Curecanti National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use, 13792-13801 [E6-3938]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• National Park Service

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13792-13801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3938]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

RIN 1024-AC99


Curecanti National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) is proposing to designate 
areas where personal watercraft (PWC) may be used in Curecanti National 
Recreation Area, Colorado. This proposed rule implements the provisions 
of the NPS general regulations authorizing park areas to allow the use 
of PWC by promulgating a special regulation. The individual parks must 
determine whether PWC use is appropriate for a specific park area based 
on an evaluation of that area's enabling legislation, resources and 
values, other visitor uses, and overall management objectives.

DATES: Comments must be received by May 16, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the number RIN 1024-
AC99, by any of the following methods:

--Federal rulemaking portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
--E-mail NPS at CurecantiPWC@urscorp.com. Use RIN 1024-AC99 in the 
subject line.
--Mail or hand delivery to: Superintendent, Curecanti National 
Recreation Area, 102 Elk Creek, Gunnison, CO 81230.
--For additional information see ``Public Participation'' under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Case, Regulations Program 
Manager, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW., Room 7241, 
Washington, DC 20240. Phone: (202) 208-4206. E-mail: jerry_
case@nps.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Additional Alternatives

    The information contained in this proposed rule supports 
implementation of the preferred alternative for Curecanti National 
Recreation Area (CNRA) in the Environmental Assessment (EA) published 
April, 2003, as modified by the errata issued March 10, 2005. The 
changes to the environmental assessment in the errata were made to 
modify the preferred alternative and its analysis, to address public 
comments on the EA, and to clarify the text. The public should be aware 
that two other alternatives were presented in the EA, including a no 
PWC alternative. Those alternatives should also be reviewed and 
considered when making comments on this proposed rule.

Personal Watercraft Regulation

    On March 21, 2000, the National Park Service published a regulation 
(36 CFR 3.24) on the management of personal watercraft (PWC) use within 
all units of the national park system (65 FR 15077). This regulation 
prohibits PWC use in all national park units unless the NPS determines 
that this type of water-based recreational activity is appropriate for 
the specific park unit based on the legislation establishing that park, 
the park's resources and values, other visitor uses of the area, and 
overall management objectives. The regulation banned PWC use in all 
park units effective April 20, 2000, except 21 preserves, lakeshores, 
seashores, and recreation areas. The regulation established a 2-year 
grace period following the final rule publication to provide these 21 
park units time to consider whether PWC use should be allowed. On 
November 7, 2002 PWC use was discontinued at CNRA.

Description of Curecanti National Recreation Area

    Curecanti National Recreation Area (Curecanti) was established in 
1965 to provide for conservation of scenic, natural, historic, 
archeological, and wildlife values. The goal of the National Recreation 
Area is to provide for public use and enjoyment while ensuring visitor 
safety, resource preservation, and conservation. Curecanti is located 
on U.S. Highway 50 (U.S. 50) west of Gunnison, Colorado.
    Three reservoirs, named for corresponding dams on the Gunnison 
River, form the heart of Curecanti National Recreation Area. The three 
reservoirs are Blue Mesa Reservoir, Morrow Point Reservoir, and Crystal 
Reservoir. Blue Mesa Reservoir is Colorado's largest body of water and 
is home to the biggest Kokanee Salmon fishery in the United States. 
Morrow Point Reservoir is the beginning of the Black Canyon of the 
Gunnison. Crystal Reservoir is the site of the Gunnison Diversion 
Tunnel, a National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. In addition to 
the three reservoirs, recently discovered dinosaur fossils, a 5,000 
acre archeological district, a narrow gauge train, and traces of 6,000 
year old dwellings further enhance the significance of Curecanti.

Purpose of Curecanti National Recreation Area

    The purpose and significance statements listed below are from 
Curecanti's Strategic Plan and General Management Plan. Curecanti 
National Recreation Area was established for the following purposes:
    1. Conserve the scenery, natural, historic, and archeological 
resources, and wildlife of Curecanti.
    2. Provide for public use and enjoyment in such a way as to ensure 
visitor safety and resource preservation or conservation by 
establishing and maintaining facilities and providing protection and 
interpretive services.
    3. Manage the lands, waters, and activities of Curecanti in such a 
way that it does not interfere with the purposes of the Colorado River 
Storage Project Act and other Bureau of Reclamation agreements 
affecting the operation of the Aspinall Unit.
    4. Mitigate the loss of fish and wildlife resources as a result of 
the Colorado River Storage Project.

Significance of Curecanti National Recreation Area

    The following statements summarize the significance of Curecanti:
    1. Blue Mesa Reservoir is one of the largest high-altitude bodies 
of water in the United States. It provides an exciting diversity of 
water recreation opportunities for windsurfers, sail boaters, and water 
skiers.
    2. The scenic values of the canyon, the needles, the pinnacles, and 
the reservoirs provide dramatic contrast, which causes visitors to slow 
down, pause, and reflect on the diversity of the landscape and its 
spaciousness.
    3. Curecanti provides one of the best cold-water fishing 
opportunities in the nation. This is due primarily to the Kokanee 
salmon run occurring in Blue Mesa. The Morrow Point and Crystal 
Reservoirs' trout fisheries routinely attract fishing enthusiasts from 
throughout the nation because of the high-quality trout fishing and 
uniqueness of the canyon environment.

[[Page 13793]]

    4. The prehistoric and historic stories of human culture in the 
Curecanti area are recorded in the traces and tracks left by Native 
Americans, miners, railroaders, and ranchers. The cultural history of 
this area documents not only the human struggles to survive but also 
how changing human value systems; economic, social, and technological 
changes; and the importance of water have shaped the use and character 
of the land and its people. Cultural history contains archeological 
examples of some of the oldest villages found in North America, 
predating the building of the pyramids.
    5. The narrow-gauge railroad exhibit in Cimarron graphically 
portrays the story of technology's effects of shaping people and using 
land; the agony and difficulties of building track in narrow canyons in 
the winter where the sun seldom shined; and of taking the hard way 
instead of the easy trail. Examples of a locomotive, tender, and 
caboose used on the railroad are on exhibit at Cimarron.
    The park's mission statement is as follows: ``Curecanti National 
Recreational Area will preserve, protect, and interpret the tremendous 
collection of nationally significant, diverse natural and cultural 
resources balanced with the provision of outstanding recreational 
opportunities.''

Authority and Jurisdiction

    Under the National Park Service's Organic Act of 1916 (Organic Act) 
(16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) Congress granted the NPS broad authority to 
regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks. In 
addition, the Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 3) allows the NPS, through the 
Secretary of the Interior, to ``make and publish such rules and 
regulations as he may deem necessary or proper for the use and 
management of the parks * * *''
    16 U.S.C. 1a-1 states, ``The authorization of activities shall be 
conducted in light of the high public value and integrity of the 
National Park System and shall not be exercised in derogation of the 
values and purposes for which these various areas have been established 
* * *''
    As with the United States Coast Guard, NPS's regulatory authority 
over waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including 
navigable waters and areas within their ordinary reach, is based upon 
the Property and Commerce Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. In regard 
to the NPS, Congress in 1976 directed the NPS to ``promulgate and 
enforce regulations concerning boating and other activities on or 
relating to waters within areas of the National Park System, including 
waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States * * *'' (16 
U.S.C. 1a-2(h)). In 1996 the NPS published a final rule (61 FR 35136, 
July 5, 1996) amending 36 CFR 1.2(a)(3) to clarify its authority to 
regulate activities within the National Park System boundaries 
occurring on waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

PWC Use at Curecanti National Recreation Area

    Curecanti National Recreation Area includes Blue Mesa Reservoir, 
which was created with the completion of the Blue Mesa Dam. Blue Mesa 
Reservoir is comprised of three basins: Sapinero, Cebolla, and Iola as 
well as various arms. The basins are often referred to as the main body 
of the reservoir to distinguish activities there from activities in the 
arms.
    Approximately 1 million visitors use Curecanti's facilities 
annually. This figure includes visitors who pursue recreation 
activities on the reservoir and those who engage in other recreation 
opportunities. Motorboats and other watercraft have been used in 
Curecanti since 1975. Personal watercraft have emerged at Curecanti 
only since their introduction in the 1980s, and particularly since the 
summer of 1995 when personal watercraft were available for rent from a 
park concessioner. Park staff believes PWC use has increased since 
1995, and a registration survey mailed to vessel users requesting an 
annual permit revealed that in 2000, 0.69% of over 400 respondents were 
PWC users. The annual use is estimated to be 792 PWC in 2002, 
increasing at approximately 2% annually to 965 PWC in 2012. Based on 
ranger observation, most PWC users are from Colorado, they limit their 
PWC use to approximately 2 hours, and they wear a wetsuit because of 
cold-water temperatures and high afternoon winds. In addition, PWC use 
has conflicted with both bank and boat fishermen from Dry Creek to Bay 
of Chickens.
    Before the ban on PWC use, the General Management Plan and 
Superintendent's Compendium allowed personal watercraft and other 
watercraft to operate only on the main body of the Blue Mesa Reservoir 
and lake arms with speed and zone restrictions. PWC use was prohibited 
in all other areas of the park through restrictions on horsepower and 
restrictions on motorized vessels. Personal watercraft generally did 
not operate at the extreme ends of lake arms because the arms are 
narrow in width. On the main body of the reservoir, personal watercraft 
were widely distributed. In addition to the main body, high-use areas 
include the Iola Basin and Colorado State Highway 149 (Highway 149) 
areas. Other locations with limited use include Stevens Creek, Cebolla 
Basin, Soap Creek Arm, Bay of Chickens, and the main marina at Elk 
Creek.
    This rulemaking is focusing exclusively on PWC use at the park. The 
park also intends to develop a water/vessel management plan for the use 
of other vessels.

Resource Protection and Public Use Issues

Curecanti National Recreation Area Environmental Assessment

    As a companion document to this NPRM, NPS has issued the Personal 
Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment for Curecanti National 
Recreation Area. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was open for public 
review and comment from June 11, 2003 until July 13, 2003. The EA is 
available at https://www.nps.gov/cure/webvc/pwc_use.htm.
    The purpose of the environmental assessment was to evaluate a range 
of alternatives and strategies for the management of PWC use at 
Curecanti to ensure the protection of park resources and values while 
offering recreational opportunities as provided for in the National 
Recreation Area's enabling legislation, purpose, mission, and goals. In 
March, 2005 an errata was issued. The changes to the environmental 
assessment were made to modify the preferred alternative and its 
analysis, to address public comments, and to clarify the text. The 
assessment assumed alternatives would be implemented beginning in 2002 
and considered a 10-year period, from 2002 to 2012. The assessment also 
compares each alternative to PWC use before November 7, 2002, when the 
ban took effect. In addition, the Environmental Assessment defines such 
terms as ``negligible'' and ``adverse.'' In this document, these terms 
are used to describe the environmental impact. Refer to the EA for 
complete definitions.
    The environmental assessment evaluates three alternatives 
addressing the use of personal watercraft at Curecanti:
    Alternative A--By using a special regulation, the park would 
reinstate PWC use as previously managed prior to November 7, 2002, and 
would add one buffer zone as described below. Under this alternative, 
PWC use would occur in areas of Blue Mesa Reservoir and portions of the 
lake arms. Areas appropriate for PWC use would include Sapinero, 
Cebolla, and Iola Basins; Bay

[[Page 13794]]

of Chickens; Dry Creek; Elk Creek; the Highway 149 area; and Lake Fork, 
Soap Creek, and West Elk arms. Operation of all motorized watercraft 
would continue to be prohibited in areas east of Beaver Creek within 
the Gunnison River Canyon and in the area downstream from the East 
Portal diversion dam. All designated launch areas on Blue Mesa 
Reservoir (developed and unimproved) would remain open to PWC use. 
Personal watercraft would be allowed to land on any shoreline at Blue 
Mesa Reservoir.
    The following areas would remain closed to all boating, including 
personal watercraft, and shoreline entry: Blue Mesa Dam downstream for 
225 yards, Morrow Point Dam downstream for 130 yards, Crystal Dam 
downstream for 700 yards, and East Portal diversion dam upstream for 60 
yards. In addition, the following areas would be zoned as flat-wake 
speed areas: the area upstream from Lake City Bridge to Beaver Creek; 
the area within the arms of Blue Mesa Reservoir that is less than 1,000 
feet from shore to shore at full pool level. These areas will be marked 
by designated buoys. These arms include Soap Creek Arm, West Elk Arm, 
Lake Fork Arm, and Cebolla Arm; narrow waterways off the Bay of 
Chickens and Dry Creek; Elk Creek and Lake Fork Marinas; and Iola and 
Stevens Creek boat launch areas.
    In addition to the areas outlined above, a 100-foot buffer zone 
from the shoreline would be established at the Stevens Creek 
campground, as marked by buoys. The buffer area would be zoned as a 
flat-wake speed area. A buffer zone will provide for the protection of 
an active Gunnison sage grouse lek and nesting area, and would mitigate 
potential noise impacts from PWC use and associated shoreline use 
during the lek and nesting season (mid-March-July).
    Alternative B--Same as alternative A, with the following additional 
restrictions. This alternative would establish a 100-foot buffer zone 
along the south shore of Blue Mesa Reservoir from 0.5 mile west of Iola 
to 0.5 mile east of Middle Bridge for soundscape, cultural resource, 
and wildlife protection as well as to prevent erosion.
    Alternative B includes further speed restrictions. Under this 
alternative, the additional speed restrictions would apply to PWC use 
in each of the lake arms on Blue Mesa Reservoir from the mouth of each 
lake arm upriver to the flat-wake areas. In these restricted areas PWC 
use would need to operate at flat-wake speeds when within 150 feet of 
another boat, a person in or floating on the water, shore fisherman, a 
launching ramp, a dock, or a designated swimming area.
    No-Action Alternative--The park would continue the PWC ban. PWC use 
would not be reinstated and the National Park Service would not take 
action to draft a special regulation to reinstate PWC use.
    Alternative A is the park's preferred alternative because it would 
best fulfill the park responsibilities as trustee of the sensitive 
habitat; ensure safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and 
culturally pleasing surroundings; and attain a wider range of 
beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk of health 
or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.
    This document proposes regulations to implement alternative A at 
Curecanti National Recreation Area.
    The following summarizes the predominant resource protection and 
public use issues associated with the proposed rule which implements 
alternative A at Curecanti National Recreation Area. Each of these 
issues is analyzed in the Curecanti National Recreation Area, Personal 
Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment. 
Water Quality
    Most research on the effects of personal watercraft on water 
quality focuses on the impacts of two-stroke engines. Fuel used in PWC 
engines contains many hydrocarbons, including benzene, toluene, 
ethylbenzene, and xylene (collectively referred to as BTEX) and 
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). PAH also are released from boat 
engines, including those in personal watercraft. These compounds are 
not found appreciably in the unburned fuel mixture, but rather are 
products of combustion. Discharges of these compounds--BTEX and PAH--
have potential adverse effects on water quality.
    A typical conventional (i.e., carbureted) two-stroke PWC engine 
discharges as much as 30% of the unburned fuel mixture directly into 
the water. At common fuel consumption rates, an average two-hour ride 
on a personal watercraft may discharge 3 gallons of fuel into the 
water. According to the California Air Resources Board, an average 
personal watercraft can discharge between 1.2 and 3.3 gallons of fuel 
during one hour at full throttle. However, hydrocarbon (HC) discharges 
to water are expected to decrease substantially over the next 10 years 
due to mandated improvements in engine technology.
    Cumulative emissions in Blue Mesa Reservoir would be similar to 
those previous to the ban on PWC use. In addition to the personal 
watercraft that use Blue Mesa Reservoir, other two-stroke outboard 
motorboats, and to a lesser degree the inboard or inboard/outboard 
motorboats would contribute pollutants to the water. A total of 216 
vessels in 2002 and 256 vessels in 2012 are estimated during a peak use 
day. The EA found there would be negligible adverse effects on water 
quality based on ecotoxicological threshold volumes. Ecotoxicological 
threshold volumes are the volume of water needed to dilute the 
emissions from PWCs. Human health benchmark is the threshold volume of 
water needed to avoid impacts to human health. All pollutant loads in 
2002 and 2012 from personal watercraft and other motorboats would be 
well below ecotoxicological benchmarks and criteria as described in the 
EA.
    PWC impacts on water quality from benzo(a)pyrene, naphthalene, and 
benzene based on human health (ingestion of water and fish); and 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State of Colorado water 
quality criteria, would range from negligible to minor adverse in both 
2002 and 2012. Cumulative impacts from PWC and other motorboats would 
be negligible adverse for benzo(a)pyrene and naphthalene. Cumulative 
water quality impacts due to benzene would be minor to moderate adverse 
in 2002 and 2012 based on human health benchmarks. Impacts in Blue Mesa 
Reservoir due to benzene would be reduced to minor adverse impacts when 
the half-life of benzene is considered. Implementation of this proposed 
rule would not result in an impairment of water quality.
Air Quality
    Personal watercraft emit various compounds that pollute the air. In 
the two-stroke engines commonly used in personal watercraft, the 
lubricating oil is used once and is expelled as part of the exhaust; 
and the combustion process results in emissions of air pollutants such 
as volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOX), 
particulate matter (PM), and carbon monoxide (CO). Personal watercraft 
also emit fuel components such as benzene that are known to cause 
adverse health effects. Even though PWC engine exhaust is usually 
routed below the waterline, a portion of the exhaust gases go into the 
air. These air pollutants may adversely impact park visitor and 
employee health, as well as sensitive park resources.
    In the presence of sunlight, VOC and NOX emissions 
combine to form ozone. Ozone causes respiratory problems in humans, 
including cough, airway

[[Page 13795]]

irritation, and chest pain during inhalations. Ozone is also toxic to 
sensitive species of vegetation. It causes visible foliar injury, 
decreases plant growth, and increases plant susceptibility to insects 
and disease. Carbon monoxide can affect humans as well. It interferes 
with the oxygen carrying capacity of blood, resulting in lack of oxygen 
to tissues. NOX and PM emissions associated with PWC use can 
also degrade visibility. NOX can also contribute to acid 
deposition effects on plants, water, and soil. However, because 
emission estimates show that NOX from personal watercraft 
are minimal (less than 5 tons per year), acid deposition effects 
attributable to personal watercraft use are expected to be minimal.
    As was the case before the ban on PWC use, negligible adverse 
impacts for CO, HC, PM10 , and NOX 
would occur in 2002 and 2012. The human health risk from PAH would also 
be negligible. Cumulative emission levels would be minor adverse for CO 
and negligible adverse for PM10 , HC, and 
NOX. This alternative would maintain existing air quality 
conditions, with future reductions in PM10 and HC emissions 
due to improved emission controls. Overall, PWC emissions of HC are 
estimated to be approximately 16% of the cumulative boating emissions 
in 2002 and 2012. Therefore, implementation of this proposed rule would 
not result in an impairment of air quality.
Soundscapes
    The proposed rule would manage noise from PWC use in affected areas 
so that visitors' health, safety, and experiences are not adversely 
affected and would protect birds, waterfowl, and other wildlife from 
the effects of PWC noise.
    Soundscapes include both natural and human components. Natural 
soundscapes include all naturally occurring sounds such as waves on the 
shoreline, running water, bird calls, wind blowing through trees, or 
the sound of thunder. It also includes ``natural quiet'' that occurs in 
the absence of natural or human caused sound. The opportunity to 
experience natural sounds is an enjoyable part of visits to the 
recreation area.
    Common human-caused sounds at Curecanti include engines from PWC 
and other vessels, vehicle noise, human vocalizations, radios, and 
other sounds generated by people picnicking and camping. Human sounds 
are not unexpected or inappropriate at the recreation area, but are a 
part of the overall soundscape in an area where water activities, 
picnicking, camping, and other recreation use are part of the purpose 
of the park. Evaluation of the appropriateness of human sounds is 
accomplished by considering visitor expectation, management guidelines, 
resource sensitivity, and park purpose.
    Specific areas within the park where visitors may be sensitive to 
noise include the surface of Blue Mesa Reservoir and surrounding 
campgrounds, picnic areas, and hiking trails, including Stevens Creek, 
Elk Creek, Dry Gulch, and Lake Fork campgrounds as well as Blue Mesa, 
Old Stevens, Iola, Dry Creek, Bay of Chickens, Dillon Pinnacles, 
McIntyre Gulch, and Elk Creek picnic areas. Visitors would likely be 
less sensitive to noise in those areas located close to U.S. 50, which 
runs along Blue Mesa Reservoir, often close to the shoreline, and 
rarely more than 0.75-mile away from the shoreline; therefore, 
providing a relatively high ambient automobile noise.
    Noise sensitive activities that may occur throughout the reservoir 
and immediate area include boat and shoreline fishing and wildlife 
watching. Noise related to PWC and other watercraft, and sounds related 
to other human activity, are typically highest during the summer 
months, especially at Elk Creek and Lake Fork, where most PWC launch. 
PWC generate noise that varies in pitch and frequency due to the nature 
of their construction and use. The two-stroke engines are often used at 
high speeds, and the craft bounce along the top of the water such that 
the motor discharges noise below and above the water surface. To 
recreation area visitors, this irregular noise seems to be more 
annoying than that of a standard motorboat that is cruising along the 
shoreline, even though the maximum noise levels may be similar for the 
two watercraft (approximately 80 to 90 dBA at 50 feet). Additionally, 
visitors who expect to experience natural quiet may consider the 
irregular noise of PWC more annoying, especially if the craft is 
operating in one location for extended periods of time.
    The proposed rule would result in a minor to moderate adverse 
impact at certain locations along the reservoir on days when PWC use is 
relatively heavy. Minor impacts would occur where use is infrequent and 
distanced from other park users, for example, as PWC users operated far 
from shore. Moderate impacts could occur from concentrated PWC use in 
one area, particularly in the narrow canyon between Cebolla and Iola 
Basins near Elk Creek, where motorized noise could predominate on busy 
summer weekends. On the highest PWC use days of the year, such as a 
Saturday on the Fourth of July holiday weekend, motorized noise could 
predominate for most of the day at Elk Creek marina. Although noise 
levels may be bothersome for some, most visitors to Curecanti on a busy 
holiday weekend will expect to hear motorized noises, and PWC and other 
motorized use is consistent with park purpose of supplying visitors 
with water-based recreational opportunities. The cumulative effect of 
PWC and boating noise would have a minor to moderate adverse impact 
because it would be heard occasionally throughout the day. Impacts are 
generally short term, since noise would usually be of limited duration, 
except on very busy holidays when motorized noise from PWC, other 
motorboats, automobiles, and other human-caused sounds can predominate 
for most of the day at the high use, near shore recreation areas such 
as Elk Creek.
    Therefore, noise from PWC would have minor to moderate adverse 
impacts at most locations at Curecanti and immediate surrounding area. 
Impact levels would be related to the number of personal watercraft 
operating as well as the sensitivity of other visitors. Cumulative 
noise impacts from personal watercraft, motorboats, automobiles on U.S. 
50, and other visitors would be minor to moderate adverse because these 
sounds would be heard occasionally throughout the day and may 
predominate on busy days during the high use season. The proposed new 
buffer zone would have speed and wake restrictions that would provide 
beneficial improvements to the soundscape values.
    Implementation of this proposed rule would not result in an 
impairment of soundscape values.
Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
    The proposed rule aims to manage PWC use to protect fish and 
wildlife including the bald eagle, great blue heron (park native 
species of special concern) and Gunnison sage grouse (park native 
species of special concern and Federal candidate for designation as an 
endangered species) and their habitats from PWC disturbances. Also, the 
proposed rule would manage PWC use to protect fish and wildlife from 
the adverse effects that result from the bioaccumulation of 
contaminants emitted from personal watercraft.
    Some research suggests that PWC use affects wildlife by causing 
interruption of normal activities, alarm or flight, avoidance or 
degradation of habitat, and effects on reproductive success. This is 
thought to be a result of a combination of PWC speed, noise, and 
ability to

[[Page 13796]]

access sensitive areas, especially in shallow-water depths. Waterfowl 
and nesting birds are the most vulnerable to personal watercraft. 
Fleeing a disturbance created by personal watercraft may force birds to 
abandon eggs during crucial embryo development stages, prevent nest 
defense from predators, and contribute to stress and associated 
behavior changes. Impacts on sensitive species are documented under 
``Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species.''
    PWC use could affect wildlife wherever motorized vessels are 
allowed. When PWC were allowed throughout the main body and arms of 
Blue Mesa Reservoir prior to the November 2002 ban, use was most 
concentrated between Elk Creek and the Lake City Bridge, and in the 
Soap Creek Arm. Most access was from the Ponderosa Campground and the 
Elk Creek Marina. Due to cool ambient air and water temperatures 
throughout the majority of the year, PWC use occurred from June through 
September with peak use during July and August. Due to heavy winds and 
wave action on Blue Mesa Reservoir, average time of use for PWC per day 
was 2 hours.
    Within the impact analysis area, wildlife such as waterfowl is most 
likely to occur near the shoreline due to habitat constraints. Some 
species such as small mammals may visit the shoreline often, even 
though their primary habitat is outside of the immediate shoreline 
area. Other wildlife species that occur within the recreation area 
occur at the shoreline only infrequently. The addition of flat-wake 
zoning at the Stevens Creek campground and the expanded wake 
restriction zones in the lake arms would decrease the likelihood of 
impacts to waterfowl and other species along the shoreline. In the 
shoreline buffer areas, noise, physical disturbance, and emissions from 
PWC would be decreased or eliminated. There are no documented cases of 
deliberate harassment or collisions with wildlife by PWC users on Blue 
Mesa Reservoir.
    Potential cumulative effects to wildlife and wildlife habitat are 
related to various visitor activities that occur in proximity to 
wildlife species. Visitors have access to the shoreline by many types 
of non-personal watercraft, or by automobile and hiking. Non-PWC 
boating activities account for over 90% of total boating activity in 
the recreation area. Wildlife routinely exhibit movement or flight 
response due to disturbance by powerboats.
    Interactions between wildlife and human visitors would be limited 
because of the low abundance of wildlife within the high use areas and 
the dispersion of visitors along the shoreline. Shoreline use tends to 
be concentrated around developed facilities such as marinas, where 
habitat characteristics are lacking relative to undeveloped shoreline 
areas. Visitor interactions would not interfere with feeding, 
reproduction, or other activities necessary for the survival of the 
wildlife species. Overall, visitors (including PWC users) at Curecanti 
would cause moderate, short-term adverse impacts to wildlife that are 
dispersed over a large area along the shoreline.
    PWC use at Curecanti would have negligible adverse effects on fish, 
and minor to moderate adverse impacts on waterfowl and other wildlife. 
There would be no perceptible changes in wildlife populations or their 
habitat community structure. Due to low levels of PWC use, coupled with 
a lack of substantial habitat areas, any impacts to fish, wildlife and 
respective habitats would be temporary and short term. The intensity 
and duration of impacts is not expected to increase substantially over 
the next 10 years, since PWC numbers would not increase substantially 
and engine technology would continue to improve under EPA industry 
regulations. On a cumulative basis, all visitor activities would have 
moderate adverse effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat. All wildlife 
impacts would be temporary and short term.
    Therefore, implementation of the proposed rule would not result in 
impairment to wildlife or wildlife habitat.
Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species
    By implementing this proposed rule, the park aims to protect 
threatened and endangered species, and species of special concern, and 
their habitats from PWC disturbances.
    The same issues described for PWC use and general wildlife also 
pertain to special concern species. Potential impacts from personal 
watercraft include inducing flight and alarm responses, disrupting 
normal behaviors and causing stress, degrading habitat quality, and 
potentially affecting reproductive success. Special status species at 
the recreation area include Federal or State listed threatened, 
endangered, or candidate species. In addition to Federal and State 
designated species, Curecanti National Recreation Area contains species 
that park staff considers to be native species of special concern.
    The Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.) mandates that 
all Federal agencies consider the potential effects of their actions on 
species listed as threatened or endangered. If the National Park 
Service determines that an action may adversely affect a Federally 
listed species, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is 
required to ensure that the action will not jeopardize the species' 
continued existence or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat.
    The following species found in Curecanti are Federally listed or 
candidates for designation as an endangered species according to the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): bald eagle (threatened), 
southwestern willow flycatcher (endangered), yellow-billed cuckoo 
(candidate), Canada lynx (threatened), and boreal toad (candidate). The 
Colorado Wildlife Commission maintains a list of special status species 
including State-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern 
species. The Federally listed species mentioned above with the 
exception of the yellow-billed cuckoo are also given special status by 
the State. Other State listed species that may potentially be affected 
by the action at Curecanti include the greater Sandhill crane, Gunnison 
sage grouse, American peregrine falcon, and long-billed curlew. All of 
these species are listed as special concern species and therefore do 
not have protected status. However, these species have been determined 
by the Colorado Wildlife Commission to be at risk of eventual 
threatened or endangered status. One State-listed (threatened) species 
that is protected is the Colorado River cutthroat trout, which is also 
Federally listed as threatened. However, USFWS did not include any fish 
species in their list of Federally listed species potentially affected 
by PWC management actions. Also, according to the USFWS, there are no 
federally listed or candidate plant species at Curecanti National 
Recreation Area that would be affected by PWC use on Blue Mesa 
Reservoir. However, there are two plant species that occur within the 
recreation area that are ranked by the Nature Conservancy's Natural 
Heritage ranking system. The skiff milkvetch (State listed as 
``critically imperiled'') and the Gunnison milkvetch (State listed as 
``imperiled'') occur in upland sagebrush communities within the 
recreation area, but do not occur along the shoreline of Blue Mesa 
Reservoir.
    The proposed rule would allow PWC use but would include additional 
PWC management strategies. A resource monitoring program would be 
established to monitor future impacts. Also, a 100-foot buffer zone 
would be

[[Page 13797]]

established for Gunnison sage grouse habitat on the northern shore of 
the main body at Stevens Creek. The establishment of a PWC buffer zone 
along portions of Blue Mesa Reservoir would potentially have beneficial 
impacts on threatened and endangered species, particularly the Gunnison 
sage grouse. Effects from PWC noise, physical disturbance, and access 
would be decreased along this portion of the shoreline. Under the 
proposed rule, PWC use in Curecanti National Recreation Area may affect 
but is not likely to adversely affect bald eagle, yellow billed cuckoo, 
American peregrine falcon, and both milkvetch plant species. As before 
the ban, there would be no effect on all other Federal or State-listed 
species, and no likely effects on park sensitive species.
    Cumulative impacts to the special status animal and plant species 
discussed in the EA include impacts from human presence and all other 
water-based recreational activities such as boating, swimming, and 
fishing. In addition, visitors who focus more on upland activities such 
as picnicking, camping, hiking, and hunting also may cause minor 
adverse disturbances to the above species in the short term. However, 
most visitor activities occur in or near already disturbed or developed 
sites such as boat ramps, marinas, and camp or picnic areas.
    Cumulative impacts from activities within Curecanti National 
Recreation Area may affect but are not likely to affect federally or 
state listed species or other special status wildlife or plant species 
in the short term but not in the long term.
    PWC use at Curecanti National Recreation Area may affect, but is 
not likely to adversely affect the federally or state listed bald 
eagle, Gunnison sage grouse, yellow-billed cuckoo, American peregrine 
falcon, skiff milkvetch, and Gunnison milkvetch. There would be no 
effect to all other federal or state listed species. All park sensitive 
species are unlikely to be affected. Cumulative effects from all park 
visitor activities would also be unlikely to cause adverse effects to 
special status species due to lack of species occurrences as well as a 
lack of access to the species or their habitats in the short or long 
term.
    Therefore, implementation of the proposed rule would not result in 
impairment of threatened or endangered species.
Shoreline Vegetation
    Personal watercraft provide access to the shoreline and operators 
may disembark to explore shoreline areas. As a result, vegetation could 
be trampled by visitors. PWC are able to access areas where other types 
of watercraft cannot, which may disturb sensitive plant species. In 
addition, wakes created by personal watercraft may affect shorelines 
and cause erosion. However, vegetation along the reservoir shoreline is 
generally lacking, so the proposed rule would manage PWC use in order 
to protect what sensitive shoreline areas there are from PWC activity 
and access.
    Reinstated PWC use could affect vegetation in areas between Elk 
Creek and the Lake City Bridge and in the Soap Creek Arm where visitor 
use and shoreline access is concentrated. Potential impacts to 
vegetation from PWC use include short-term wave action and trampling as 
a result of PWC operators accessing and walking on the shore. Because 
vegetation is generally lacking along many shoreline areas, PWC use 
would result in only negligible, short-term adverse impacts. The 
primary location of lush riparian vegetation is in more inland and 
narrow areas of the lake arms. However, the expanded designated flat-
wake speed areas in the lake arms would minimize disturbance from PWC 
and other activities. Thus, adverse impacts to vegetation would be 
negligible in the lake arms as well. Shoreline erosion at Curecanti is 
caused primarily by high winds and wave action and is more likely to 
affect shoreline vegetation when the reservoir is at full pool. 
Physical processes in combination with PWC and other watercraft use at 
Curecanti, would result in a negligible to minor adverse impacts on 
shoreline vegetation because it is generally lacking in concentrated 
use areas or is protected by restrictive zoning.
    PWC use would result in a negligible adverse effect on shoreline 
vegetation because vegetation along the reservoir shoreline is 
generally lacking. Areas where vegetation may occur would be protected 
by wake restrictions. Cumulative impacts would be negligible to minor 
in the long term due to wind-related erosion, wave action, and other 
visitor activities such as boating.
    Therefore, implementation of the proposed rule would not result in 
an impairment of shoreline vegetation.
Visitor Experience
    PWC use is viewed by some segments of the public as a nuisance due 
to their noise, speed, and overall environmental effects, while others 
believe personal watercraft are no different from other watercraft and 
that people have a right to enjoy the sport. The primary concern 
involves changes in noise, pitch, and volume, due to the way personal 
watercraft are operated. Additionally, the sound of any watercraft can 
carry for long distances, especially on a calm day. The proposed rule 
aims to minimize potential conflicts between PWC use and park visitors, 
to seek cooperation with State entities that regulate PWC use, and to 
provide a wide range of recreational activities consistent with 
conservation of the natural and cultural values.
    Under the proposed rule, PWC use would be reinstated with 
additional management prescriptions. A new 100-foot buffer zone would 
be established on the northern shore of the main body at Stevens Creek 
to protect the Gunnison sage grouse habitat.
    Impact on PWC Users--There would be minimal changes to PWC use or 
activity as compared to conditions prior to the 2002 PWC closure. The 
flat-wake zone near Stevens Creek campground would have a negligible 
adverse impact on PWC users, since this area is not a high-use area for 
PWC. The boat ramp at Stevens Creek would remain zoned as flat-wake. 
The flat-wake zones within the portion of the arms of the lake that is 
less than 1,000 feet from shore to shore would have a minor adverse 
impact on PWC users, as these calmer, narrow, areas of the reservoir 
would not be available for any high speed use.
    Impact on Other Boaters--Other boaters at Curecanti National 
Recreation Area would interact with PWC operators on an increasing 
basis as overall boating numbers increase over the next 10 years. PWC 
use is expected to increase at a slightly higher rate then other boat 
use; however, PWC would still only comprise approximately 7% of total 
boats on Blue Mesa Reservoir in 2012. The main body of Blue Mesa 
Reservoir does not receive substantial PWC use due to the large 
expanses of open water and frequent high winds. High-use areas for PWC 
include Dry Creek, the Soap Creek Arm, Bay of Chickens, near the 
marinas, and off Highway 149 just south of the Lake City Bridge.
    Generally, few non-motorized craft (sea kayaks, canoes, and 
windsurfers) use Blue Mesa Reservoir, so interactions with these user 
groups would be infrequent. In addition, flat-wake speed areas would 
occur within the arms of the lake, including Soap Creek Arm, West Elk 
Arm, Lake Fork Arm, Cebolla Arm; the narrow waterways off the Bay of 
Chickens and Dry Creek; and upstream of the Lake City Bridge--calmer 
waters that lead to creeks favored by canoeists and kayakers. Flat-wake 
areas would exist at Elk Creek and Lake Fork Marinas, and Iola, Stevens 
Creek and Old Stevens boat ramps. However, it should be noted that the 
main violation by PWC users has

[[Page 13798]]

historically been violation of flat-wake speed zones, and increased PWC 
numbers could have an effect on non-motorized boaters at these sites. 
Some PWC activity exists near the windsurfing beach, but staff 
observations note that windsurfing activity has been steadily declining 
over the past few years. Therefore, under the proposed rule, impacts to 
non-motorized boaters would be negligible to minor adverse.
    Impact on Other Visitors--There are four campgrounds on the 
reservoir that have boat launch facilities, and thus have PWC use in 
the vicinity. Receding lake levels have led to decreased visitation at 
park campgrounds, and because campgrounds are currently high above the 
reservoir level, contact between campers and PWC users are low. 
However, lake levels could rise, camping visitation could increase, and 
contact between the two user groups could also increase. The 100-foot 
flat-wake zone at the Stevens Creek campground would reduce noise 
impacts from PWC on campers. Under the proposed rule, PWC use would 
have negligible to minor adverse effects on visitors to park 
campgrounds and minor adverse effects at higher water levels when 
campgrounds are more accessible from the water.
    There is one designated hiking trail along the northern shoreline 
of Blue Mesa Reservoir at Dillon Pinnacles. Roads and miles of 
undesignated hiking trails also provide access to much of the Blue Mesa 
shoreline. PWC use in areas such as these that are popular with both 
personal watercraft and other shoreline visitors could affect visitors 
seeking natural quiet. However, anglers who seek solitude can fish in 
Morrow Point and Crystal Reservoirs, and along the Gunnison River east 
of Beaver Creek--areas closed to motorized watercraft. In addition, 
many shoreline visitors are travelers stopping to enjoy the scenery and 
picnic, not necessarily to have a solitude experience, thus PWC use 
under the proposed rule would have a negligible to minor adverse effect 
on hikers and shoreline users.
    PWC use would not result in a noticeable change in shoreline 
visitor experiences because the park provides flat-wake speed areas for 
non-PWC visitors to enjoy park activities. However, violations of flat-
wake speed zones and the expected increase in PWC use at congested 
areas in the Blue Mesa Reservoir could result in negligible to minor 
adverse impacts on the experiences of these shoreline visitors.
    The primary activities at Curecanti National Recreation Area that 
could affect visitor experiences include the number and activities of 
other visitors and noise from vehicles and motorboats. Increased use or 
expansion of U.S. 50 would cause an increase in noise levels and 
increased lakeshore activity. Due to low water levels, several boat 
launch ramps were unusable in 2002. Although the Bureau of Reclamation 
regulates lake levels, it is impossible to predict the effects of 
drought conditions and downstream water needs on future water levels. 
However, if drought conditions worsen, boat ramps and swim beaches may 
become unusable, and usable launch areas could become more crowded. It 
is, however, impossible to predict future water levels. Predictable 
cumulative impacts related to the use of personal watercraft, motorized 
boats, and other visitor activities would be negligible to minor over 
the short and long term.
    Reinstated PWC use would result in negligible to minor adverse 
impacts on experiences for most visitors in the short and long-term 
under the proposed rule. Swimmers and other motorized boat users would 
be most affected by PWC use because of the popularity of the day use 
areas habituated by PWC, especially at Dry Creek Picnic Area, Bay of 
Chickens, and the windsurfing beach. PWC use would have short- and 
long-term negligible to minor adverse impacts for visitors who desire a 
more passive recreational experience and desire natural quiet. Overall, 
most visitors to Curecanti National Recreation Area would experience 
negligible to minor adverse effects under the proposed rule and would 
be satisfied with their experiences at Curecanti National Recreation 
Area.
    Cumulative effects of PWC use, other watercraft, and other visitors 
would result in short- and long-term, negligible to minor adverse 
impacts.
Visitor Conflict and Safety
    The proposed rule would minimize or reduce the potential for PWC 
user accidents, minimize or reduce the potential safety conflicts 
between PWC users and other water recreationists, and minimize or 
reduce the potential user conflicts between PWC users and shore and 
boat fishermen.
    The park has documented, through incident reports, conflicts and 
complaints between PWC operators and other visitors. The Superintendent 
also has received a few complaints about PWC activity from both bank 
and boat fishermen. Most complaints are about wake violations. No PWC 
accidents have been reported in the last five years. Although there 
have only been 9 citations involving PWC operators in the last five 
years, the share of PWC citations is disproportionately high. In this 
five-year period, PWC accounted for less than 6% of total watercraft, 
and over 20% of all watercraft citations. Records of boating violations 
only include infractions for which citations were issued. Figures do 
not include verbal or written warnings. The most common infraction was 
for violation of the flat-wake speed restrictions, especially in 
marinas. There have been one or two reported incidents involving PWC 
per year, mostly property damage from vessels grounding or wind related 
swamping. PWC have the most potential for conflicts with other 
motorboats, fishermen, and shoreline users because both user groups 
concentrate in the same areas. Areas of potential conflict are similar 
to areas of current conflict, at high PWC use areas such as the Iola 
Basin at Highway 149, Dry Creek picnic area, the Soap Creek Arm, the 
marinas, and around ``Sometimes Island.''
    Under the proposed rule, PWC operators would have unrestricted use 
along the Blue Mesa Reservoir shoreline within the impact analysis 
area, as allowed prior to the November 7, 2002 ban. Use would increase 
from 9 personal watercraft per typical summer season day to 11 PWC per 
day by 2012. Peak use days would see an increase from 16 to 20 PWC per 
day, based on an increase of 2% per year.
    Personal Watercraft/Swimmer Conflicts--The greatest potential for 
conflict with swimmers is at the high use areas near Dry Creek Picnic 
Area, Bay of Chickens windsurfing beach area, and along Highway 149 
just south of the Lake City Bridge. This is where many of the park's 
visitors swim, and these areas include the most PWC areas within the 
national recreation area. No PWC-related accidents have been documented 
since 1995.
    The park has established flat-wake speed zones to help protect 
visitors, including the area around Stevens Creek campground and the 
area within the arms of the lake that is less than 1,000 feet from 
shore to shore at full pool level. However, violations do occur in 
these areas, and historically, PWC operators are more likely to 
infringe on the flat-wake speed rule than other vessel operators. An 
estimated 16-20 personal watercraft would be operated in the reservoir 
during peak use days, many of which would likely concentrate near 
popular swim areas and may violate the flat-wake speed rule to beach, 
pick up passengers, or change operators. Even though no PWC related 
accidents have occurred involving a swimmer, the park has received 
complaints from swimmers about PWC not slowing down as required in the

[[Page 13799]]

presence of swimmers. PWC users may operate at speeds of up to 40 mph 
on the reservoir, and the potential exists for an accident involving a 
swimmer. Due to the concentration of visitors that use these areas, 
impacts regarding swimmer safety at these locations are predicted to be 
minor to moderate adverse.
    The remaining park locations would experience little or no conflict 
between PWC users and swimmers. There are few swimmers in other areas 
of the park that are frequented by PWC. Thus, conflicts in these 
segments would constitute negligible adverse impacts. Swimming is not a 
popular activity at Curecanti due to cold water. Swimmers tend to be in 
the water for short periods of time and tend to stay close to shore.
    Personal Watercraft/Other Boat Conflicts--PWC represent an 
estimated 7% of all vessels at Blue Mesa Reservoir on peak use days. At 
Curecanti, no vessel accidents (out of 24 accidents from 1995 through 
2000) involved PWC. Potential for incidents or accidents at congested 
boat ramps exists but the impact of PWC use on safety would be 
considered negligible to minor. PWC may come into conflict with non-
motorized boats in the flat-wake speed areas, where PWC have violated 
the flat-wake speed rules. Impacts to other boaters are predicted to be 
negligible to minor adverse.
    Overall, PWC use would have negligible to minor adverse impacts on 
other boat users at Curecanti National Recreation Area. Impacts would 
be concentrated primarily at the boat launches and high PWC use areas.
    Personal Watercraft/Other Visitor Conflicts--Blue Mesa Reservoir 
and its shoreline are used by a variety of visitors, including 
swimmers, motorboat users, kayakers, canoeists, campers, anglers, and 
hikers. All of these user groups interact with each other and 
occasionally come into conflict. Some user groups are more distributed 
than others. For example, kayakers, canoeists, and swimmers tend to 
stay close to the shore, whereas PWC and motorboat operators tend to 
operate at least 150 feet offshore, unless landing and taking off. This 
separation of use reduces the potential for conflicts between the 
various groups. However, several of these user groups favor the same 
general location.
    The cumulative impact of the various user groups on visitor 
conflicts and safety under the proposed rule would be negligible to 
minor adverse over the short and long term.
    Reinstated PWC use would have short-term negligible to minor 
adverse and long-term, minor adverse impacts on visitor conflicts and 
safety, particularly in the noted high PWC use locations due to the 
number of visitors and boats present on high use days, as well as a 
concentration of conflicting uses. Conflicts at other locations would 
remain negligible adverse because use is lower and conflicts would be 
less likely to occur.
    Cumulative impacts related to visitor conflicts and safety would be 
minor adverse for all user groups in the short and long term, 
particularly near the high-use areas. Cumulative impacts in other areas 
of the reservoir would be negligible adverse.
The Proposed Rule
    Under this proposed rule, PWC use would be reinstated, with one new 
restriction for wildlife protection, in all locations of the recreation 
area where it was allowed until November 6, 2002. PWC use would be 
reinstated in areas of Blue Mesa Reservoir and portions of the lake 
arms. Areas appropriate for PWC use would include Sapinero, Cebolla and 
Iola Basins; Bay of Chickens; Dry Creek; Elk Creek; the Highway 149 
area; and Lake Fork, Soap Creek, and West Elk arms. In addition, all 5 
designated launch areas on Blue Mesa Reservoir (developed and 
unimproved) would remain open to PWC use. Personal watercraft would be 
allowed to land on any shoreline at Blue Mesa Reservoir.
    Operation of all motorized watercraft would continue to be 
unacceptable in areas east of Beaver Creek within the Gunnison River 
Canyon and in the area downstream from the East Portal diversion dam. 
The following areas would remain closed to all boating, including 
personal watercraft, and shoreline entry: Blue Mesa Dam downstream for 
225 yards, Morrow Point Dam downstream for 130 yards, Crystal Dam 
downstream for 700 yards, and East Portal diversion dam upstream for 60 
yards.
    At Curecanti, the following areas would remain flat-wake speed 
areas: the most inland and narrow portions of Soap Creek Arm, West Elk 
Arm, Lake Fork Arm, and Cebolla Arm; within 100 foot of Steven's Creek 
campground; the narrow waterways off the Bay of Chickens and Dry Creek; 
Elk Creek and Lake Fork Marinas; and Iola, Stevens Creek, and Ponderosa 
boat launch areas.
    Finally, in addition to the restrictions for PWC use before the 
ban, a 100-foot flat wake zone would be established at the Stevens 
Creek campground for the protection of an active Gunnison sage grouse 
lek and nesting area. A flat wake zone would mitigate potential noise 
impacts from PWC use and associated shoreline use during the lek and 
nesting season (mid-March-July).

Compliance With Other Laws

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    This document is not a significant rule and has not been reviewed 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
    (1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on 
the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities. The National Park Service has completed the report 
``Economic Analysis of Personal Watercraft Regulations in Curecanti 
National Recreation Area'' (MACTEC Engineering, November 2002). This 
document may be viewed on the park's Web site at: https://www.nps.gov/
cure/webvc/pwc_use.htm.
    (2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. Actions 
taken under this rule will not interfere with other agencies or local 
government plans, policies or controls. This rule is an agency specific 
rule.
    (3) This rule does not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of 
their recipients. This rule will have no effects on entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of 
their recipients. No grants or other forms of monetary supplements are 
involved.
    (4) This rule does not raise novel legal or policy issues. This 
rule is one of the special regulations being issued for managing PWC 
use in National Park Units. The National Park Service published general 
regulations (36 CFR 3.24) in March 2000, requiring individual park 
areas to adopt special regulations to authorize PWC use. The 
implementation of the requirement of the general regulation continues 
to generate interest and discussion from the public concerning the 
overall effect of authorizing PWC use and National Park Service policy 
and park management.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking 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 a report entitled ``Economic Analysis of 
Personal Watercraft Regulations in Curecanti National

[[Page 13800]]

Recreation Area'' (MACTEC Engineering, November 2002). This document 
may be viewed on the park's Web site at: https://www.nps.gov/cure/webvc/
pwc_use.htm.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:
    a. Does 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. Does 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

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per 
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector. This rule is an 
agency specific rule and does not impose any other requirements on 
other agencies, governments, or the private sector.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have 
significant takings implications. A taking implication assessment is 
not required. No taking of personal property will occur as a result of 
this rule.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment. This proposed rule only affects use of NPS 
administered lands and waters. It has no outside effects on other areas 
by allowing PWC use in specific areas of the park.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that this rule does not unduly burden the 
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This regulation does not require an information collection from 10 
or more parties and a submission under the Paperwork Reduction Act is 
not required. An OMB Form 83-I is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    As a companion document to this NPRM, NPS has issued the Personal 
Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment for Curecanti National 
Recreation Area. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was open for public 
review and comment from June 11, 2003 until July 13, 2003. The EA and 
the errata are available at https://www.nps.gov/cure/webvc/pwc_use.htm, 
or copies can be obtained directly from the park. The park encourages 
the use of the Web site for review and comment, however, a limited 
number of hard copies and CD-ROMs of the document are available. Send 
written requests for the EA to Superintendent, Curecanti National 
Recreation Area, 102 Elk Creek, Gunnison, CO 81230 or phone park 
headquarters at 970-641-2337, ext. 200. If requesting a copy, please 
specify your choice of either a hard copy or CD-ROM of the document.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government to Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated potential 
effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that 
there are no potential effects.

Clarity of Rule

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations 
that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to make 
this rule easier to understand, including answers to questions such as 
the following: (1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? (2) 
Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that interferes with 
its clarity? (3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of 
sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its 
clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to read if it were divided into 
more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' appears in bold type and is 
preceded by the symbol ``Sec.  '' and a numbered heading; for example 
[Sec.  7.51 Curecanti Recreation Area] (5) Is the description of the 
rule in the ``Supplementary Information'' section of the preamble 
helpful in understanding the proposed rule? What else could we do to 
make the rule easier to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this 
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department 
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. 
You may also email the comments to this address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov.
    Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation are: 
Bill Wellman, Superintendent, Linda Alick, Chief Ranger, Ned Kelleher, 
District Ranger, Phil Zichterman, Chief of Interpretation, Ken 
Stahlnecker, Chief of Resource Stewardship, Jerry Burgess, Facility 
Manager, Curecanti National Recreation Area; Sarah Branswom, 
Environmental Quality Division; Mike Tiernan, WASO Solicitor's Office, 
and Jerry Case, Regulations Program Manager.

Public Participation

    You may submit comments, identified by the number RIN 1024-AC99, by 
any of the following methods:

--Federal rulemak