[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 12 (Friday, January 17, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2466-2476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-1157]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

RIN 1024-AC90


Special Regulations; Areas of the National Park System

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service has proposed this rule to designate 
areas where personal watercraft (PWC) may be used in Glen Canyon 
National Recreation Area, Utah and Arizona. This rule implements the 
provisions of the National Park Service (NPS) general regulations 
authorizing park areas to allow the use of PWC by promulgating a 
special regulation. The NPS Management Policies 2001 require individual 
parks to 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, overall management 
objectives, and consistent with the criteria of the NPS for managing 
visitor use.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 18, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to, Glen Canyon National Recreation 
Area, PWC Rule-Making, Box 1507, Page, Arizona 86040. Email: [email protected]. FAX: (928) 608-6259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kym Hall, Regulations Program Manager, 
National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW, Room 7248, Washington, DC 
20240. Phone: (202) 208-4206. Email: [email protected]. Fax: (202) 219-
8835.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Additional Alternatives

    The information contained in this proposed rule supports 
implementation of the preferred alternative in the Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement for Personal Watercraft Rule-Making published 
September 13, 2002. The public should be aware that two other 
alternatives were presented in the Draft EIS, including a no-PWC 
alternative, and those alternatives should also be reviewed and 
considered when making comments on this proposed rule.

Purposes of the Recreation Area

    National Park System units are established by Congress, and the 
enabling legislation usually identifies specific purposes for the unit. 
A unit's purpose, as established by Congress, is the foundation on 
which management decisions are based. The purpose and significance of 
Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and its broad mission goals are 
derived from its enabling legislation and are summarized in the 
national recreation area's General Management Plan (NPS 1979) and 
Strategic Plan (NPS 2000-2005).
    Glen Canyon National Recreation Area was established in 1972 
(Public Law 92-593) ``to provide for public outdoor recreation use and 
enjoyment of Lake Powell and lands adjacent thereto * * * , and to 
preserve scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to 
public enjoyment of the area (16 U.S.C. 460dd).'' The recreation area's 
primary management objective, as established in the General Management 
Plan (NPS 1979), is ``to manage the recreation area so that it provides 
maximal recreational enjoyment to the American public and their 
guests.''
    The national recreation area's enabling legislation states ``The 
Secretary shall administer, protect, and develop the recreation area in 
accordance with the provisions of [the Organic Act] * * * and with any 
other statutory authority available to him for the conservation and 
management of natural resources (16 U.S.C. 460dd-3). This act also 
specifies that ``nothing * * * shall affect or interfere with the 
authority of the Secretary * * * to operate Glen Canyon dam and

[[Page 2467]]

reservoir'' for the purposes of the Colorado River Storage Project Act, 
administered by the Bureau of Reclamation.
    As stated in the General Management Plan and Strategic Plan, Glen 
Canyon National Recreation Area is significant because it offers a 
tremendous diversity of both water-based and land-based recreational 
opportunities. It contains Lake Powell, the second largest man-made 
lake in North America, which provides both a unique opportunity for 
recreation in a natural environment and a transportation corridor to 
remote backcountry areas of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. It is 
in the heart of the Colorado Plateau region, which offers a unique 
combination of water and desert environments. It offers a natural 
diversity of rugged water and wind carved canyons, buttes, mesas, and 
other outstanding physiographic features. The climate and physical 
features have created local environments favorable to the preservation 
of scientifically important objects, sites, populations, habitats, or 
communities that are significant in and of themselves or provide 
opportunities to add to our understanding of past or ongoing events. It 
possesses evidence of 10,000 years of human occupation and use of 
resources, which provides a continuing story of the prehistoric, 
historic, and present-day affiliation of humans and their environments. 
It constitutes a significant part of the outstanding public lands of 
the Colorado Plateau.
    The recreation area offers a tremendous diversity of land and 
water-based recreational opportunities. The area's major recreational 
resource is Lake Powell, a 186-mile-long reservoir at full pool that 
was created when the Colorado River was dammed. Boating is very popular 
on the lake, including the use of PWC, houseboats, powerboats, fishing 
boats, tour boats, canoes, kayaks, and sailboats. Other popular 
activities include fishing, camping, water skiing, hiking, photography, 
and driving for pleasure.

Description of the Recreation Area

    Glen Canyon National Recreation Area encompasses 1,254,306 acres of 
land and water in northern Arizona and southeastern Utah. Its southern 
boundary is contiguous with the Navajo Nation. Other boundaries adjoin 
Grand Canyon National Park, Capitol Reef National Park, Canyonlands 
National Park, and Rainbow Bridge National Monument, all managed by the 
National Park Service. The recreation area also adjoins areas 
administered by the Bureau of Land Management that include Grand 
Staircase--Escalante National Monument, Vermillion Cliffs National 
Monument, and Paria Canyon Wilderness. Lake Powell is the predominant 
physical feature and at full pool (3700 feet elevation), occupies about 
163,000 surface acres, storing approximately 27 million acre feet of 
water, and providing about 1,960 miles of shoreline. More than 2 
million people visit Glen Canyon National Recreation Area each year.

Motorized Watercraft

    Motorboats and other motorized watercraft such as houseboats, ski 
boats, fishing boats, and powerboats have been used in Glen Canyon 
National Recreation Area since its establishment in 1972. PWC use has 
emerged at the recreation area with the introduction of this type of 
vessel in the 1980s. Prior to 2000, PWC use was allowed throughout Glen 
Canyon National Recreation Area except in the waters of the Colorado 
River between the Glen Canyon Dam and the downstream river boundary of 
Glen Canyon National Recreation Area where it adjoins Grand Canyon 
National Park near Lees Ferry. The waters of the recreation area above 
the dam where PWC use could occur, as identified in the 
superintendent's compendium, are within the scope of this proposed 
rule.
    The 15-mile corridor of the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam 
was closed to PWC use in the superintendent's compendium for the 
protection of environmental values and the avoidance of conflict among 
traditional visitor use activities. This stretch of river is a 
nationally significant resource known for its scenery and ``blue-
ribbon'' trout fishery. The historical recreational uses include fly-
fishing and rafting trips. In March 2000, provisions of the National 
Park Service PWC rule closed the waters below the dam to PWC use. These 
waters continue to be an inappropriate area for PWC use and are not 
considered within the environmental impact statement (NPS, September 
2002) or this proposed rule.
    Glen Canyon National Recreation Area is located within the states 
of Arizona and Utah. Both states enforce their laws on Lake Powell 
within their respective state jurisdictions. The National Park Service 
manages these regulations in concert with the federal boating 
regulations that are addressed within Title 36 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, and the United States Coast Guard Regulations pursuant to 
Title 36.

Resource Impact Topics

    The following summarizes the predominant natural resources, 
cultural resources, and public use concerns and issues associated with 
PWC use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. Each of these issues 
is discussed in greater detail in the environmental impact statement.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

    Shoreline areas that typically are exposed to PWC uses provide 
limited habitats for the large, highly mobile mammals of the recreation 
area. Although areas are typically unvegetated and steep, shoreline 
areas may occasionally be briefly occupied by several species of 
mammals while searching for food or water or while moving through the 
area. These species include desert bighorn sheep, mule deer, antelope, 
feral horse, bobcat, mountain lion, gray fox, badger, kit fox, and 
coyote. However, they spend most of the time in adjacent upland areas 
and are not affected by motorized watercraft, including PWC.
    Vegetation and corresponding habitat conditions are different in 
the tributaries and upper river reaches of the recreation area where 
water level fluctuations generally follow normal seasonal patterns. 
Such reaches provide riparian vegetation complexes that support 
different wildlife species assemblages than those encountered along 
main lake shorelines. Therefore, management actions should be 
consistent with protecting these resources.
    Shore birds, waterfowl, and other water-associated bird species 
frequently use Lake Powell and its surrounding shoreline during 
migration for resting, security, and foraging purposes. Groups commonly 
observed on the lake and near shoreline areas include several species 
of grebes, cormorants, herons, egrets, coots, and ducks. Waterfowl, 
shorebirds, wading birds, and other water-associated bird species tend 
to concentrate in highest number and greatest diversity at Lake Powell 
in the late fall, winter, and the early spring months during peak 
migration periods. PWC use is minimal or not existent during this time 
of year; therefore, there is not a significant impact upon bird species 
associated with PWC operation.
    The recreation area currently supports an assemblage of fish 
species that includes those adapted to either lake (lacustrine) or 
flowing-water (riverine) environments. Most of the lake-adapted species 
have been introduced intentionally or unintentionally by man through 
past fish-stocking programs or bait release. These species are more 
abundant because of the larger abundance of suitable aquatic habitat.
    The flowing-water or riverine fish species tend to be native 
species that are

[[Page 2468]]

restricted to the flowing portions of the main tributary streams and 
rivers that flow into the lake. These species are relatively less 
abundant and more restricted in distribution than the lake-associated 
fish species.
    The creation of Lake Powell changed the riverine habitat formerly 
found on this stretch of the Colorado River to such an extent that 
native fish species have been virtually eliminated from the resulting 
lake environment. As a result of habitat modification and competition 
by introduced species, some native species are now classified as 
endangered or threatened.
    The large seasonal and annual variations in water surface elevation 
resulting from reservoir operations and management impose substantial 
environmental constraints on the types of habitats that can develop and 
persist at near-shore locations. Wildlife species typically associated 
with the water fluctuation zone are highly adapted to using food, 
cover, and shelter conditions that may develop and disappear quickly. 
In many main lake locations, especially where the inundation frequency 
is high and prolonged, shoreline and near-shore areas consist primarily 
of unvegetated or sparsely vegetated rock, sand, cobbles, and boulders.
    Wetlands and riparian areas are typically considered to be 
important wildlife concentration areas for several reasons. These 
include the availability of good foraging conditions resulting from the 
high degree of vegetation, water interfaces and interspersion (or 
edge), and structural diversity typically associated with vegetation 
conditions in such areas. General wildlife habitat values and uses 
generally increase as wetland and riparian area size increases. Because 
of the physical shoreline conditions and the operational 
characteristics of the reservoir, wetland sites are limited in number 
and small in size. Wetlands are typically associated with the upstream 
reaches of tributary or secondary side canyons where water levels 
fluctuate less.
    Riparian areas are typically found along the shorelines of the four 
major rivers flowing into the reservoir. However, even in these 
locations, riparian corridors are generally scarce in number and small 
in size.
    The perennial tributary rivers flowing into Lake Powell represent 
examples of the river systems and aquatic environments that existed 
prior to lake impoundment. These areas are of particular scientific and 
resource preservation values because of their general scarcity and 
because they preserve populations and community relationships of 
previous riverine ecosystem conditions. Relict native fish species 
still survive within the rivers in limited numbers. Major examples 
include reaches of the Colorado, San Juan, Escalante, and Dirty Devil 
Rivers. Therefore, management actions should be consistent with the 
protection of these wildlife habitats.

Threatened and Endangered Species

    In accordance with threatened or endangered species consultation 
and coordination activities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
identified 13 listed, 1 proposed, and 1 candidate species for portions 
of Coconino County, Arizona and Kane and San Juan Counties, Utah (U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service letter dated May 9, 2002). Of these species 
identified, Glen Canyon NRA resource specialists confirm that habitat 
for 12 federally listed endangered, threatened and candidate species 
may occur in the lake or near its shoreline. The area addressed for 
this resource characterization includes Lake Powell up to the 3700-foot 
water surface elevation, the shoreline zone, and uplands within 500 
feet of Lake Powell's 3700-foot water surface elevation.
    Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) is native to the Colorado 
River and once occupied the entire range of the river basin. San Juan, 
Dirty Devil and Colorado River inflow areas continue to produce some 
razorback suckers. Eleven adult razorbacks were caught at the San Juan 
Inflow (USGS et al. open file report). Adult razorback suckers are 
considered to be the products of native fish recovery programs 
conducted further upstream of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. 
Fish tracking studies conducted in Lake Powell from 1995 to 1997 
indicated this species primarily used vegetated habitats less than 1.5 
feet deep in side canyons and backwaters covering sandy or cobble 
bottoms and open waters in upper portions of the river inlets. These 
areas represent less than 1 percent of the habitat in Lake Powell (Karp 
and Mueller, 2002).
    Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius) is a native migratory 
species of the Colorado River that once was present basin wide. It is 
no longer present in the lower basin and is considered rare in the 
upper basin. It is only found upstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Juvenile 
pikeminnow have been found in off-channel and backwater habitats 
adjacent to lower reaches of the river inflows into Lake Powell (UDWR, 
M. Gustaveson, pers. com. 2002). Some have been found in the San Juan 
River near Mexican Hat (National Park Service, 1986). The Colorado 
pikeminnow has not been reported captured in the lake since 1977. 
Limiting factors include loss of habitat.
    Humpback chub (Gila cypha) is a native migratory species that was 
once more abundant throughout the Colorado River. The species has been 
found to exist near the confluence of the Colorado and Little Colorado 
Rivers within Grand Canyon National Park. The humpback chub has not 
been captured in Lake Powell since the early 1970s. It is assumed to no 
longer be present in the lake. Habitat preferences include river 
channels with deep fast-moving water and large boulders that are often 
conditions created in river channels bounded by steep cliffs. Adults 
typically live in eddy currents of whitewater canyons. Threats to this 
species include habitat modification and fluctuating water discharges 
that eliminate preferred conditions.
    Bonytail (Gia elegans) is a native species that has a historic 
range that includes the Colorado River and its main tributaries. The 
bonytail is no longer present in the upper basin and is believed to be 
the most endangered of the four fish species. Prior to 1996 less than 
10 bonytails were captured in Lake Powell. No individual fish have been 
observed during annual gill-net surveys in the last 20 years. Some 
populations may be present in Utah but their relative abundance is 
unknown. The species prefers pools and eddies of warm, often heavily 
silted, swift moving rivers.
    Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucidia) utilizes a variety 
of habitats including old growth forests, mixed conifer, Ponderosa 
pine, deciduous riparian, and steep canyons with rocky cliffs. Timber 
harvesting is the main threat to the Mexican spotted owl. Small 
populations roost in abandoned nests, tree cavities, or caves along 
canyon walls. Steep canyon habitats and drainages adjacent to Lake 
Powell and adjoining rivers may occasionally be utilized by this bird 
species. A juvenile was observed in Cataract Canyon several years ago 
but none have been sighted in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area 
since. There are no potential areas of concern located within the 
analysis area. Known occupied territories are located more than 4 miles 
from the Lake Powell shoreline (Glen Canyon NRA, Spence pers. com. 
2002).
    Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) is 
associated with low-elevation dense willow, cottonwood and saltcedar 
communities along streams and rivers. This species has been sighted 
about 30 miles from Lake Powell up the Escalante

[[Page 2469]]

River and the San Juan River near Clay Hills Crossing but there is no 
confirmed nesting or breeding habitat present in the national 
recreation area. (Glen Canyon NRA, Henderson and Spence pers. com. 
2002). In Arizona more than 110 pairs occupy 160 territories including 
breeding territory along the Colorado River. Smaller populations are 
known to exist in Utah. Breeding habitat is present along the Colorado 
River and some lake shorelines at low elevations in areas of dense 
willow, cottonwood and saltcedar or other woodlands along streams and 
rivers. Destruction and loss of native riparian habitat combined with 
natural predation and brown-headed cowbird parasitism have reduced 
species populations.
    California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) was reintroduced into 
the wild by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona in 1996. 
There is some evidence that the condor was present in Utah at one time 
and its range may extend into Utah. These birds were released on the 
Vermilion Cliffs in Coconino County near Page, Arizona approximately 20 
miles from the Utah border. Roosting habitat includes cliffs, tall 
evergreens and snags. Their population decline is thought to be related 
to ingestion of lead or cyanide poisoning of dead carcasses. Possible 
shootings, removal from wild of eggs, young, and adults for captive 
breeding, and unknown causes may also be a contributor. This species is 
known to forage for food more than 100 miles from their home territory. 
No breeding or nesting habitat is present in the recreation area, but 
individual birds may infrequently move across the area. A few 
individuals have been observed at Lake Powell within the last five 
years (Glen Canyon NRA, Spence pers. com. 2002).
    Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) habitat is present along the 
larger rivers in the southern part of Utah. The bald eagle winters in 
small numbers throughout the Lake Powell area and is observed in areas 
of the San Juan River and around Bullfrog (Glen Canyon National 
Recreation Area, 1986). Of the three nesting sites located in 
southeastern Utah, two nests are located along the Colorado River 
corridor. No nest sites have been observed or recorded along Lake 
Powell's shorelines. Potentially favorable bald eagle roosting sites 
along the rivers and shorelines of reservoirs such as Lake Powell are 
monitored for winter and breeding season uses (Spence et al 2002). 
There are no known consistently used winter roosting locations in the 
recreation area. Bald eagles have been observed feeding at Antelope 
Island and other portions of Lake Powell during the winter months 
(National Park Service 2002).
    Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) populations have 
declined throughout its range in the western states due to habitat 
loss. It is a candidate species currently under study by the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife. Habitat for this neo-tropical species consists of 
cottonwood-willow riparian forests. Its presence and breeding habitat 
is well documented in Arizona. The bird has been sighted in Utah but 
its presence is not well documented. Western yellow-billed cuckoo have 
been observed on the Colorado River near Lees Ferry below the Glen 
Canyon Dam and at Clay Hills Crossing on the San Juan River. This bird 
species has not been observed at Lake Powell (Spence 2002).
    American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) was removed 
from the federal list of endangered and threatened species on August 
25, 1999 (64 Federal Register 46542). It is still listed as an Arizona 
special status species. The peregrine falcon nests on cliffs next to 
riparian and wetland habitats. It is occasionally observed on cliff 
faces in the recreation area. Foraging activity does occur within close 
proximity to the lake shoreline. Threats to this species include loss 
of habitat and environmental contaminants. There are over 80 known 
peregrine falcon nesting sites in the recreation area. These nest sites 
are located along cliffs at higher elevations on the canyon walls far 
above the water surface of the lake (Glen Canyon NRA, Spence pers. 
com.2002).
    Navajo Sedge (Carex specuicola), grows in small pockets of sandy to 
silty moist soil in cool and shady seeps or spring alcoves in the San 
Juan River Canyon at elevations ranging from 4301 to 6004 feet. No 
designated critical habitat for the Navajo sedge is located in Glen 
Canyon National Recreation Area (Glen Canyon NRA, Henderson, pers. 
com., 2002).
    Ute Ladies-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) is a small native orchid 
that is associated with wet meadows that may occur along streams, at 
spring or seep discharges and rarely along lakeshores at elevations 
ranging from about 4300 to 7000 feet. It typically flowers between late 
July through August, which is the best time to determine its presence. 
This species is threatened by loss of habitat, agriculture, fluctuating 
water levels and urban stream channelization. This species is known to 
occur in Garfield County, and other counties in Utah (FWS letter June 
14, 2001) but it has not been observed or identified on the shoreline 
or riparian areas along either Lake Powell or any of the river 
corridors joining the lake (Glen Canyon NRA, Spence, pers. com. 2002).
    Under current use conditions, there have been no documented 
incident reports of known conflicts of federally endangered fish or 
other species with watercraft or PWC users (Glen Canyon NRA, Spence, 
pers. com. 2002). Current motorized watercraft use of any type is not 
considered to affect any endangered fish species in Lake Powell (UDWR, 
M. Gustaveson, pers. com. 2002).

Shoreline Vegetation

    More than 730 species of plants have been identified in the 
recreation area. Shoreline vegetation is considered to include several 
types of vegetation communities, including submerged aquatic beds, 
wetlands, riparian areas or zones, beach dunes, and upland vegetation 
that grows near the shoreline. The EIS defines the shoreline zone as 
areas within 500 horizontal feet from the lake's waterline at full 
pool. The area physically included in this zone will change as 
reservoir water levels change. The waterline can fluctuate as much as 
50 feet vertically and 1,000 feet horizontally during a calendar year.
    Areas of submerged aquatic vegetation are generally scarce and 
poorly developed at the recreation area. Reasons for this condition 
include unstable water levels associated with reservoir operations for 
water supply, power generation, and flood storage; poor plant rooting 
conditions along the lake's shorelines; very steep shoreline slopes; 
limited availability of low-gradient shorelines; and lack of suitable 
bottom conditions. Shoreline vegetation includes upland, beach dune, 
wetland, hanging-garden, and riparian locations near the land-water 
interface. Shoreline vegetation occurs along the main reservoir 
shoreline and along the tributary streams and rivers that flow into the 
reservoir. The same water fluctuation and difficult rooting conditions 
combined with the desert climate severely restrict development of 
shoreline and riparian vegetation. Consequently, most shorelines are 
bare rock, unvegetated sand, gravel, or cobbles.
    PWC use has limited impact upon the recreation area shoreline 
vegetation. The areas where disturbance could occur should be 
considered and consistent within the protection of these resources.

Water Quality

    During the summer of 2001, the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area 
conducted a water quality testing to

[[Page 2470]]

determine the presence of hydrocarbons in Lake Powell. Samples were 
taken over a 4-day period from June 29th through July 2nd. This period 
was selected because it represents a high-use period by watercraft, 
including PWC.
    The persistence of gasoline and oil in lake waters depends on the 
temperature of the water and the amount of mixing. Fuel components 
volatilize (evaporate) more quickly at warmer temperatures. High rates 
of mixing increase exposure to the air and accelerate volatilization. 
The greatest amount of boat use on Lake Powell generally occurs during 
the hot summer months. The lake's water temperature reaches up to 80 
degrees Fahrenheit during the summer and high rates of mixing is 
proportional to the high rate of visitation on the lake. Therefore, 
gasoline volatilizes quickly on Lake Powell.
    Emissions of gasoline and exhaust associated with PWC operation 
were compared to existing water quality conditions and to state water 
quality standards to determine their effects. The method used to 
evaluate the water quality used basic steps to determine the degree of 
impact a waterbody would experience based on the exceedence of water 
quality standards/toxicity benchmarks for PWC and outboard engine-
related contaminants.
    Analyses were performed by the State of Utah, The Woods Hole Group, 
Inc., and the U.S. Geologic Survey research laboratories. Samples were 
tested for benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylenes; five gasoline 
additives, including methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), ethyl tertiary 
butyl ether (ETBE), tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME), diisopropyl 
ether (DIPE), and tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA); and 24 polycyclic 
aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds. These test results are included 
within the environmental impact statement.
    The maximum concentrations detected from the most heavily used test 
site, Bullfrog Marina, were below the treated drinking water standard 
or advisory level for all three compounds (benzene, benzo(a)pyrene, 
methyl teriary-butyl ether) for which a standard exists as determined 
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Based on this information 
the impacts associated with PWC on water quality were found to be not 
significant.
    Based on the estimated Glen Canyon National Recreation Area boating 
hour statistics for 2001, PWC represented 17 percent of the total 
boating hours on Lake Powell. Of the PWC using Lake Powell; 87 percent 
were carbureted, 2-cycle engines, 6.5 percent were direct injection, 2-
cycle engines, and 6.5 percent were 4-cycle engines.
    The remaining 83 percent of boating hours on the lake for 2001 
involved all other watercraft; house boats, powerboats, and fishing 
boats. Of the other vessels using Lake Powell, 78.6 percent were 4-
cycle engines, 12.6 percent were carbureted, 2-cycle engines, 6.4 
percent were fuel-injected 2-cycle engines, and 2.4 percent were diesel 
or sail powered vessels.
    Of all the vessels using Lake Powell in 2001, 75 percent of the 
motorized vessels on Lake Powell were 4-cycle engines or fuel-injected, 
2-cycle engines. It is estimated that these engines have emission rates 
that are 75 to 90 percent lower and thus emit about one-tenth the 
pollutants of carbureted, 2-cycle engines.
    On October 4, 1996, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
issued a final rule to regulate emissions for new spark-ignition 
gasoline marine engines, including outboard engines, PWC engines, and 
jet boat engines. The rulemaking was conducted under Section 213 of the 
Clean Air Act. The EPA had determined that these engines contributed to 
ozone air pollution, and that the technology was available to 
manufacture cleaner operating engines. The rule stipulates that by the 
2006 model year, the entire fleet of marine engines produced by each 
manufacturer, including those for PWC, must have a 75 percent reduction 
in hydrocarbon emissions compared to the average for the fleet produced 
by that manufacturer prior to the rule. It also established 
intermediate target dates for emission reductions.
    In contrast to outboard engines that are used on boats, the average 
useful ``life'' of a 2-cycle PWC is 9 years (California Air Resources 
Board 1998b). As a result, by around 2015, most of the PWC used on Lake 
Powell will have low-emission engines. By 2005, the emissions from the 
fleet of watercraft using Lake Powell would be reduced by 25 percent 
compared to emissions in 1996; and in 2012, the emissions from the 
fleet of watercraft using the lake would be reduced by 50 percent 
compared to emissions in 1996. Therefore, water quality conditions 
associated with the use of PWC and other watercraft will improve, 
regardless of the management actions identified within this proposed 
rule.

Air Quality

    Glen Canyon NRA is designated as a class II air quality area under 
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions of the Clean Air 
Act and meets or exceeds all EPA standards for ambient air quality. The 
air quality of the Glen Canyon region is in attainment of the national 
ambient air quality standards. The sources of air pollutants come 
primarily from outside the park and can concentrate, especially during 
periods of atmospheric inversion, in the park, causing visible smog on 
occasion. There are sources of air pollutants that are generated within 
the park, including pollutants contained in the exhaust of motorized 
vessels. The combustion process of motorized vessels results in 
emissions of air pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOC), 
nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM), and carbon 
monoxide (CO) (EPA).
    Although there is existing data showing that carbureted 2-cycle 
engines emit pollutants into the air, there is little data that shows 
specifically what impacts PWC emissions have on air quality. On Lake 
Powell, the current impacts from carbureted 2-cycle engines, including 
PWC, occur intermittently in high-use areas such as marinas, primarily 
between May and October. These impacts include visible smoke and the 
smell of exhaust and gasoline fumes. These impacts are considered 
moderate and have not been shown to exceed the national ambient air 
quality standards under the Clean Air Act or the EPA air quality index. 
The PWC industry reports that the highest volume selling models today 
are the cleaner-burning PWC (PWIA 2002, www.pwia.org); therefore, there 
is expected to be some beneficial impacts through 2012 as older models 
are replaced by the newer models. Once the proposed 2006 requirement is 
in place, air quality is expected to improve in the high use areas 
where carbureted two-cycle engines are currently heavily used. The EPA 
expects a 50% reduction in hydrocarbon emissions from marine engines 
from present levels by 2020, and a 75% reduction by 2025 (EPA 1996).

Soundscapes

    Most visitors to Lake Powell have expectations of some noise from 
motorized vessels. Noise is generally considered appropriate if it is 
generated from activities consistent with park purposes and at levels 
consistent with those purposes. Engines are a primary source of human-
caused sound at the recreation area. These include engines on PWC and 
other vessels, cars and trucks, off-road vehicles, aircraft, 
generators, and other miscellaneous sounds from electronic devices and 
humans. However, the opportunity to experience the natural soundscape 
is an important part of a positive park

[[Page 2471]]

experience for some visitors. During the high use season, the sound of 
all boats can be continuous in the high use zones, marinas and main 
channel. Boat noise is noticeable in the Natural and Cultural zones 
during periods of high boating activity, but there are extended periods 
when boating noise is not noticeable.
    Noise from watercraft operating in excess of the noise decibel 
requirements could negatively impact visitors. Noise abatement is 
regulated by the NPS within Glen Canyon NRA and other units of the 
National Park System (36 CFR, part 3.7). ``Operating a vessel in or 
upon inland waters so as to exceed a noise level of 82 decibels 
measured at a distance of 82 feet (25 meters) from the vessel is 
prohibited.'' The NPS is proposing to amend 36 CFR 3.7 to a different 
SAE testing standard in order to make enforcement of our existing 
decibel level easier.
    Boating noise is also regulated by the States of Utah and Arizona. 
The respective states have developed standards relative to boat noise 
and these standards are enforced by state law enforcement officers on 
Lake Powell. Glen Canyon is working with the States of Arizona and Utah 
to address inconsistencies in boating laws, including noise 
regulations.
    The nature of the noise generated from PWC may be more disturbing 
than other watercraft operating at similar decibels due to rapid 
changes in acceleration and direction typical of the operation of PWC. 
Although within the federal and state noise standards described 
previously, the changes in pitch can be annoying to some visitors. 
Where legislation allows for specific noise-making activities, such as 
motorized boating in parks, the soundscape management goal is to reduce 
the noise to the level consistent with the best technology available 
and consistent with park purposes and operations in order to mitigate 
the noise impact.
    Manufacturers of PWC are aware of the concerns of the public 
related to the noise of their operation and have taken steps to reduce 
the noise by using more rubber in construction and eliminating 
vibrations. It is anticipated the PWC manufacturers will continue to 
reduce the noise associated with PWC. As the existing fleet is 
converted to the newer engine technology by the year 2012, it is 
expected noise will also be significantly reduced. Noise levels 
generated by watercraft on Lake Powell, including PWC, is consistent 
with park purposes and within the standards established by NPS. No 
additional restrictions are proposed.

Visitor Use, Conflicts, and Safety

    Boat days were used as a basic unit of analyzing the intensity and 
impact of watercraft use upon Lake Powell. A `boating day' equals one 
watercraft on the lake sometime during a 24-hour period. Total annual 
boating days on Lake Powell were estimated by multiplying the total 
number of boats estimated to enter the recreation area by the average 
length of time boats spend on the lake during a visit. The average 
amount of time each watercraft spent on the lake was estimated by a 
University of Minnesota 2000 visitor survey, in which watercraft users 
were asked how many nights they spent on the lake during their stay 
(Visitor Use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Comparison of 
Personal Watercraft Users and Nonusers, James 1999-2001).
    The total number of boats was estimated using boat rental, boat 
slip, and boat buoy data obtained from ARAMARK (the national recreation 
area concession operator), and from the recreation area's monthly entry 
and trailer counts gathered at the Wahweap, Lone Rock, Antelope Point, 
Bullfrog, Halls Crossing, and Hite launch areas.
    Total annual Glen Canyon National Recreation Area watercraft use in 
2001 was 823,148 boating days. This was the only year that all factors 
necessary for calculating boating days were recorded and available for 
analysis. There are several important characteristics of this use. PWC 
use accounted for 27 percent of the boating days estimated in 2001.
    The visitor survey identified that, typically, many watercraft are 
used by a large group of friends or family, and groups often include 
more than one boat type. Generally one boat type in the group is the 
primary watercraft. The most common primary watercraft are powerboats. 
The second most common primary watercraft are houseboats.
    It is common for houseboat and powerboat groups on Lake Powell to 
bring PWC on their trips. Of all groups traveling on Lake Powell with 
houseboats, 39 percent also included at least one PWC. Twenty-five 
percent of all powerboat groups included at least one PWC.
    Half of all respondents to the summer survey stated that they 
operated a PWC during their visit. Visitors have and use multiple types 
of watercraft, including PWC, during a recreation trip, and PWC use is 
not restricted to a specific user or age group.
    Watercraft use peaks in the months of June through September. About 
79.5 percent of the total boating days in 2001 occurred during this 
peak use period. PWC use accounted for 30 percent of the boating days. 
Because PWC sales have actually decreased over the last several years, 
based on information provided by the Personal Watercraft Industry 
Association, the NPS has assumed that PWC use levels will likely remain 
constant over the next several years. Should PWC sales increase in the 
near future, use numbers could increase as well.
    Over the course of the year, PWC use will vary in proportion to 
other watercraft. Watercraft use of the lake originates primarily from 
the four marinas with launch ramps at Wahweap, Bullfrog, Halls Crossing 
and Hite. From marinas, watercraft users distribute themselves on the 
lake to popular destinations. Some visitors remain in the vicinity of 
the marina. Because of the distribution of marinas with fueling 
stations along the length of the lake, houseboats and powerboats have 
access to and may travel to any point on the lake.
    PWC use correlates with other watercraft use in remote areas of the 
lake because of the association of PWC with houseboat and powerboat 
groups. However, PWC operators were more likely to recreate in the 
Wahweap, Bullfrog, and Halls Crossing portal areas than other areas 
based on the fuel holding capacity of these vessels.
    Boating use originates from outside of Glen Canyon on the San Juan 
and Colorado Rivers. The Bureau of Land Management issues permits for 
trips that originate typically from BLM's Sand Island Recreation Site 
(river mile 0) or Mexican Hat (river mile 27) on the San Juan River and 
terminate at Clay Hills Crossing (river mile 84) within Glen Canyon 
(personal communications, Berkenfield, BLM). Canyonlands National Park 
issues permits for trips that originate within Canyonlands on the 
Colorado River and terminate within Glen Canyon at Hite (personal 
communications, Henderson, NPS). PWC are prohibited within Canyonlands.
    PWC users and other watercraft users come to Glen Canyon with 
motives for and expectations about their visit. These reflect the 
visitor's desired experiences and indicate the basis for a satisfactory 
visit.
    Respondents to the University of Minnesota summer 2000 watercraft 
survey (James, 2001) described their motives for visiting the 
recreation area. Little difference exists between the desired 
experiences of PWC and other watercraft users. Among the most important 
were ``to enjoy the scenery of Lake Powell,'' ``to do something with my 
family,'' ``to get away from the usual demands of life,'' ``to be with 
members

[[Page 2472]]

of my group,'' ``to be with people who enjoy the same things I do,'' 
and ``to experience nature.''
    Most desired experiences were reported by PWC and other watercraft 
users as being attained, indicating that, overall, visitors were very 
satisfied with their visit to Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. 
Among the experiences receiving only a moderate level of attainment 
were, ``to experience solitude,'' ``to be away from other people,'' and 
``to be on my own'' indicating that overall use levels on the lake 
tends to be adequate for most visitors. There were no significant 
differences in experience attainment found between PWC operators and 
other watercraft operators.
    Non-safety situations that were rated as most problematic included 
``litter on beaches and shoreline,'' ``people being inconsiderate,'' 
``too many PWC on the lake,'' ``finding a beach campsite,'' and 
``finding an unoccupied site.'' The study noted that although these 
were the most problematic, the mean rating on a scale of 1 (No problem) 
to 5 (very serious problem) was 2.1 or lower (slight to no problem). 
There was no difference between PWC and other watercraft users in their 
perception of ``conflicts with PWC operators on the lake.'' The mean 
response was 1.7 (no problem to slight problem).
    The relatively low perception of conflict with PWC was reflected in 
attitudes towards potential management actions. Respondents generally 
opposed management actions that would prohibit, limit, or zone 
watercraft uses. Respondents evaluated potential actions on a scale of 
1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support) with a rating of 3 meaning 
neither support nor opposition. Both PWC and other vessel users 
expressed general opposition to ``zoning the waters to provide specific 
uses at specific places,'' ``limit number of PWC allowed on the lake at 
one time,'' and ``prohibit PWC on the lake.'' To manage conditions on 
the lake, watercraft users were generally supportive of actions that 
would ``provide more information about appropriate behavior,'' 
``aggressively enforce safety rules and regulations on the lake,'' and 
``use management control to prevent damage to the environment by 
visitors.''
    The overall conclusion was that the differences in perceptions of 
experience and conflict between PWC and other watercraft users were 
very small. There appears to be little conflict between groups and high 
satisfaction during the visit.
    The number of overall boating accidents on the lake changed little 
from 1999 to 2001. There were 811 reported accidents over the three-
year period from 1999-2001. Other vessels accounted for approximately 
86 percent and PWC accounted for 14 percent of accidents respectively 
during this 3-year period. When PWC were involved in accidents there 
was a higher percentage involved in accidents with personal injury 
(14.7 percent; 3-year average) as compared to property damage only (4.5 
percent-3-year average).
    The results of the summer 2000 visitor survey addressed visitors' 
perceptions of safety and identification of safety problems. Overall, 
respondents did not experience many problematic situations during their 
visit.

Cultural Resources

    The recreation area contains evidence of human occupation from over 
10,000 years ago. Cultural resources within the recreation area include 
archeological resources, cultural landscapes, ethnographic resources 
and historic resources, including features listed on the National 
Register of Historic Places. No museum collections or National Historic 
Landmark properties exist within the project area or its general 
vicinity. PWC use was analyzed in terms of whether the use would impact 
the archeological resources, historic resources, cultural landscapes 
and ethnographic resources within 0.5 miles (horizontally) from the 
full pool line at 3700 feet above sea level. These categories of 
cultural resources are defined within the environmental impact 
statement, affected environment section.
    Visitors access areas of the park in numerous different ways--they 
arrive in motor vehicles and airplanes, in boats of all types, by 
hiking, and by PWC. Given this diversity of modes of access, the 
impacts on archeological and historic cultural resources directly 
attributable to PWC users are very difficult to define. Most PWC users, 
like most recreation area visitors, are conscientious about protecting 
the cultural resources and do not engage in deliberate disturbance of 
the sites. Disturbance to sites occurs by the frequency of trampling, 
graffiti, vandalism, and illegal collection of objects. Access to side 
canyons to Lake Powell varies with lake levels. PWC may be able to 
access narrow, steep-walled canyons that are inaccessible to most 
visitors.
    This proposed rule would, in effect, close the upper canyons of the 
Dirty Devil, Escalante, San Juan, and Colorado Rivers to use by all 
PWC. This action would make archeological sites, ethnographic sites, 
and cultural landscapes along approximately 113 miles of river less 
vulnerable to damage and vandalism and illegal collection. The rule 
will also include new flat wake zones along a total of about 17 miles 
of the Dirty Devil and Escalante Rivers. Restrictions on PWC use would 
provide long-term benefits for cultural resources in these areas. These 
benefits would be negligible to minor because impacts from other types 
of visitor use (hikers and other vessel use, etc.) would continue, and 
some isolated sites could be more vulnerable to damage due to the lack 
of contact with other visitors.
    These restrictions on PWC use in selected canyon areas could help 
focus more of the PWC activity to developed areas containing fewer 
ethnographic resources. To help reduce impacts on cultural resources 
all across the recreation area, resources would continue to be 
monitored on a regular basis. Glen Canyon National Recreation Area 
staff would continue to educate visitors regarding archeological and 
ethnographic site etiquette to provide long-term protection for surface 
artifacts, architectural features, and traditional activities.

Authorizing PWC Use

    Under the Preferred Alternative (Alternative B) of the ``Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement'' the National Park Service is issuing a 
proposed rule to specifically authorize the continued use of PWC in 
portions of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
    This proposed rule will impose additional geographic restrictions 
on PWC use and define additional flat wake zones. It also includes 
management actions to enhance the protection of park resources, improve 
visitor safety, and reduce recreational use conflicts. The specific 
section descriptions are outlined as follows:
    Section 7.70(g)(1) states that PWC may operate, transit and launch 
in park water or beach on park land except in the areas and conditions 
as described in the following subsections. Under the proposed rule, 
about 24 miles of the Colorado River upstream from Sheep Canyon would 
be closed to all PWC use. It would prohibit PWC use on the Dirty Devil 
River upstream from that point where measurable downstream current is 
encountered. (The exact location will change depending upon lake 
level). PWC would be prohibited on the Escalante River above the 
confluence of Coyote Creek and on the San Juan River upstream of the 
Clay Hills pullout. PWC would also be prohibited on the Colorado River 
between Glen Canyon Dam and the downstream river boundary of Glen 
Canyon NRA where it adjoins Grand Canyon National Park. All of these 
actions would increase the

[[Page 2473]]

protection of environmental values and reduce conflict among visitor 
use activities.
    Section 7.70(g)(1)(i) addresses the Colorado River between Glen 
Canyon Dam and the downstream river boundary of Glen Canyon NRA where 
it adjoins Grand Canyon National Park. The restriction pertaining to 
PWC use contained in the current Superintendent's Compendium (36 CFR, 
Sections 1.7(b) and 1.5), would be added to this proposed rule. The 
compendium prohibits PWC use between the Glen Canyon Dam and the 
downstream river boundary of Glen Canyon NRA where it adjoins Grand 
Canyon National Park. This closure went into effect in 1998 to 
eliminate possible conflicts between the traditional fishing and scenic 
float trips and conflicting PWC use.
    Section 7.70(g)(1)(ii) addresses the Colorado River upstream of 
Sheep Canyon. The proposed rule would prohibit PWC use on the Colorado 
River upstream from Sheep Canyon. This action would have two benefits. 
Cataract Canyon upstream of Sheep Canyon is a popular white-water 
rafting destination that provides a recreational experience that is not 
available in other parts of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. 
Closure of the Colorado River upstream from Sheep Canyon would preserve 
this locally unique visitor experience for Colorado River white-water 
river runners.
    Because of the transition from lake to river conditions, PWC 
operation upstream from Sheep Canyon is substantially different than 
operation below this point. Beginning in Cataract Canyon, conditions 
become increasingly hazardous because of conflicts between traditional 
rafting uses and use of PWC. The river's uncertain currents and 
shifting sandbars can force both groups to use a common river channel. 
The presence of standing waves also produces a high potential for 
collision. Closing this area to PWC use would help protect the safety 
of visitors. Implementing these closures to all PWC use would 
strengthen the NPS' intent to maintain areas of quiet and solitude on 
portions of the rivers and to reduce the potential for conflict between 
motorized and non-motorized users. Closing the areas in both directions 
of travel would provide for consistency within the regulations. This 
limitation will be applied to all motorized vessels in the 
Superintendent's Compendium, except for permitted activities.
    Section 7.70(g)(1)(iii) addresses the San Juan River upstream of 
Clay Hills pullout. The intent of the PWC closure on the San Juan River 
would be to provide an opportunity for visitors to enjoy quiet and 
solitude. Establishing the closure at the Clay Hills pullout would 
allow continued opportunity to access the lake from this remote site 
when the lake level is above an elevation of 3675 feet. At the same 
time, it would protect a rare visitor experience for San Juan River 
travelers upstream from this point. This limitation will be applied to 
all motorized vessels in the Superintendent's Compendium.
    Section 7.70(g)(1)(iv) addresses the Escalante River upstream of 
Coyote Gulch. The proposed rule would prohibit PWC use on Escalante 
River upstream of Coyote Gulch. Implementing this closure to all PWC 
use would strengthen the NPS's intent to maintain areas of quiet and 
solitude on portions of the rivers and to reduce the potential for 
conflict between motorized and non-motorized users, thus enhancing the 
traditional river experience. This limitation will be applied to all 
motorized vessels in the Superintendent's Compendium.
    Section 7.70(g)(1)(v) addresses the Dirty Devil River at the point 
where measurable downstream current is encountered. The operation of 
PWC upstream from where noticeable current is encountered is 
significantly different than operation below this point. The Dirty 
Devil Canyon is very narrow with tight, blind bends, and becomes 
increasingly hazardous upstream because of shallow and murky water, 
floating debris, uncertain currents, and shifting sandbars because of 
the transition from lake to river conditions.
    Section 7.70(g)(2) has two subsections that outline additional wake 
restrictions. To further reduce visitor conflict, enhance visitor 
safety and experience, and protect soundscapes, the proposed rule would 
prohibit operation of PWC above flat wake speed on portions of the 
Dirty Devil and Escalante Rivers. PWC are required to comply with 
existing wake restrictions in the current Superintendent's Compendium 
(36 CFR Sections 1.7(b) and 3.6) that apply to all motorized vessels. 
These include requirements that watercraft operators cannot operate at 
speeds in excess of 5 miles per hour or create a wake when operating 
within harbors, mooring areas, flat wake areas, and other ``no wake'' 
buoyed areas.
    When PWC operate at flat wake speeds many of the impacts they cause 
are greatly reduced. Visitor conflicts are virtually eliminated due to 
their reduced speed and noise. Although at flat wake speed, access may 
still be obtained by PWC users. Flat wake areas were considered to be 
prime access areas that all types of visitors seek out, but also areas 
within a river corridor that supports traditional rafting and river 
experiences.
    Section 7.70(g)(2)(i) addresses the Escalante River from Cow Canyon 
to Coyote Gulch. The 4.4-river-mile stretch of the Escalante River 
between Cow Canyon and the confluence of Coyote Creek would be 
designated as flat wake for PWC. This stretch of the Escalante River is 
a popular float stream and hiking area. In most years, travel upstream 
by PWC from Cow Canyon is precluded by low water levels and 
insufficient stream flow. However, when lake levels are sufficiently 
high, the natural quiet of this area is often disturbed by noise from 
PWC. Limiting PWC use to flat wake speeds upstream from Cow Canyon 
would help maintain a more natural sound quality in this portion of the 
Escalante River and Coyote Gulch area. This limitation will be applied 
to all motorized vessels in the Superintendent's Compendium.
    Section 7.70(g)(2)(ii) addresses the Dirty Devil River upstream 
from the Utah Highway 95 bridge until measurable downstream current is 
encountered. PWC would have to operate at flat wake speed on the Dirty 
Devil River upstream from Utah Highway 95 bridge to the point where 
measurable downstream flow is encountered. Flat wake speed requirements 
would help protect the safety of visitors. The Dirty Devil River is a 
popular destination for fishing, including both trolling and fishing 
from stationary boats. High-speed maneuvering with PWC is inconsistent 
and disruptive to this traditional visitor activity. Visitor conflicts 
would be reduced with flat wake speed of PWC. This limitation will be 
applied to all motorized vessels in the Superintendent's Compendium.
    Section 7.70(g)(3) addresses the temporary limits and restrictions 
on PWC use within areas of the recreation area. The recreation area may 
consider other location restrictions, which would be implemented as 
part of the lake management plan that is discussed in the DEIS in the 
description of Alternative B. To support the decision to implement 
other restrictions, a 3-year pilot study would be conducted. The study 
would examine the effectiveness of location restrictions and other 
management actions in reducing visitor conflicts associated with 
motorized vessels, including PWC, in the recreation area.

History of Public Involvement

    Public meetings were initiated in August 2001 to solicit early 
input into

[[Page 2474]]

the scope and range of issues to be analyzed related to the management 
of PWC within Glen Canyon NRA. A notice of intent to prepare the 
Environmental Impact Statement was published in the Federal Register 
(66 FR 39789) on August 1, 2001. Scoping comments continued to be 
accepted and considered within the planning process. During this 
comment period, the NPS facilitated several hundred discussions and 
briefings to park staff, congressional delegations, elected officials, 
tribal representatives, public service organizations, educational 
institutions, and other interested members of the public.
    Over 3500 letters and e-mail messages concerning PWC use on Lake 
Powell were received. A mailing list of interested parties was compiled 
from attendees at the meetings and from any written comments received 
at the recreation area.
    During this first comment period, Glen Canyon NRA received 503 
individual written letters of concern, 270 petition form letters 
originating from the American Watercraft Association requesting that 
PWC be regulated just as any other type of watercraft and access should 
not be denied, 325 petition postcards originating from the American 
Watercraft Association requesting that Glen Canyon NRA adopt reasonable 
regulations to support continued access by all boaters versus 
implementing discriminatory regulations, and 523 e-mail letters. Lake 
Powell Magazine obtained 533 signatures from boating shows supporting 
continued rights for PWC use on Lake Powell. Glen Canyon NRA received 
over 1100 electronic form letters: 152 titled `Jet Skis at Glen 
Canyon!' supporting the elimination of PWC, 926 titled `End Jet Ski 
Pollution at Glen Canyon' supporting the elimination of PWC on Lake 
Powell and 109 titled `Free Glen Canyon National Recreation Area of Jet 
Skis' also supporting PWC elimination. During the public workshops, 146 
written comments regarding issues, concerns, and alternatives for 
management were received. These comments ranged from the support of the 
continued use of PWC throughout the recreation area (over 80%), to a 
total ban on PWC use, to restrictions in selected areas of the 
recreation area. Issues generated during the comment period included 
visitor safety concerns related to illegal and reckless operation of 
PWC, conflicts among different user groups, educational requirements 
for all boaters, potential resource impacts, and questions concerning 
the impacts of PWC use related to other motorized vessels.
    The Glen Canyon NRA ``Draft Environmental Impact Statement'' was 
made available for public review on September 13, 2002 (67 FR 58071). 
The document is available in hard copy, on computer disk, and on the 
park's Web site at http://www.nps.gov/glca/plan.htm. Public meetings 
were held with the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 
These meetings were held at various locations to discuss the components 
of the document and solicit public response related to all aspects of 
the statement. Public comments on the statement were accepted for 60 
days from the Notice of Availability published in the Federal Register.

Compliance with Other Laws

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    This document is a significant rule and has 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. This determination is based upon the findings in a report 
prepared by the National Park Service entitled ``Economic Analyses of 
Personal Watercraft Regulations in Glen Canyon National Recreation 
Area'' (Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. 2002). The 
focus of this study was to document the potential impact of the 
alternatives listed within the environmental impact statement on a 
variety of small entities including PWC dealerships and repair shops, 
PWC rental business, and other local businesses that provide services 
to PWC users.
    This rule would continue PWC use with restrictions in some narrow 
canyon areas and other management restrictions. Some localized 
ecosystem protection and noise reductions benefits are anticipated. 
However, because the vast majority of Lake Powell, including the most 
popular areas for PWC use, will remain open to PWCs under this rule, 
the NPS anticipates no significant effects on the visiting public or 
local businesses.
    Should this proposed rule not be instituted, PWC use would be 
completely banned under this alternative, affecting the approximately 
40 percent of visitors that use PWCs. The estimated reduction in 
producer surplus (a measure closely related to business profit) in the 
local community would be between $505,000 and $3,076,100 annually. The 
economic effect on the visiting public was not quantified due to 
limited data availability; however, the 40 percent of visitors that 
currently use PWCs would lose all the value they receive from PWC use. 
Beneficiaries of this rule would include the remaining portion of 
visitors that do not use PWCs. Additionally, ``nonusers'' may 
significantly benefit from knowing that resources in the National 
Recreation Area will be better protected into the future.
    Over a ten-year horizon, an annual reduction in producer surplus of 
$505,000 has a present value of $4.3 million when discounted at 3 
percent per year. A 3 percent discount rate is widely recognized in the 
economics literature and Federal rulemakings as an appropriate discount 
rate for valuing natural amenities and other non-market resources and 
services. When discounted at 7 percent per year (OMB Circular A-94), 
the present value of a $505,000 annual reduction in producer surplus 
over ten years is $3.5 million. The present value of an annual loss of 
$3,076,100 in producer is $26.2 million when discounted at 3 percent 
per year, or $21.6 million when discounted at 7 percent per year.
    This analysis clearly indicates that this proposed rule is expected 
to avoid significant losses to local business. However, the net effect 
of this rule on the visiting public and nonusers has not been 
quantitatively determined. This rule would yield a positive net benefit 
if the benefits of not implementing this rule did not exceed the 
avoided business losses of implementing this rule.
    (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 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 raises novel legal or policy issues. This rule is 
among the first of its kind for managing PWC use in National Park 
Units. The National

[[Page 2475]]

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 requirements 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 document 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.). 
Based on a report entitled Economic Analysis of Personal Watercraft 
Regulations in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (Law Engineering 
and Environmental Services, Inc. 2002). The focus of this study was to 
document the impact of this rule on two types of small entities, PWC 
dealerships and PWC rental outlets. This report found that there was no 
potential loss for these types of businesses as a result of this rule 
since PWC use would remain substantially the same as it has been over 
the last several years.

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. The National Park Service 
has completed an economic analysis to make this determination. This 
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 a significant adverse effect 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 imposes no 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

    The National Park Service has analyzed this rule in accordance with 
the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act and has prepared 
a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The draft EIS was made 
available for public review and comment on September 13, 2002 (67 FR 
58071). A copy of the Draft EIS is available by contacting the 
Superintendent, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, or by downloading 
the document at http://www.nps.gov/glca/plan.htm.

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.
    During May 2002, the NPS consulted with tribes in the surrounding 
area in writing and/or in person about the development of this proposed 
rule and the supporting Environmental Impact Statement. Those tribes 
include the Hopi, Navajo, San Juan Southern Paiute, and Kaibab Paiute 
Tribes as well as several tribal historic preservation programs and 
cultural and natural resources divisions of the tribes. None of the 
tribes have expressed concern or dissent with the planning process or 
development of the alternatives for the EIS or this proposed rule. The 
tribes will continue to be consulted as the rulemaking process 
continues.

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.  7.70 Glen Canyon National 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: [email protected].
    Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation were 
Suzy Schulman, Environmental Specialist, and Brian Wright, Outdoor 
Recreation Planner, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
    Public Participation: If you wish to comment, you may submit your 
comments by any one of several methods. You may mail written comments 
to: Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, PWC Rule-Making, Box 1507, 
Page, Arizona 86040. Fax: (928) 608-6259. You may also comment via the 
Internet to [email protected]. Please also include ``PWC Rule'' in the 
subject line and your name and return address in the body of your 
Internet message. Finally, you may hand deliver comments to the Glen 
Canyon NRA Headquarters Building Receptionist at 691 Scenic View Drive, 
Page, Arizona.

[[Page 2476]]

Our practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of 
respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. 
Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address 
from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to the extent allowable 
by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must 
state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we 
will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials or organizations or 
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

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

    In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service 
proposes to amend 36 CFR Part 7 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 7.70 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  7.70  Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.

* * * * *
    (g) Personal watercraft (1) Personal watercraft may operate, 
transit and launch in park water or beach on park land except in the 
areas and under the conditions described as follows:
    (i) On the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and the 
downstream river boundary of Glen Canyon NRA where it adjoins Grand 
Canyon National Park.
    (ii) On the Colorado River upstream of Sheep Canyon.
    (iii) On the San Juan River upstream of Clay Hills Pullout.
    (iv) On the Escalante River upstream of Coyote Gulch.
    (v) On the Dirty Devil River at the point where measurable 
downstream current is encountered.
    (2) Personal Watercraft must travel at flat wake speed:
    (i) On the Escalante River from Cow Canyon to Coyote Gulch.
    (ii) On the Dirty Devil River upstream of the Utah Highway 95 
bridge until measurable downstream current is encountered.
    (3) The Superintendent may temporarily limit, restrict or terminate 
access to the areas designated for PWC use after taking into 
consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource 
protection, and other management activities and objectives.

    Dated: January 10, 2003.
Craig Manson,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 03-1157 Filed 1-16-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P