[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 120 (Monday, June 23, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33749-33751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-16193]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

RIN 1024-AC46


St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, Boating Operations

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) is adopting this final rule to 
amend the special regulations for the NPS administered portion of the 
St. Croix National Scenic Riverway (Riverway). This rule will provide 
for the regulation of access to waters within the Riverway of vessels 
and individuals in order to protect against the infestation of zebra 
mussel. The purpose of this rule is to protect park aquatic natural 
resources and supporting human built infrastructure.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule becomes effective on July 23, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Adams, Chief Ranger, St. Croix 
National Scenic Riverway, P.O. Box 708, Saint Croix Falls, WI 54024. 
Telephone 715-483-3284.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The NPS is granted broad statutory authority under 16 U.S.C. 
Section 1 et. seq. (National Park Service Organic Act) to ``* * * 
regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, 
monuments, and reservations * * * by such means and measures as conform 
to the fundamental purpose of the said parks * * * which purpose is to 
conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the 
wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such 
manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the 
enjoyment of future generations'' (16 U.S.C. Sections 1a-2(h)). In 
addition, the Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 3.) allows the NPS to develop 
``rules and regulations * * * necessary or proper for the use and 
management of the parks, monuments and reservations under the 
jurisdiction of the National Park Service''.
    The National Park Service Management Policies (1988) provide 
overall direction in implementing the intent of this congressional 
mandate and other applicable Federal legislation. The policy of the NPS 
regarding protection and management of natural resources is ``The 
National Park Service will manage the natural resources of the national 
park system to maintain, rehabilitate, and perpetuate their inherent 
integrity'' (Chapter 4:1). Where conflict arises between human use and 
resource protection, where the NPS has a ``reasonable basis to believe 
a resource is or would become impaired, the Park Service may, * * * 
otherwise place limitations on public use'' (Chapter 1:3).
    The integrity and quality of many national aquatic ecosystems, and 
dependent economic values and infrastructure, are threatened by the 
introduction of a variety of injurious non-indigenous aquatic species, 
both flora and fauna. These exotic aquatic animals and plants cause 
irreparable harm to the core values and resources for which the 
national park system was created and can impose costly economic impacts 
on businesses and government entities through loss of production time 
and detection, mitigation, remediation and control activities. It is 
estimated that six of the over 150 known exotic aquatic species found 
within United States waters have alone caused over $1.5 billion in 
damages since 1906 (U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment).
    One such example is the exotic zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). 
The zebra mussel is a small, fresh water, filter feeding mollusk that 
attaches itself to any hard surface, human-made or natural. These 
highly prolific mussels were first discovered in Lake St. Clair in 1988 
and have rapidly become one of the most ecologically and economically 
damaging aquatic nuisance species in North America. It is believed that 
the species was accidently introduced into Great Lakes waters in 1985-
1986 by the routine practice of transferring ballast water in 
commercial vessels. They have quickly spread throughout the Great Lakes 
and into the major eastern and Midwestern river systems including the 
Mississippi River, Ohio River, Arkansas River, Red River, Tennessee 
River and Hudson River drainages.
    The ecological and economic impacts of zebra mussels have been 
extensive. These include effects to other organism, water quality, 
water clarity, and disruption of native aquatic communities and impacts 
to navigational devices, businesses and industries, municipal water 
systems, utility power plants, and recreational and commercial vessel 
owners.
    The primary vector in the spread of the zebra mussel, like many 
aquatic exotic species, is by in-water or trailered vessels transport 
from infested to uninfested waters. During the summer of 1995, zebra 
mussels were found on trailered vessels as far west as California. 
There is evidence that contaminated wet suits are also a vector for 
accidental introduction. There is no evidence that transport by natural 
means such as birds or aquatic wildlife has led to the establishment of 
viable zebra mussel populations.
    Exotic organisms were recognized as a problem in 1977 when, on May 
24, 1977, Executive Order (EO) 11987 was signed and released. EO 11987 
directed Federal agencies to restrict the importation and introduction 
of exotic species into the natural ecosystems on lands and waters under 
their jurisdiction. On November 29, 1990, Congress passed the 
Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, as 
amended (1996) (16 U.S.C. 4701). This act, among other things, directed 
Federal agencies to prevent the introduction and dispersal of 
nonindigenous species into waters of the United States. On November 9, 
1996, the President signed the ``National Invasive Species Act'' that 
had been passed by Congress. This act calls for a more widespread 
effort in looking for ways to prevent and control the increasing number 
of invasions by nonindigenous species.
    This final rule will allow St. Croix National Scenic Riverway to 
regulate vessel and individual access to park area waters, to prevent 
or minimize the risk of the unintentional introduction of zebra mussel. 
Minimizing such risks is particularly important since once introduced 
and established, zebra mussels are extremely costly and nearly 
impossible to eliminate.
    This rule will prohibit the transportation, introduction or 
attempted introduction of aquatic nuisance species into park area 
waters. The rule includes criteria for the decontamination of vessels 
and equipment that will allow them access to park area waters. The rule 
will also allow the NPS to implement a permit system outlined in the 
general provisions (36 CFR 1.6) to assure vessels entering Riverway 
waters are free of aquatic nuisance species.
    This rule will bring the NPS into conformity with programs 
currently in place in the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin and will 
allow the NPS to provide an extra measure of protection

[[Page 33750]]

to the Federally administered section of the St. Croix National Scenic 
Riverway. Currently there are four marinas along the St. Croix National 
Scenic Riverway in both Minnesota and Wisconsin that provide inspection 
and vessel cleaning services. These facilities are listed in the 
Superintendent's Compendium and will be identified in the annual St. 
Croix Interagency Zebra Mussel Task Force Plan. The availability of 
these inspection and vessel cleaning services has also been published 
in local and regional newspapers and is commonly known throughout the 
regional boating community.
    This rule was originally published in the Federal Register on June 
24, 1996 (61 FR 32383) as a proposed Servicewide rule at 36 CFR Part 3, 
Boating and Water Use Activities. However, the NPS has determined that 
Servicewide regulations are not appropriate at this time and have 
elected instead to limit the applicability of this final rule to St. 
Croix National Scenic Riverway, located in Minnesota and Wisconsin, 
only. Since this final rule is very similar to the proposed rule, but 
is less broad in scope, the NPS has determined that issuance of this 
rule as final is appropriate.

Analysis of Comments

    NPS published proposed rules in the Federal Register on June 24, 
1996 (61 FR 32383). NPS received two timely comments on the proposed 
rules, one each by the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin. It needs to 
be said that the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota, along with the NPS, 
are involved with active aquatic nuisance species control and 
prevention programs on the St. Croix River. Much mention is made by 
both States regarding the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, which is 
threatened by a variety of nuisance aquatic plant and animal species 
including, but not limited to, the zebra mussel, purple loosestrife and 
Eurasian watermilfoil.
    NPS has considered each of these comments. NPS's responses to the 
comments are as follows:

Jurisdiction of the NPS To Regulate Vessel on State Waters

    The comments by the State of Wisconsin focused on the jurisdiction 
of the NPS to regulate or impede ``the forever free'' concept for 
navigable waters as outlined in the Wisconsin State Constitution, 
Article IX, section 1. The heart of the comments by the State of 
Wisconsin states ``Accordingly, it is the view of the State of 
Wisconsin that even though the Federal government also has jurisdiction 
over navigation on federally navigable waters, any federal restrictions 
on the right of navigation must take into account the concurrent state 
rights including the general right of free navigation.'' The State 
claims its authority through ``ownership of all submerged lands under 
navigable waters vested in the State'' when Wisconsin attained 
Statehood in 1848.
    NPS regulatory authority over waters subject to the jurisdiction of 
the United States, including navigable water and areas within their 
ordinary reach, however, is not based on ownership but rather on the 
Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. In regards to the NPS, 
Congress in 1976 amended the 1970 Act for Administration (known as the 
General Authorities Act) and authorized and directed the NPS to 
``promulgate and enforce regulations concerning boating and other 
activities on or relating to waters located within areas of the 
National Park System, including waters subject to the jurisdiction of 
the United States * * *'' 16 U.S.C. 1a-2(h).
    This rule carries out the responsibility of the NPS, as directed by 
Congress, to develop and enforce rules over waters subject to the 
jurisdiction of the United States in keeping with the core mission of 
the NPS, which is to ``conserve the scenery and the natural and 
historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the 
enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave 
them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations'' (16 U.S.C. 
1).
    This rule is not designed to prevent people from using Riverway 
waters, but conditions the use of these waters to protect against the 
danger of infestation from aquatic nuisance species.

Clarity of the Rules

    The State of Minnesota generally commented on the lack of clarity 
or general vagueness of the rule and made specific recommendations to 
improve the language of the rule. These comments will be addressed in 
the ``Section-by-Section Analysis'' to follow.

Compliance With Other Laws

    The State of Minnesota questioned the last statement in paragraph 
two of the proposed rule, Compliance with Other Laws section. It is 
true that this statement is conjecture, as the state asserts, and was 
stated as such. The NPS does not know exactly how much of a positive 
secondary effect this rule may have on local business and small 
entities providing vessel cleaning and decontaminating services to the 
public. That is up to the private sector to determine. The NPS merely 
stated that it may occur.
    The State of Minnesota also questioned the last two paragraphs of 
this same section. These two paragraphs deal with requirements found in 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and merely state the 
determination that they are categorically excluded from the procedural 
requirements of NEPA. As the State of Minnesota points out, some people 
will be locally affected by this rule, but the effect of the rule does 
not significantly effect the quality of the human environment, health 
and safety, and satisfies the criteria set forth, and therefore neither 
an Environmental Assessment (EA) nor an Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) will be prepared.

Section-by-Section Analysis

    Sections 3.6(m) of the proposed rule is promulgated with several 
revisions. The revisions include moving most of the proposed rule to 36 
CFR 7.9. Section 3.6 (m)(2) and (m)(4) have been removed from the final 
rule.
    The State of Minnesota states that this paragraph is vague, and 
implies that a boat operating in infested waters is considered infested 
regardless of the risk of infestation. The State is correct. The NPS 
considers any vessel operating in infested waters to be contaminated, 
regardless of risk, and should be inspected and cleaned prior to 
placement in uninfested waters. The State expressed concern on the 
liability of the State and its agents in regard to knowingly allowing a 
vessel to be launched at a State facility. This rule does not imply 
that the State must take any special action beyond its normal ability 
to act to prevent a contaminated vessel from entering park area waters 
and does not imply that the State is liable if an unknowing launch or 
operation does occur at a State operated facility. NPS itself does not 
have the fiscal or human resources to monitor all its launch facilities 
at all times.
    The State also recommended that NPS use a different term to 
describe an ``undesirable exotic species''. The State is correct that 
there are a variety of terms in both State and Federal law used to 
identify ``undesirable exotic species''. Because of this, the NPS has 
decided to narrow the scope of this final rule. For the purposes of 
this rule, aquatic nuisance species is used to include zebra mussel, 
purple loosestrife and Eurasian watermilfoil.
    Finally, the State expressed concern that the term ``NPS waters'' 
was not adequately defined in the rule. The narrower scope of this rule 
will make the regulation applicable only on St.

[[Page 33751]]

Croix National Scenic Riverway waters. ``Waters'', as used in this 
rule, are described in 36 CFR 1.2, Applicability and Scope. The State 
also expressed concern over the term ``vessel'' as found in 
subparagraph (m)(5). This definition is the same as found in 36 CFR 
1.4, Definitions, with the exception of seaplanes, which are considered 
a vessel for this rule. The State is correct in its assumption that a 
``belly boat'' or ``inflatable raft'' is a vessel, and that it should 
be inspected and cleaned, as necessary, before being placed in 
uninfested waters after use in infested waters.
    Section 3.6(m) is renumbered as 36 CFR 7.9(c) and promulgated as 
proposed, except for changing the words ``park waters'' to ``park area 
waters'' and changing ``injurious nonindigenous aquatic nuisance 
species'' to ``aquatic nuisance species''.
    The definitions at Sec. 3.6(m)(3) and (m)(5) have been amended and 
renumbered 36 CFR 7.9 (f)(1) and (f)(2), respectively.
    Section 3.6(n) is removed.
    Section 3.6 (o) is renumbered as 36 CFR 7.9(d) and promulgated as 
proposed, with the addition of the words ``is prohibited''.
    Section 3.23(c) is renumbered as 36 CFR 7.9(e) and promulgated as 
proposed, with the addition of the words ``is prohibited''.

Drafting Information

    The primary authors of this rule are Brian R. Adams, Chief Ranger, 
St. Croix National Scenic Riverway; James A. Loach, Superintendent, 
Great Lakes System Support Office, Midwest Field Area; and Dennis 
Burnett, Washington Office of Ranger Activities, National Park Service.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule does not contain collections of information 
requiring approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Compliance With Other Laws

    This rule is not a significant rule requiring review by the Office 
of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866. The Department of 
the Interior has determined that this rule will not have a significant 
economic effect on a small number of small entities under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.). The economic 
effects of this rulemaking are local in nature and negligible in scope.
    NPS has determined and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rule will not impose a 
cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local, state, or 
tribal governments or private entities.
    NPS has determined that this rulemaking will not have a significant 
effect on the quality of the human environment, health and safety 
because it is not expected to:
    a. Increase public use to the extent of compromising the nature and 
character of the area or causing physical damage to it;
    b. Introduce non-compatible uses that may compromise the nature and 
characteristic of the area, or cause physical damage to it;
    c. Conflict with adjacent ownerships or land uses; or
    d. Cause a nuisance to adjacent land owners or occupants.
    Based on this determination, this rulemaking is categorically 
excluded from the procedural requirements of the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) by Departmental guidelines in 516 DM 6 (49 FR 21438). 
As such, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental 
Impact Statement has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

    District of Columbia, National parks, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 36 CFR Chapter I is amended as 
follows:

PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

    1. The authority citation for Part 7 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q), 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also 
issued under D.C. Code 8-137(1981) and D.C. code 40-721(1981).

    2. Section 7.9 is amended by adding paragraphs (c), (d), (e) and 
(f) to read as follows:


Sec. 7.9  St. Croix National Scenic Rivers.

* * * * *
    (c) Vessels.
    (1) Entering by vessel, launching a vessel, operating a vessel, or 
knowingly allowing another person to enter, launch or operate a vessel, 
or attempting to do any of these activities in park area waters when 
that vessel or the trailer or the carrier of that vessel has been in 
water infested or contaminated with aquatic nuisance species, except as 
provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section is prohibited.
    (2) Vessels, trailers or other carriers of vessels wishing to enter 
park area waters from aquatic nuisance species contaminated or infested 
waters may enter after being inspected and cleaned using the technique 
or process appropriate to the nuisance species.
    (d) Placing or dumping, or attempting to place or dump, bait 
containers, live wells, or other water-holding devises that are or were 
filled with waters holding or contaminated by aquatic nuisance species 
is prohibited.
    (e) Using a wet suit or associated water use and diving equipment 
previously used in waters infested with aquatic nuisance species prior 
to being inspected and cleaned using a process appropriate to the 
nuisance species is prohibited.
    (f) For the purpose of this section:
    (1) The term aquatic nuisance species means the zebra mussel, 
purple loosestrife and Eurasian watermilfoil;
    (2) The term vessel means every type or description of craft on the 
water used or capable of being used as a means of transportation, 
including seaplanes, when on the water, and buoyant devises permitting 
or capable of free flotation.

    Dated: June 9, 1997.
William Leary,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 97-16193 Filed 6-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P