conservationsystemunit.

Id.;seealso126Cong.Rec.21,882(1980)(statementofSen.Stevens)(The factthatNative landslie withinthe bounda riesofconservation

systemunitsisnotintended

toaffectanyrights whichthe [Native]corporationshave

underthis

act,

[ANCSA],

or

anyotherlaw....

The

Native

organizations have beengivenrepeatedassurances thatincludingtheirlandswithinconservationunitswillnotaffectthe implementationof[ANCSA].);125Cong.Rec.11,158(1979)(statementofRep.Seiberling)(recognizing thatnothinginANILCAaltersinanywaythe abilityofthe StateorNativestodowhatitwillwith...landswithinthe bounda riesofCSUs).

Congress understood,though,thatitshoulddomore thanmake its intentknowninlegislative documentsandfloorstatements.Itthus addedSection103(c),whichstates:

Onlythoselands withinthe bounda ries ofanyconservation

systemunitwhicharepublic

lands(a ssuchtermisdefinedinthisAct)

shallbe

deemed

to

be

included

as

a portion

ofsuch

unit.No

landswhich,be fore ,on,orafter

December2,1980,are conveyedto the State,to


25/63

9

anyNa tive Corporation,ortoanyprivate pa rty

shallbesubjecttotheregulationsapplicable solelytopubliclands withinsuchunits.Ifthe State,aNa tiveCorporation,orotherownerdesires to conveyanysuchlands,the Secretarymay

acquiresuchlandsinaccordance withapplicablelaw(includingthisAct),andanysuchlands

shall

be comepa rtofthe unit,and

be administeredaccordingly.

16U.S.C.3103(c).2

Congress addedSection103(c)to make clearbeyondanydoubtthatanyState,Na tive ,orpriva te lands,whichmaylie withinthe outerbounda riesofthe conservation systemunita re notpa rts ofthatunitandare notsubjectto

regulations

which

are

applied

to

public

lands,

which,infact,are partofthe unit.125Cong.Rec.11,158(1979)(statementofRep.Seiberling).Onlyanexpress statutoryprohibition wouldguaranteethatsomesharplawyerwould

notusecatchwordstocircumventCongress s

intention thatthe factthat[land]is withinthe boundaries drawn

onthe mapforthatconservationunitdoes notin

2.

Thisprovisionwa soriginallylocatedinSection810(c)

ofH.R.3651,the Udall-Andersonbillthateventuallybe came ANILCA.S eeH.R.39,96thCong.(1979).AftertheHouse versionofANILCApa ssed,125Cong.Rec.11,458-59(1979),itwa s replacedwiththeSenatesversion,whichdidnotinclude Section810(c),126Cong.Rec.21,891(1980);H.R.39,96thCong.(1980).This provision wa s includedinthe finalversionofANILCAthrough

aconcurrent

resolutionthatreinstatedtheoriginalSection810(c)amendmentlanguage toits newlocationatSection103(c).126Cong.Rec.30,495-500(1980);see H.R.Con.Res.452,96thCong.(1980).


26/63


27/63

11

and

the

explanatory

legislative

history,

then,

NPS restricted]theapplicabilityofthese

regulationsto federallyownedlands ...withinpa rkarea bounda ries .Id.(citing 126Cong.Rec.11,115(1980)and126 Cong.Rec.15,130-31(1980)).Inotherwords,NPS made clearthat[t]hese regulations wouldnotapplyto activities occurringonStatelands.Similarly,theseregulations wouldnotapplytoactivities occurringonNa tive oranyothernon-

federally

owned

land

interests

located

inside

pa rk

area boundaries .Id.

Twoyearslater,NPS engagedina comprehensive reviewof[its]generalregulationsapplicablenationwide inan effortto simplifythem and ease the burdenof[its]regulations onthe public.GeneralRegulations forAreas Administeredbythe Na tiona lParkService,48Fed.Reg.30,252,

30,252

(June

30,1983).

Underthe

Na tiona lParkService Organic Act,the Secretaryofthe Interiorha d the authorityto make and publishsuchrules and regulations ashe

maydeemnecessaryorprope rfortheuseandmanagementofthe pa rks ,monuments,andreservations underthe juris dictionofthe Na tiona lParkServices,16 U.S.C.3,a nd to [promulgateandenforce regulations

concerning

boa ting

and

other

activities

on

orrelating

to

waters located withinareas ofthe Na tiona lParkSystem,includingwaters subjectto the jurisdictionofthe UnitedStates ,id.la-2(h).4Acting underthose authorities,NPS revisedmanyofits generalregulations governing publicuse

a ndrecreationalactivities inareasitadministers. 48Fed.Reg.a t30,252.Aspa rtofthisoverhaul,NPS

4.

16U.S.C.3and16U.S.C.la-2(h)were laterrepealedandrecodifiedbythe ActofDec.19,2014,Pub.L.113-287,7,128Stat.3094,3273(2014).S ee54U.S.C.100751.


28/63


29/63

13

agencypurportedtoclarifythe applicabilityofthose NPS regulations thatapplyina llNationalParkSystemareas towaterssubjecttofederaljurisdictionlocatedwithinpa rkbounda ries,includingnavigablewaters.GeneralRegulations forAreasAdministeredbytheNationa lParkService andNationalParkSystemUnits inAlaska,61Fed.Reg.35,133,35,133(July5,1996).Abandoning its earlierview,NPSannouncedthatNPSregulations

otherwise applicablewithinthe boundaries ofaNationalParkSystemunitapplyonandwithin waters subjecttothe jurisdictionofthe UnitedStateslocatedwithinthatunit,includingnavigable watersandareas withintheirordinaryreach...irrespective ofownership ofsubmergedlands,tidelands orlowlands,and jurisdictiona lstatus.Id.a t35,136(quoting36C.F.R.1.2(a)(3)).

NPS

therefore

claimed

power

to

enforce

both

its

generalregulations,whichincludedthe banon hovercraftin36

C.F.R.

2.17(e),andits Alaska-specific regulations in36C.F.R.Part13overa llState-ownednavigable waters withinthe bounda ries ofthe CSUs thatANILCAcreatedorexpanded.NPSrejectedcommentsthatSection103(c)ofANILCAshouldbe interpretedas superseding

NPSauthoritytoregulate

[non-federal]waters within pa rkbounda ries.Id.a t35,135.AccordingtoNPS,Section103(c)was characterized byCongress as aminortechnicalprovisionandinterpretingittoallowNPSregulationofnonfederalnavigablewaters within CSUs wouldbe

consistentwith[ANILCAs]underlying prote ctive purpos es.Id.

i

i

I}


30/63

14

D.

Factual

Background

PetitionerJohnSturgeonis a lifelong Alaskan.Priortothis dispute,he hadhuntedmoose annuallysince 1971on the YukonRiverdownstreamfrom Eagle,Alaska,and its tributary,the NationRiver.App.8a .In1990,inordertoaccess waters ofthe NationRiverinaccessible byotherwatercraft,

Mr.Sturgeonpurcha sedasmallpersona l

hovercraft

and

registered

it

with

the

State

of

Alaska.App.8a .Ahovercraftis a motorizedvesse lthatutilizes a low-pressure a ircushion producedbydownward-directedfans.S ee Alaska Admin.Code tit.11,20.990(7),(18).Ahovercraftcan traveloverwaterand exposed gravelba rs,whichare common inAlaska.Alaska lawpe rmits the use ofhovercraftonState-ownedlands and waters.

From

1990

through

2007,

Mr.

Sturgeon

used

his hovercrafttoaccess moose-huntinggrounds onthe Nation River,includingthose waters ofthe NationRiverupriverfrom

theYukon-Charleyboundary.App.8a .Because the

NationRiverisnavigable,Alaska holdstitletoits

submergedlands.S ee Alaskav.UnitedS tate s ,201F.3d1154

(9thCir.2000).

InSeptember2007,during his annualmoose-huntingtrip,

Mr.Sturgeonenteredthe NationRiverfromthe YukonRiveronhishovercraft.Approximatelytwomiles upriver,

Mr.Sturgeonstoppedonagravelbarlocatedbe lowthe rivers meanhigh-watermarkto make repairs.Shortlythereafter,three armedNPS rangers approached him.App.8a .The NPS rangers toldMr.Sturgeon thathe

was

committing

a federal

crime

by

operating

his

State-registeredhovercraftwithinthe Yukon-Charley.App.8a .Mr.Sturgeonexplainedtothe NPS rangers

thathe


31/63

15

was operating his hovercraftona State-ownednavigable river.App.8a .The NPS rangers saidthatMr.Sturgeon was incorrectandinsistedthathe remove the hovercraftfrom the Yukon-Charley.App.8a .

Mr.SturgeonlatermetwithNPS SpecialAgentSears inAnchorage,Alaska,to discuss NPS s threatofcriminalcitation.App.9a .SpecialAgentSears acknowledgedthat

the

State

ofAlaska

owned

the

submerged

lands

within

the banks ofthe YukonandNa tionRivers,butreaffirmedNP S spos itionthatitwouldbeafederalcrime forMr.Sturgeon to use his hovercraftonnavigable waters withinCSUs.App.9a .She warned Mr.SturgeonthatNPS wouldcriminallycharge him ifhe againoperatedhis hovercraftwithinthe Yukon-Charley.App.9a .Becauseofthese warnings,Mr.Sturgeondidnotuse his hovercraftwithinthe

Yukon-Charley

in

subsequent

hunting

seasons.

He thus

was unabletohuntareas ofthe Na tionRiverthathe hadprevious lyaccessedwithhis hovercraft.App.9a .

In

October2010,Mr.Sturgeonsen ta lettertothen-Secretaryofthe InteriorKenSalazar,requestingthathe initiate a rulemaking to repealoramendNPS regulations

sothat

NPS

could

no

longerrestrict

access

on

State navigable waters locatedwithinthe boundaries ofCSUs.App.

9a .He receivednoresponse.OnJune 26,2011,Mr.Sturgeonwrote totheNPSAlaska DistrictRegionalChiefRanger,copyingSpecialAgentSears ,requestingwritten

confirmationthathe wouldbecitedifheagainoperatedhis hovercraftwithinthe remote regions ofthe Yukon-Charley. D.Ct.Doc.No.1-2,a t1-2(Sept.14,2011).

He receivednoresponse. L

i


32/63


33/63


34/63

18

unit,

andthatno

lands

ownedbythe

State,

[a]

Native Corporation,or[a]private

partyshallbe subjecttothe regulations applicable solelytopubliclandswithinsuchunits.16U.S.C.3103(c).Congressfurtherstatedthattobecome partofthe unitand[be]administeredaccordingly,nonfederallandmustfirstbeconveyedtothe UnitedStates.Id.

ANILCAdefines publiclandstomeanlandsituatedinAlaska which,afterDecember2,1980,areFederallands,id.3102(3),andfederallandstomeanlands the title towhichis inthe UnitedStates afterDecember2,1980,id.3102(2).Lands be longingtoAlaska andNative Corporations areexpresslyexcludedfromthe definition ofpubliclands.Id.3102(3).

There is nodisputethatAlaska s navigable waters arenotpubliclands.ThroughtheStatehoodAct,Alaska receivedtitle toandownershipofthe landsbeneathnavigablewaterswithin[its]boundaries .43

U.S.C.1311(a).TheSubmergedLands Actestablishesthatthis title includescontrolofthe watersandresourcesabove.S ee infraat33-35.Because Alaska s navigable waters are

notpubliclands,NPS maynotregulate thempursuanttoits generalauthoritytomanage nationalpa rks.Section103(c)ofANILCA,aspecificstatutoryprovis ion,is controlling.ForMr.Sturgeon,thatmeans thatNPShadno

authoritytothreatenhimwithacriminalcitationforusinghishovercraftonthe NationRiver,aState-ownednavigable riverinAlaska.

TheNinth

Circuitfoundotherwise bydistortingthe plainmeaningofSection103(c).Focusingonthe wordsolely,the NinthCircuitreadSection103(c)tomeanthat


35/63


36/63

20

are notsubjectto regulations whichare appliedtopubliclands,which,infact,are pa rtofthe unit.125Cong.Rec.11,158(1979)(statementofRep.Seiberling).

EvenifANILCAwereambiguous,whichitisnot,NPS s constructionofSection103(c)wouldbe unreasonable andentitled tonodeference.UnderNPS s interpretation,the agencycouldeasilyevade Section103(c)slimitationon

federal

control

simplybypromulga ting

a

nationwide regulationapplicabletononpubliclands.Paradoxically,thisinterpretationwouldmeanthatshouldthisnewregulationbe more restrictive thanNPS s Alaska-specific rules,publiclands withinCSUs wouldcontinue toreceive the

bene fit

ofthe relaxedAlaska-specificregulations,butnonpubliclands wouldnot.This nonsensicaloutcome

squarely

contradicts

ANILCA,

which

repeatedly

recognizes the unique nature ofAlaskanlands.

Finally,

NPS salternativearguments basedon navigable

watersarenotbefore theCourtandcannot

salvagethe agencys regulations inanyevent.NPS mayargue thatsubmerged lands were neverconveyedto the State ofAlaska.Butthe transferoftitle from the United

States

to

Alaska

under

the

Statehood

and

SubmergedLands Actsisaconveyanceunderanycommonlyunderstooddefinitionoftheterm.Nora reAlaskan navigable waters publiclands,as NPS mayargue.Itis settledlawthatthe State s ownershipofsubmergedlands includes controlofthe waters flowingabove them.

Inshort,becausetheState snavigablewatersare notpubliclands,ANILCAmakes clearthatNPS maynot

regulate thema sthoughtheywere partofa CSU.NPS

thus

had

nopowertothreatenMr.Sturgeonwith


37/63

21

a criminalcitationforusinghishovercraftonthe Nation River.

This

Courtshould

reversetheNinthCircuits

decision.

ARGUMENT

I.

ANILCAProhibitsNPSfromRegulating

Nonfedera lLands Within Alaska CSUs as Though

TheyWerePartofthe NationalParkSystem.

This Courtreviewsa federalagencys constructionofa statute thatitadministers underthe frameworksetforthinChevron,U.S.A.,

Inc.

v.

NaturalResource s Defense Council,Inc.,467U.S.837(1984).Ifa court,employingtraditionaltools ofstatutoryconstruction,ascertains thatCongress had an intentiononthe precise questionatissue,thatintentionisthe lawandmustbe giveneffect.Id.at843n.9.OnlyifCongress has notdirectlyaddressedthe precise questionatissue should a courtconsiderwhetherthe agencys answeris ba sedona pe rmissibleconstructionofthe statute.ZuniPub.Sch.Dis t.No.89v.De ptofEduc.,550U.S.81,107(2007)(Kennedy,J .,concurring)(quotingChevron,467U.S.at843).

t

NPS s

constructionofSection

103(c)

cannotsurvive Chevronreview.First,CongressspokedirectlyandclearlybyspecifyinginANILCAthatnonfederallands withina CSUarenotpa rtofthe CSUandnotsubjecttoregulationas thoughtheywere.As a consequence,NPS s enforcementof36C.F.R.1.2(a)(3)exceeded its statutoryauthority.Second,the legislativehistoryconfirmsthat

Congress

intended

for

Section

103(c)

to

prevent

NPS fromregulatingnonpubliclandinAlaska CSUs as thoughtheywere pa rtofthe NationalParkSystem.Third,even

si

il

f

ii

F

i-

1.n!


38/63

22

ifthere

were

any

ambiguity,

NPS s

interpretation

ofSection103(c)wouldstillbe unreasonableanddependonanimpermissible constructionofANILCA.

A.Section103(c)ofANILCAlimits NPS s generalregulatory

controltopubliclandswithinAlaska CSUs.

The

question

presented

here

is

whether

Section

103(c)

ofANILCAlimits

NPS sgeneralauthorityto

regulate nonfederallands locatedwithinAlaska CSUs.7As explained be low,itpla inlydoes.

The Courtsinquirybe gins withthe statutorytext,andends there as wellifthe textis unambiguous.BedRoc

Ltd.,LLCv.

UnitedStates,541U.S.176,183(2004).The textofSection103(c)is straightforward.Itprovide s :

Onlythose lands withinthe bounda ries ofanyconservation

systemunit

whicharepublic

lands(a s

suchterm

is

defined

inthis Act)

shallbe deemedtobe includedasa portionof

7.

NPS sregulatoryauthorityderivesfromtwostatutorysources,neitherofwhichpe rmits applicationofthehovercraftregulationtononpubliclandswithinAlaskaCSUs.First,the Secretaryofthe Interiormayprescribesuchregulations as theSecretaryconsiders necessaryorproperforthe us eand managementofSystemunits.54U.S.C.100751(a).Second,theSecretarymaypre scribe regulations undersubsection(a)concerningboa tingandotheractivities onorrelatingtowater

locatedwithin

Systemunits,

includingwatersubjectto

the jurisdiction ofthe UnitedStates.Id.100751(b).Butitis familiarlawthataspecificstatutecontrolsovera generalone.BulovaWatchCo.v.

UnitedStates,365U.S.753,758(1961).


39/63

23

suchunit.

Nolands which,

be fore,

on,

orafterDecember2,1980,areconveyedtothe State,toanyNative Corporation,ortoanyprivate partyshall

besubjecttothe regulationsapplicablesolelytopubliclands withinsuchunits.Ifthe State,aNative

Corporation,

orotherownerdesires toconveyanysuchlands,the Secretarymayacquiresuchlandsinaccordancewith

applicable

law

(including

this

Act),

and

anysuchlandsshallbecome partofthe unit,andbe administeredaccordingly.

16U.S.C.3103(c).

TheCourtneedlooknofurtherthanthe provis ion s firstsentence toresolve this dispute.State,Alaska Native,and

priva te

propertyholdings

locatedwithin

CSUs

are notpubliclandsasANILCAdefinesthatterm.The pre cedingstatutorysection,Section102,defines landstomeanland,waters,andinterests therein.16U.S.C.3102(1).Anditdefinespubliclandstomeanlandsituatedin

Alaska which,afterDecember2,1980,are Federallands,excludingfromits ambitlands be longing

tothe State ofAlaska,

a Native

Corporation,orlands

referredto

in

Section

19(b)

of[ANCSA].Id.

3102(3).Becausethe navigablewaterwayatissueisnotpubliclandasANILCAdefinesthatterm,itisnotaportionofthe CSUwithinwhichitis located.Inotherwords,the State-ownedriveruponwhichMr.Sturgeon was usinghishovercraftis notpa rtofthe Nationa lParkSystem.NPS maynotmanage itas thoughitwere. i

Congress wiselyunderstoodthatthe nonpublicstatus oftheselandsmightnotpreventNPSfromtryingto


40/63

24

regulate them.Section103(c)ssecondsentence therefore provide s thatnonpubliclandsshallnotbe subjecttothe regulations

applicable solelyto

publiclandswithinsuch

units.In otherwords,regulations (includingNPS boating regulations)thatapplytothe federalportions ofCSUs donot,

andcannot,applytoState,NativeCorporation,andpriva te lands withinCSUboundaries.

Lastly,

Section

103(c)s

third

sentence

sets

forth

the onlywaysuchnonpubliclandmaybecome subjecttoNPS management.As the statute explains,the State,a Native Corporation,orotherownermustconveythe land,whichthe

Secretarymayacquire ...inaccordance withapplicable law.Onlyafterthe nonpubliclandis conveyedtothe UnitedStatesshall[it]become partofthe unit,

and

be

administered

accordingly.

Whenreadtogether,Sections102and103(c)evince

aclearintenttoprotectState,NativeCorporation,andpriva te landfrombe ing manageda s partofthe NationalParkSystem.Everystatutoryreferencetononfederallandis phrasedinprote ctive orexclusionaryterms.Suchland

isexcludedfromthe definitionofpubliclandsin

Section

102(3);

it

is

excluded

from

the

CSUs

in

the

firstsentenceofSection103(c);itisfencedofffromNPS regulationinthe secondsentenceofSection103(c);andSection103(c)sthirdsentence ensuresthatitmaybe administeredbyNPS onlyafteritha s be e nconveyed tothe federalgovernment.

Section103(c)has a mirrorimageinSection906(o),which

confirms

its

pla in

meaning.

Section

906(o)(l), locatedinANILCAs chapteraddressing ANCSAand the StatehoodAct,provides

thatANCSAlandwithdrawals


41/63

25

are

included

in

a

CSU

and

administered

accordinglyunless theywere conveyedtoa Na tiveCorporationpriorto ANILCAs enactment,orunless theyare subsequentlyconveyed

to

theState.43U.S.C.1635(o)(l).Section906(o)(2)thenprovidesthatFederallandswithinthe boundaries

ofaconservationsystemunit...shallbe administered inaccordance withthe laws applicabletosuchunitonlyuntilconveyedoutoffederalownership.

Id.

1635(o)(2).

Like

Section

103(c),

Section

906(o)clearlydistinguishes

be tweenmanagementoffederalandnonfederallands.Federallands are partofthe CSUa ndadministeredaccordingly,while nonfederal

lands withinCSUboundaries are notdeemedtobe includedin the CSUandarenots oadministered.8Thus,ANILCAdraws

a sharpdistinctionbe tweenfederallands,whicharesubjecttoNPS management,andnonfederallands,whichare not.

Indeed,itwa s notuntilMr.Sturgeoninitiatedthis litigationthatNPS made the argument,whichthe NinthCircuitaccepted,thatSection103(c)exempts nonfederallandwithin Alaska CSUs onlyfrom Alaska CSU-specific regulations.App.24a.Accordingtothe NinthCircuit,

the

phrase

regulations

applicable

solely

to

public

lands within such unitsdistinguishes betweenAlaska-specificNPS regulations a ndnationwide NPS regulations.App.23a-24a.The Ninth

Circuitthus upheldthe extensionof

8.Section907(a)likewise makes clearthatnonpubliclands withinCSUs are exemptfrom NPS regulations applying topubliclands.Thatprovisionstates thatnonpublicland becomes subjecttofederal

managementonlyifthe owner

agreesinwriting.

43U.S.C.

1636(a).

Byimplication,

no

agreementwould

be

necessaryifthese nonpubliclands were alreadysubjectto federalmanagementregulations.


42/63


43/63


44/63

28

B.

Congress intended forSection103(c)topreventNPS

fromregulatingnonpubliclandsin Alaska

CSUs

a s

thoughtheywere pa rtofthe

NationalParkSystem.

GiventhestraightforwardstatutorycommandofSection

103(c),there is noreasontoresorttolegislative

history.UnitedStatesv.Gonzales,520U.S.1,6(1997).But

there

ca n

be

no

serious

dispute

that

the

statute s legislativehistoryconfirmswhat[its]language... compels.IntlUnion,UnitedAuto.,Ae rospace &Agric.ImplementWorkersofAm .,UAWv.Johns onControls,Inc.,499U.S.187,205(1991).Congress sobjectiveininsertingSection103(c)intoANILCAwa s to ensure thatnonfederallands newlysurroundedbyoradjacenttoCSUs

would

notbe

subjectto

NPS

oversight

a nd

regulation.

Section103(c)sHouse sponsorintroduceditasan amendmenttomakeclearbe yond

anydoubtthatanyState,

Native ,orpriva te lands,whichmaylie withinthe outerboundaries ofthe conservationsystemunitare notpa rts ofthatunita nd are notsubjectto regulations whichare appliedto publiclands,which,infact,are partofthe

unit.

125

Cong.

Rec.

11,158

(1979)

(statement

of

Rep.Seiberling);see

alsoS .Rep.No .96-413,a t303(Nov.14,1979)(Those priva te lands,and those public lands,ownedbythe State ofAlaska ...are nottobe construeda s subjecttothe managementregulations whichmaybe adoptedtomanage a nd administeranynationalconservationsystemunitwhichis adjacentto,orsurrounds,the priva te ornon-Federalpubliclands.).The legislativerecordisreplete withevidence confirming Section 103(c)s specificpurpose.S eesupraa t5-10.Congress pa ss edittomakeexplicitthatonlypublic lands (and notState orpriva te lands)are


45/63


46/63


47/63

31

restricts

NPS s

authoritybroadly

or

narrowly;

but

theyagree

thatthe pointofenactingthisprovis ionwasto

restrictNPSauthority.YetunderNPS sconstruction,

anystatutorylimitationonits authorityiseasilyevaded.AllNPS wouldneedtodo is promulga te a newregulation making

apreviouslyAlaska-specificrule applicabletononpubliclandsnationwide andthe rule wouldnolongerbe

applicablesolelytopubliclands.Aninterpretation

of

Section

103(c)

that

renders

its

restriction

on

NPS s authoritypointlessisnotreasonable.CircuitCityStores ,Inc.v.Adams,532U.S.105,113(2001).

In opposingcertiorari,NPS arguedthatthis concern ispurelyhypotheticalunlessNPSdramaticallyshifts its regulatoryapproachand,therefore,enforcementofNPSrulesonnavigablewaters withinparkboundaries will

not

make

NPS s

rules

applicable

on

priva te lyheld,

state-held,orNative-he ldinholdings.BriefinOpposition21-22.Butjus tlastmonth,NPSpublisheda noticeofproposedrulemakingthatwouldeliminateanAlaska-specificexemptionfromcertainnationwideoilandgas

rules,makingthe rulesenforceableonState,NativeCorporation,andprivate inholdings.S ee General

Provisions

and

Non-Fede ral

Oil

and

Gas

Rights,

80

Fed.

Reg.65,572,65,573 (Oct.26,2015).Notably,the rulemakingexplainedthatbe ca use theseregulations aregenerallyapplicabletoNPSunitsnationwideandtonon-federalinterests inthoseunits,theyarenotapplicablesolelytopubliclandswithin[unitsestablishedunder

ANILCA],andthusarenotaffectedbysection103(c)ofANILCA.Id.(quotingSturgeonv.Mas ica,768F.3d1066,1077-78

(9th

Cir.

2014)).

Accordingly,

there

is

no

need

to

debate whetherNPSwilluseitsnewlyfoundpowertoimpose nationwide regulations on nonpublic landin Alaska CSUs.Ithas alreadypromisedtodoso.

i:


48/63

32

An

interpretation

of

Section

103(c)

that

leads

to

a nonsensicalresultislikewise unreasonable.Paroline v.

UnitedS tate s ,134S.Ct.1710,1729(2014).Because ofthe uniqueness ofAlaska s wilderness,numerous Alaska-specificrules differfromthe nationwide rulesgoverningthe National

Park

System.Alaska snationalpa rks,forexample,have specialcamping,hunting,fishing,trapping,

commercial

activity,

and

motorized

access

rules.S ee

36

C.F.R.

13.25

(camping);

id.

13.30

(weapons,

traps,andnets);id.13.40(commercialfishing);id.13.176(commercialuse ofcabins);id.13.182(constructionoftemporaryfacilities);id.13.1316(commercialpa s s e nge rtransport).Accordingto

NPS s interpretationofSection103(c),however,nonpubliclandslocatedinAlaska CSUs would

neverreceivethe be ne fitofthesemorerelaxed,

Alaska-specificregulations (because theycan neverapplytononpublic

land).Rather,thesenonpublic

lands

wouldhave tocomplywith the nationwide rules thatNPS itselfdeterminedwere notappropriatelysensitivetoAlaska s circumstances.

The textofSection103(c)cannotrequire thatifNPS enacted

a nAlaska-specificrulepe rmittinghovercraft,

then

State,

Alaska

Na tive ,

and

priva te

lands

withinthoseparks would,pa radoxica lly,remainsubjecttothe more

restrictive

nationwiderule.Thatisthe epitome ofanunreasonable constructionofa federalstatute.Butitwould

be the inevitable consequence ofadoptingNPS s andthe Ninth Circuits interpretationofSection103(c).


49/63

33

II.

NPS s

Alternative

Arguments

Are

Beyond

the QuestionPresented

and

Provide

No

Basisfor

Affirming the JudgmentBelow.

Boththe districtcourtandthe NinthCircuitdecidedthis casebasedon

their

reading

ofSection103(c).The questionpre sentedtothis Courtisthuslimitedtothatissue.Atthecertioraristage,however,NPSraised

alternative arguments in anefforttosustainthe extensionofits hovercraftbantononpublic lands.Butthere are goodreasons whythe lowercourts bypassedthese arguments infavorofananti-textualconstructionofSection103(c).As

explainedbelow,theyare a lluntenable.

A.Submerged lands were conveyedto the State ofAlaska.

NPS arguedbe lowthatSection103(c)does notapplytosubmergedlandsandnavigablewaters be caus etheywere notconveyedtothe State,butinstead be came State landbyoperationoflaw.S ee App.55a-56a Therefore,NPS asserted,suchlandsandwaterscouldbeadministered as

partofaCSUunderSection103(c),eventhoughthey

were notpubliclands.Id.The NinthCircuit

assum[ed](withoutdeciding)thatthe waters ofandlandbene aththe

NationRiverwere conveyedtothe State forpurposes ofSection103(c).App.26a.This assumptionwas correct.

The Alaska Statehood Actexpresslyincorporatedthe Submerged

Lands Actof1953.Pub.L.85-508,6(m),72

Stat.339,343(1958).ByapplyingtheSubmerged

Lands

ActtoAlaska through

the Alaska

StatehoodAct,Congressgranted

the Statetitletosubmergedlands.UnitedStates v. Alaska,521U.S.1,7-8(1997).This grant


50/63

34

oftitle

to

submerged

lands

a t

statehood

is

universallydescribedas a transferof

a n interestin propertyfrom the UnitedStatestothe newlysovereignstate.S eeIdahov.UnitedStates,533U.S.263,272 (2001)([T]he defaultrule isthattitle tolandundernavigable waters pa s se s fromthe UnitedStates toa newlyadmittedstate.);Alaska v.Ahtna,891F.2d1401,1404(9thCir.1989)(consideringownershipofthe lowerthirtymiles ofthe Gulkana Rivera nd

noting

that,

[i]fnavigable,

title

to

the

submergedlands pa s s e dtoAlaska atstatehood).

Atransferoftitle tosubmerged lands from the UnitedStatestoAlaska isa conveyanceunderanycommonlyunderstooddefinitionofthe term.Blacks LawDictionarydefines conveyance a s [t]he voluntarytransferofa right

orofproperty,a nd

conveyas

[t]otransfer

or

deliver

(something,suchasa rightorproperty)toanother,esp.bydeed

orotherwriting;esp.,tope rforma nactthatisintendedtocreateoneormorepropertyinterests,regardless ofwhetherthe actis actuallyeffective tocreate thoseinterests.BlacksLawDictionary(10thed.2014).Ne itherdefinition excludes transfers byoperationoflaw.AccordTyonekNative Corp.v.S ecyofthe Interior,836

F.2d

1237,

1241

n.5

(9th

Cir.

1988)

(referencing

lands conveyed underthe Alaska StatehoodAct).

Consistentwiththese principles,the Alaska Supreme Courtha s describedthe transferofsubmergedlands tothe states atstatehooda s a conveyance.James v.State,950P.2d1130,1138(Alaska 1997)(We conclude thatthe tidelands a ndlandsunderlyingthe coastalwaters ofthe Tongass were conveyed tothe State ofAlaska atstatehood undertheequalfootingdoctrineandtheSubmergedLands Act.).Section103(c)sexemptionforlands...


51/63

35

conveyed

to

the

State

thus

applies

to

submergedlands

andnavigable waters.

B.State navigable waters are notpubliclands.

1.Ownershipofsubmergedlandsincludes controlofthe waters flowingabove them.

NPS

asserted

be low

that

navigable

waters

couldbepubliclandsunderANILCAbeca use Alaska does not

ownwater,onlyitssubmergedlands.Resp.C.A.Br.38-40.Butthis noveltheoryhasnomeritbecause thedefinitionoflandsinSection102(1)ofANILCAincludeswaters.16U.S.C.3102(1).Thus,underANILCA,submergedlands includethewatersabove them.

NPS sregulations similarlymakenodistinctionbe tweenownershipofsubmergedlandsandownershipofwaters S ee 36 C.F.R.34.4,9.37,&9.38(purportingto

regulatefederallyownedorcontrolledlandsandwaters);36C.F.R.13.1406(regulatingstate-ownedlandsandwaters).

Furthermore,thereisnolegalsupportfor

distinguishingbe tweensubmergedlands

andthe waters

above.

The

Submerged

Lands

Act

makes

clear

that

itinseparablygrants ownershipofsubmergedlandsandthe righttomanageandregulatethe resources inthe waters above:

Itisdeterminedanddeclaredtobeinthe public

interest

that(1)title toandownership

ofthe

lands

beneath

navigable

waters

withinthe

boundariesoftherespectiveStates,andthe naturalresourceswithin

such

landsand


52/63

36

waters,and(2)

the rightandpowe rtomanage,

administer,

lease,

develop,

andus ethesaidlands andnaturalresourcesallin accordance with

applicableStatelawbe ,andtheyare,subject

totheprovis ionshereof,recognized,confirmed,establishedandvestedinandassignedtothe respectiveStates.

43

U.S.C.

1311(a)

(emphasis

added).

The SubmergedLands Actthus grants tothe States title toandownershipof[]submerged lands andwaters,including

therightandpowertomanage,administer,lease,develop,anduse them.UnitedStates v.California,436U.S.32,40(1978)(emphasisadded)(citationandquotation

omitted);seealsoTotemoffv.State,905P.2d954,

964

(Alaska 1995)

(The

SubmergedLands Actthus gives Alaska ownershipof,title to,andmanagementpoweroverthe following:landsbeneaththenavigablewaters ofAlaska,the navigable waters themselves,andfishandother

marine life located

in

Alaska s navigablewaters.

(emphasis added)(footnotes omitted)).

Permitting federalregulationofnavigable waterways independent

ofstateownershipofthesubmergedlands be neathwouldalsosubvertthe publictrustdoctrine.As a sovereignstate,Alaska holds title to lands undernavigable waters in trustforthe people ofAlaska,sothattheymayenjoythe navigation ofthe waters,carrycommerce overthem,andhavethelibertyoffishingtherein.Illinois Cent.,146U.S.at453.10Accordingly,title tothe lands

10.Alaska sconstitutionandlawunequivocallyrecognize

the rights ofa llAlaskans touseandaccess waterforpurposes


53/63

37

under

the

navigable

waters

...

necessarily

carries

withitcontroloverthe waters above them.Id.a t452.NPS s assertion thatwaters flowing oversubmergedlandsmayconstitute federal

publiclandsunderANILCAcannotbe reconciledwiththis principle.There is noauthorityfordivorcingcontrolofState-ownedsubmergedlands fromthe waters above them.

NPS s

argument

also

overlooks

the

factthat

publiclandsin ANILCAare definednotbywhatAlaska owns,butbywhatthe UnitedStatesowns.ANILCAprovide s thatpubliclandsarelands the title towhichisinthe UnitedStates.16U.S.C.

3102(l)-(3).NPS hasatno

pointdemonstratedorevenarguedthatthe United

Statesholdstitletothe waters flowingoverAlaska s submergedlands.Forgoodreason:the notionoffederaltitletowateris incompatible withAlaska sundisputedownership

ofsubmergedlands andcontrolofthe waters flowingabove.43U.S.C.1311(a)(1).

i

Finally,ANILCAitselfba rsNPS seffortstousurpAlaska s traditionalcontrolovernavigable waters flowingover

itssubmergedlands.Section1319makesclear

that

ANILCA

does

notexpand

or

diminish[]

Federal

or

Statejurisdiction,

responsibility,

interests,

orrights inwaterresourcesdevelopmentorcontrol.16U.S.C.

consistentwiththe publictrust.See ,e.g.,Alaska Const,art.VIII,3(Whetheroccurringintheirnaturalstate,fish,wildlife,andwatersarereservedtothepeopleforcommonuse.);Alaska Stat.38.05.126(a)(The people ofthe state have a constitutionalrighttofree accesstoandus e ofthe navigableorpublicwaterofthe

state.);

Alaska

Stat.

38.05.126(b)

([T]he

state

holds

andcontrols a llnavigableorpublicwaterintrustforthe use ofthe peopleofthe state.).


54/63

38

3207(2).Italsoprovides thatthe statute does

notaffect

inanywayanylawgoverningappropriationoruseof,orFederalrightto,wateronlandswithintheStateofAlaska.Id.3207(1);seealsoid.3202.Inthis way,ANILCApreserves federalrights tous e Alaskan waters while expresslyrefrainingfromattempting toalterthe pre exis tingbalancebe tweenstateandfederalcontroloverthose waters.

2.

Nofederalreservedwaterrightsforsubsistence jus tifyNPSextendingits jurisdiction tostate submergedlands and navigable waters.

Alternatively,NP Sclaimedbe lowthatithadthe authorityunderthe Ninth Circuits Katie Johndecisions to

regulate

Alaskan

navigable

waters aspublic

landsbe ca us ethe

UnitedStateshadreservedwaterrights inwatersflowingthroughAlaska CSUs tofurtherthe conservation purposes behindANILCA.Resp.C.A.Br.12-13,36-38;see Alaskav.Babbitt,72F.3d698,704(9thCir.1995)(Katie John /);Katie Johnv.UnitedS tates ,720F.3d1214,1245(9thCir.2013)(KatieJohnII).

These decisions,however,held thatwaters withassociatedfederalreservedwaterrights werepubliclandsonlyforthe limitedpurposeofgivingeffecttoANILCAs subsistence provis ions inTitle VIII.S eeKatieJohnI,72F.3da t702n.9;Katie JohnII,720F.3da t1245.Anyreservedwaterrightsheldbythe governmentrelatedto

subsistenceprovide noauthorityforNPS ,oranyotheragency,toregulate be yondsubsistence issues.S e e

Cappaertv.UnitedS tate s ,426U.S.128,141(1976)(The implied-reservation-of-water-rightsdoctrine,however,reservesonlythatamountofwaternecessarytofulfillthe purpose ofthe reservation,nomore .).


55/63

39

The

NPS

hovercraft

prohibition

a t

issue

here

was adoptedforreasons whollyunrelatedtosubsistence.Itis partofNPS sregulations promulga tedunderits generalauthorities,notanycategoryoffederalsubsistence regulationspromulgatedunderTitle VIIIofANILCA.And onits face,itdoes notpurportto manage allocationof,oraccess to,subsistence resources.

CONCLUSION

Fortheforegoing

reasons,

Petitionerrespectfullyrequests thatthis Courtreverse the decision ofthe NinthCircuit.

Respectfullysubmitted,

Ma t t h e w T.

Fin d l e y CounselofRecord

Ev a R.Ga r d n e r As h b u r n &Ma s o n ,P.C.1227W.Ninth Avenue Suite 200Anchorage,AK99501(907)276-4331

[email protected]

Wil l ia mS.

Co n s o v o y J .Mic h a e l Co n n o l l y Co n s o vo y McCa r t h y

Pa r kPLLC 3033WilsonBoulevardSuite 700Arlington,VA22201

Mic h a e l H.

Pa r kCo n s o v o y McCa r t h y

Pa r kPLLC Three ColumbusCircle 15thFloorNewYork,NY10019

Do u g l a s P o p e P o p e &Ka t c h e r 421W.FirstAvenue Suite 220Anchorage,AK99501

Attorneys forPe titione r

Date:November16,2015
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


56/63

APPENDIX


57/63

I

I

Is

I

Ila

APPENDIXA

16

U.S.C.

3103

f 16 U.S.C.3103

3103.Maps

\

(a)Filing

andavailabilityfor

inspection;discrepancies;

coastal

areasi

Thebounda rymapsdescribedinthis Actshallbeon

file andavailableforpublicinspectioninthe officeofthe Secretaryorthe SecretaryofAgriculture withregardtothe Nationa lForestSystem.Inthe eventofdiscrepancies be tween

the

acreagesspecified

in

thisActandthose depicted

on

suchmaps,the mapsshallbecontrolling,

butthe

bounda ries

ofareas

added

to

the

National

Park,WildlifeRefugeandNationa lForestSystemsshall,incoastalareas

notextendseawardbeyondthe meanhightide

line

toincludelandsownedbythe StateofAlaska

unlessthe Stateshallhaveconcurredinsuchbounda ry

extensionandsuchextensionis accomplishedunderthe notice andreportingrequirements ofthis Act.

(b)

Changes

in

land

management

status;

publica tioninFederalRegister;filing;clericalerrors;boundaryfeatures andadjustments

AssoonaspracticableafterDecember2,1980,amapandlegaldescriptionofeachchange inlandmanagementstatuseffectedbythisAct,includingtheNationalWildernessPreservationSystem,shallbepublishedinthe

Federal

Register

and

filed

with

the

Speaker

of

the House ofRepresentativesandthe Presidentofthe Senate,


58/63


59/63

3a

AppendixA

landsin

accordance

with

applicable

law(includingthis

Act),andanysuchlandsshallbecomepa rtofthe unit,and

be administeredaccordingly.


60/63

4a

APPENDIX

B

36

C.F.R.

1.2

36C.F.R.1.2

1.2Applicabilityand scope.

(a)The regulations containedinthis chapterapplytoa ll

persons

entering,

using,visiting,

or

otherwise

within:

(1)The boundaries offederallyownedlandsandwaters administeredbythe Na tiona lParkService;

(2)Theboundariesoflandsandwaters administered bythe Na tiona lParkService forpublic-

use

purposes

pursuant

to

the

terms

of

a

written

instrument;

(3)Waters subjectto the jurisdictionofthe UnitedStates locatedwithinthe boundaries ofthe Na tiona lParkSystem,includingnavigable waters andareas withintheirordinaryreach(uptothemeanhighwaterline inplacessubjecttotheebbandflowof

the

tide

and

up

to

the

ordinary

high

water

mark

inotherplaces)andwithoutregardtothe ownershipofsubmergedlands,tidelands,

orlowlands;

(4)Lands and waters in the environs ofthe DistrictofColumbia,policedwiththe approvalorconcurrence ofthe headofthe agencyhaving jurisdiction orcontroloversuchreservations,pursuanttothe provis ions of

the

Act

ofMarch

17,1948

(62

Stat.

81);

(5)Otherlands andwaters overwhichthe UnitedStates

holdsaless-than-fee

interest,totheextent


61/63

5a

AppendixB

necessaryto fulfillthe purpose ofthe Na tiona lParkServiceadministeredinterestandcompatible withthe

nonfederalinterest.

(b)The regulations containedin pa rts 1through 5,part7,andpart13ofthis chapterdonotapplyonnon-federally

owned

lands

and

waters

or

on

Indian

tribal

trust

lands locatedwithinNa tiona lParkSystem boundaries ,excepta s provide din pa ragra ph(a )orin regulations specificallywrittento be applicable onsuchlands andwaters.

(c)The regulations containedin pa rt7andpart13ofthis chapterarespecialregulations pre s cribe dforspecificpa rkareas .Those regulations mayamend,modify,relax

ormake more stringentthe regulations contained in pa rts 1through 5andpart12ofthis chapter.

(d)The

regulationscontainedinpa rts 2through5,part

7,andpart13ofthissectionshallnotbe construedtoprohibitadministrativeactivitiesconductedbythe Na tiona lParkService,oritsagents,inaccordance withapproved generalmanagementand resource managementplans ,

orin emergencyoperations involving threats to life ,prope rty,orpa rkresources.

(e )The regulations inthis chapterare intendedtotreata mobility-impaired pe rsonusinga manualormotorized wheelchairasape de s trian,anda re notintendedto restrictthe activities

ofsucha pe rsonbeyondthe degree that

the

activities

of

a

pedes trian

are

restricted

by

the

same regulations.


62/63

6a

APPENDIX

C

36

C.F.R.

2.17

36C.F.R.2.17

2.17Aircra ftanda irdelivery.

(a )The following are prohibited:

(1)Operating orusing aircraftonlands orwaters otherthana tlocations designated pursuantto specialregulations.

(2)Where a watersurface is designatedpursuanttopa ragra ph(a)(1)ofthissection,operatingor

using

aircraft

under

power

on

the

water

within

500

feet

oflocations

designated

as

swimming

be ache s ,boa t

docks,piers ,orramps,exceptasotherwise designated.

(3)Deliveringorretrievinga personorobjectbyparachute ,helicopter,orotherairborne means ,exceptinemergencies involvingpublicsafetyor

serious

prope rty

loss,

or

pursuant

to

the

terms

and conditions ofa pe rmit.

(b)The provisions ofthis section,otherthan pa ragraph(c)ofthis

section,shallnotbe applicable toofficialbus ine s s oftheFederalgovernment,oremergencyrescuesin accordance with

the directions ofthe superintendent,ortolandingsdue

tocircumstances beyondthe controlof

the

operator.

(c)(1)Exceptasprovidedinpa ra gra ph(c)(3)of

this section,

the owners ofa downed aircraftshallremove the


63/63

7a

Appendix

C

aircrafta ndallcomponentpa rtsthereofinaccordance withproceduresestablishedbythe superintendent.Inestablishingremovalprocedure s,thesuperintendentisauthorizedto:(i)Establishareasonabledatebywhichaircraftremovaloperations mustbe complete;(ii)determinetimesandmeansofaccesstoa ndfromthe

downed

aircraft;

a nd

(iii)

specify

the

manner

or

methodofremoval.

(2)Failuretocomplywithproceduresand conditions

establishedunderpa ragraph(c)(1)ofthis sectionis prohibited.

(3)Thesuperintendentmaywaivethe

requirements

of

paragraph

(c)(1)

of

this

section

orprohibitthe

removalofdownedaircraft,upona determinationthat:(i)The removalofdowned aircraftwouldconstitute anunacceptable risktohumanlife;(ii)the removalofa downedaircraftwouldresultinextensive resource damage;or(iii)the removalofa downed

aircraftisimpracticableorimpossible.

(d)

The

use

of

aircraft

shall

be

in

accordance

with regulations ofthe FederalAviationAdministration.Suchregulations

are

adopted

asa partoftheseregulations.

(e)The operationoruse ofhovercraftisprohibited.

(f)Vi l ti fth t d diti f it i d

Documents

Sturgeon v. Frost, No. 14-1209