SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Denali Park Road and Vehicle Management Plan

In 1917, Congress established Mount McKinley National Park as a “game refuge” with the intent that it be “set apart as a public park for the benefit and enjoyment of the people” (39 Stat. 938). In 1980, Congress passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, Pub. L. 96-487), which enlarged and renamed the park Denali National Park and Preserve. A general purpose of all ANILCA lands is to preserve them for the benefit, use, education and inspiration of present and future generations. 16 U.S.C. 3101(a). The Denali Park Road (“park road”) serves both of these purposes. Built over 16 years (1922-1938), the historic 92-mile park road is an important means of access to the park and is one of the best places in the world for the public to observe large northern mammals in their natural habitat. Visitors traveling the park road often observe Dall sheep, caribou, wolves, grizzly bears, moose, and foxes. Nowhere else in America can visitors observe such concentrations of these large species of wildlife in such an accessible natural setting. Visitors traveling the road also have many opportunities to observe smaller mammals and birds, some of which are rarely seen elsewhere in North America. Alaska Range features, such as glacially carved mountains, Mount McKinley, and the open views of dynamic alpine landscapes, also are a source of visitor enjoyment and inspiration. The park road facilitates wilderness recreational opportunities and supports freedom of discovery, a sense of adventure, and a connection to nature.

The NPS's ability to balance the protection of park resources while offering quality visitor experiences is exemplified in the management of the park road. Road crews use graders and haul gravel to maintain it, rangers patrol it, and commercial services staff manage the transportation concession contract for it, so visitors can ride buses to view wildlife and access the park's wilderness. In 2012, planning staff, with ( printed page 65691) public input, worked to create the Denali Park Road Vehicle Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (VMP), which adopted an adaptive management strategy that includes measurable indicators and standards for visitor experience and resource protection.^[1] These include crowding standards for the number of vehicles at wildlife stops, in a viewscape, and at a rest area; the spacing of vehicles to ensure time for sheep crossings; restrictions to night-time traffic volumes; and restrictions to large (construction-related) vehicle traffic. On September 27, 2012, the Regional Director, Alaska signed a Record of Decision (ROD) selecting the preferred alternative in the VMP for implementation. One standard in the selected alternative limits the maximum level of vehicle use on the restricted section of the park road (miles 15-90) to 160 vehicles per 24-hour period in the visitor season, defined in the park's General Management Plan (GMP) as the season beginning on the Saturday before Memorial Day and ending on the second Thursday after Labor Day. This standard allows the NPS to meet growing visitor demand while maintaining a high-quality experience. The NPS has been managing vehicle use on the park road consistent with the VMP since 2012. Resources staff monitor this and other indicators in the VMP to ensure the road is managed according to the plan.

Final Rule

This rule conforms the park's special regulations to reflect how the NPS has managed the park road since adoption of the VMP in 2012. The current version of the special regulations authorizes the NPS to issue no more than 10,512 motor vehicle permits for travel on the restricted section of the park road during the visitor season. This regulatory text will be revised to provide that no more than 160 vehicles may travel on the restricted section of the road per 24-hour period during the visitor season. The rule also makes a minor change to the regulatory text by deleting text that departs from the visitor season, as it is defined in the GMP, by ending the season on September 15 if that comes before the second Thursday after Labor Day. The rule provides that the season always ends on the second Thursday after Labor Day, providing additional opportunities for recreation and access by lengthening the season in some years. By stating the cap in terms of the number of vehicles, rather than the number of permits, the rule also clarifies that any vehicle traveling on the park road counts toward the vehicle limit, not just vehicles operating under a permit. The VMP evaluated impacts from all motor vehicle use on the road, permitted or not, and the NPS has been managing vehicle use on the park road in this way since 2012. Some vehicles that use the road do not have a permit, such as tour buses that operate under concession contracts and vehicles used by the NPS for administrative purposes.

Summary of Public Comments

The NPS published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on May 18, 2026 (91 FR 28461). The NPS accepted public comments for 60 days via the mail, hand delivery, and the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Comments were accepted through July 17, 2026. The NPS received 161 comments on the proposed rule. Overall, commenters broadly supported adaptive management as a tool for managing vehicle use on the park road. Commenters supported adaptive management as a means of ensuring protection of park resources and values in accordance with desired conditions while providing flexibility for managers to adjust operations based on science-driven modeling, monitoring, and observed resource or visitor-use issues. Commenters supported regulatory flexibility that allows the NPS to respond to changing conditions, monitoring results, and evolving resource needs.

After considering public comments and additional review of the proposed rule, the NPS is making several minor changes in the final rule. Two changes better reflect how the NPS has managed vehicle access on the park road under the VMP since 2012. The first change removes language held over from the existing regulations that each permit allows one vehicle one entry onto the restricted portion of the park road. The NPS issues some permits, such as construction permits, that allow for more than one entry as needed for the authorized use. The sentence in the proposed rule that followed, which stated that other forms of written authorization may have different terms and conditions, was in reference to the sentence before and therefore also has been removed. The second change reflects that vehicle counts are made when a vehicle passes westward through the gate into the restricted section of the park road. The statement in the proposed rule that no more than 160 vehicles may travel on the restricted section was imprecise and has been replaced with a statement that no more than 160 vehicles may enter the restricted section of the park road. A similar change has been made to the title of § 13.932. If the same vehicle passes through the gate more than once per day, each passage through the gate counts toward the 160 vehicle per day limit. Finally, the titles of § 13.930 and § 13.932 and the definition of the restricted section § 13.930 have been revised to clarify that the regulations in those sections only apply to vehicle use on the restricted section of the park road during the visitor season. The restricted section of the park road outside of the visitor season is determined by the NPS. As stated in § 13.936 of the existing regulations, travel on the restricted section of the park road at any time requires a permit.

A summary of the pertinent issues raised by commenters is provided below.

1. Comment: Many commenters asked the NPS to publish vehicle management and monitoring data that can be measured against the indicators and standards in the VMP before finalizing the rule. Commenters requested information about wildlife movement and viewing, road capacity analysis and modeling, completion of a Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) study, release of long-term monitoring datasets, impacts to wilderness character, and detailed traffic analyses ( e.g., daily counts, GPS vehicle tracking data, peak hour patterns, road corridor crowding, vehicle type allocation). Commenters stated that changed visitor use patterns and resource conditions since 2012, including changes caused by the closure and reopening of a large section of the park road, warrant additional review that allows the NPS to collect and analyze updated monitoring data to determine appropriate levels of vehicle use, such as through the preparation of a supplemental environmental impact statement. One commenter encouraged the NPS to regularly reassess its vehicle management framework to ensure that it uses empirical evidence to inform management decisions for more or less access.

NPS Response: The NPS expects the visitor conditions that will exist when the park road is fully accessible to vehicle traffic in 2027 will be substantially similar to visitor conditions that existed when the scientific studies that led to the VMP were completed. Monitoring data are ( printed page 65692) published for 2013-2019,^[2] which can be measured against the indicators and standards in the VMP. Monitoring data for 2020-2022 also are published but are not suitable for comparison to the conditions studied and tested for the VMP due to changes to visitor use patterns caused by the global pandemic and the Pretty Rocks landslide that closed the road to all vehicle traffic at mile 43 in August of 2021. The NPS is working to publish monitoring data for 2023-2025, however these data are not comparable to pre-pandemic data due to the landslide closure. The Pretty Rocks Bridge was completed in August 2026. Upon completion of the Eielson Visitor Center, the NPS monitors the indicators under “normal” traffic conditions. As resources allow, and if appropriate, the NPS may complete a BACI to affirm the selection of key indicators and to distinguish impacts due to changes in current traffic patterns and traffic levels. To the extent that future monitoring data suggest the NPS should reconsider any aspect of the adaptive management framework in the VMP, or the 160 vehicles per day cap, it will undertake all compliance and planning actions necessary to do so.

2. Comment: Several commenters asked how the rule would affect access to private property within the park. Specifically, commenters requested that access to private property under ANILCA Sections 1110(a) and 1110(b) be exempt from vehicle caps. They also asked the NPS to clarify it cannot restrict or supersede statutory access by giving other users a transit priority, and to ensure the adaptive management framework allows for increased inholder access in response to demonstrated needs and changing conditions.

NPS Response: The NPS will not take any action in conflict with statutory rights of access provided under Section 1110 of ANILCA. 16 U.S.C. 3170. The NPS will ensure that its management of vehicle use on the park road, including through permit requirements or vehicle limits, will not go beyond reasonable regulation of those rights of access in accordance with Sections 1110(a) and (b).

3. Comment: Several commenters requested that the NPS revise the rule by replacing the 160-day cap with a statement that the NPS will adaptively manage vehicle use on the park road, adjusting vehicle numbers up or down based upon monitoring data. Commenters opposed a fixed cap as unable to accommodate long-term resource conditions or evolving access needs. One commenter suggested the rule indicate that daily vehicle use is governed by the indicators and standards in the VMP and that 160 vehicles should not be a management target or baseline for use. One commenter asked the NPS to codify specific aspects of adaptive management, including requirements to publish daily vehicle counts and VMP indicator results, and to automatically reduce vehicle allocations if wildlife-stop, sheep-gap, nighttime traffic, viewscape, rest-stop, hiker-wait, or large-vehicle standards are not met.

NPS Response: The daily vehicle cap in the rule is consistent with the VMP and will not interfere with the NPS's use of adaptive management to respond to monitoring data that indicates desired conditions are not being met. Adaptive management consistent with the VMP does not set the cap as a management goal or a desired outcome; it represents the upper bound of traffic that is allowable under the selected alternative. The NPS's experience with implementing adaptive management since adoption of the VMP in 2012 has led it to conclude that, at least as of now, it is unnecessary to codify adaptive management concepts in NPS regulations.

4. Comment: Commenters proposed various changes to the vehicle cap in the rule, including changes that would set a seasonal rather than a daily maximum, differentiate between daytime and nighttime use, limit use to one entry and one exit on the restricted portion of the road per 24-hour period, reserve specific access opportunities for Alaska residents, and limit use to commercial tour buses. Commenters suggested changes to the number of vehicles that could travel on the park road per day, ranging from a complete prohibition on vehicle use to increasing the cap as high as 240 vehicles per day.

NPS Response: The 160-vehicle cap is a specific standard that was selected for implementation in the ROD. The VMP includes desired conditions for daytime and nighttime use. Seasonal considerations were not a part of the scientific study leading to the VMP. However, historically and currently, there the concessionaire bus schedule is based on demand pattern which naturally creates a seasonality for the largest road user group. The bus schedule peaks in July and August. Some road permits, such as Teklanika Campground buses and concessionaire buses, are for one entry and one exit trips. Other permits, such as for construction or research projects, allow for travel back and forth along the road. Recognizing the special access provisions already provided for in ANILCA, the NPS declines to reserve additional specific access opportunities for Alaska residents in this rule.

5. Comment: One commenter asked the NPS to consider providing additional access outside of the defined visitor season when conditions permit.

NPS Response: The NPS already allows additional access outside the defined visitor season as conditions allow. Personal vehicles can travel on maintained portions of the park road outside of the defined visitor season between February 15 and October 15.

6. Comment: Commenters raised concerns about potential impacts to park resources and visitors from increasing vehicle use on the park road, expressing concern that additional traffic could diminish bicycling opportunities, affect wildlife and wildlife viewing opportunities, increase pollution, degrade wilderness character, and increase the risk of accidents. One commenter stated that increased traffic would require additional road maintenance and cited studies demonstrating that heavy equipment, such as gravel-hauling trucks, can disturb wildlife and significantly reduce wildlife-viewing opportunities compared to regular vehicular traffic.

NPS Response: The NPS will continue to monitor impacts to resources and visitor experience from vehicle use as required by the VMP. The adaptive management framework in the VMP accounts for potential impacts to a broad range of park resources and visitor experiences, including the topics raised by the commenters. The flexibility provided by adaptive management allows the NPS to adjust management actions to protect resources and visitors based upon indicators and desired conditions.

7. Comment: Commenters raised concerns about potential impacts to NPS infrastructure and operations from increasing vehicle use on the park road, expressing concern that additional traffic would increase maintenance needs by accelerating wear on the park road, strain waste management systems, particularly the park's sewage lagoon, and require the NPS to hire or reallocate staff to support increased visitation, which would weaken the NPS's ability to ensure visitor safety, provide education, and conduct essential monitoring.

NPS Response: There will not be impacts to the condition of the park road and infrastructure resulting from this rule such that it would require additional maintenance needs. The NPS expects that existing resources for road maintenance and wastewater will be ( printed page 65693) sufficient to accommodate increased visitor use given visitation trends in the park.

Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policy

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 14192)

This rule has been determined to be significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. This rule will generate benefits for the public by providing greater clarity and transparency about the NPS's management of the park road, and by providing additional opportunities for recreation and access by lengthening the visitor season by several days in certain years. Because this rule expands recreational consumption opportunities, it is considered an “enabling regulatory action.” As a result, it is an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action. Compared to baseline conditions, this rule does not involve any fees or other measures that would increase costs to visitors, businesses, communities, or the broader public.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This certification is based on information contained in the economic analyses found in the report entitled “[INSERT].” The report may be viewed on www.regulations.gov in Docket No. NPS-2026-0067.

Congressional Review Act

This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule:

(a) Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.

(b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.

(c) Will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires that agencies assess whether a rule would impose a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year. As of 2025, that threshold is approximately $206 million (2024 dollars). This rule will not result in expenditures by State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, in excess of the threshold. Thus, no written assessment of unfunded mandates is required.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have takings implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings implication assessment is not required.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, this rule will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. This rule will only affect use of federally administered lands and waters. It will have no direct effects on other areas. A federalism summary impact statement is not required.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. This rule:

(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and

(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.

Consultation With Alaska Native Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations (Executive Order 13175 and Department Policy)

The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their right to self-governance and Tribal sovereignty. NPS staff communicated with local tribal groups regarding the VMP. The planning alternatives were developed with consideration that project actions would avoid or minimally disturb resources or values important to affiliated Alaska Native Tribes. The planning alternatives did not entail new construction or ground disturbance and are not anticipated to impede access to places of traditional religious, ceremonial, or other customary activities. NPS has evaluated this rule under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and under the Department's consultation policy and has determined this rule will have no substantial direct effect on Alaska Native Tribes or Alaska Native Corporation lands, water areas, or resources. However, the NPS remains available to consult with Alaska Native Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations upon request. Doyon, Limited requested consultation as part of its comments on the proposed rule. The NPS will continue to meet regularly with Doyon, Limited and engage with them on various issues related to park management, including vehicle use on the park road.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

This rule contains no new information collections. All information collections require approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The NPS may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

The NPS prepared an environmental impact statement as part of the VMP in compliance with NEPA. This rule merely conforms the regulatory text to the ROD as it has been implemented for over a decade, which identifies the limits for vehicle use that are stated in the rule. Copies of these documents are available online at parkplanning.nps.gov/​dena by clicking the link titled “Denali Park Road Vehicle Management Plan,” then the link titled “Document List.”

Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211)

This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211; this rule is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, and this rule has not otherwise been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. A Statement of Energy Effects in not required.

In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service amends 36 CFR part 13 as set forth below: