[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 58 (Thursday, March 25, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15277-15286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-6640]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

RIN 1024-AC98


Chickasaw National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) is proposing to designate 
areas where personal watercraft (PWC) may be used in Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area, Oklahoma. This proposed rule implements the provisions 
of the NPS general regulations authorizing park areas to allow the use 
of PWC by promulgating a special regulation. The 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, 
and overall management objectives.

DATES: Comments must be received by May 24, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rule should be sent to Connie Rudd, 
Acting Superintendent, Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 1008 W. 
Second Street, Sulphur, OK 73086, e-mail: [email protected].
    If you comment by e-mail, please include ``PWC rule'' in the 
subject line and your name and return address in the body of your 
Internet message. Also, you may hand deliver comments to the 
Superintendent, Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 1008 W. Second 
Street, Sulphur, OK.
    For additional information see ``Public Participation'' under 
Supplementary Information below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kym Hall, Special Assistant, National 
Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW., Room 3145, Washington, DC 20240. 
Phone: (202) 208-4206. E-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 15278]]

Background

Additional Alternatives

    The information contained in this proposed rule supports 
implementation of portions of the preferred alternative in the 
Environmental Assessment published March 10, 2003. The public should be 
aware that three other alternatives were presented in the EA, including 
a no-PWC alternative, and those alternatives should also be reviewed 
and considered when making comments on this proposed rule.

Personal Watercraft Regulation

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

Description of Chickasaw National Recreation Area

    Chickasaw National Recreation Area is a part of America's national 
system of parks, monuments, battlefields, recreation areas, and other 
natural and cultural resources. Chickasaw National Recreation Area is 
located in Murray County, near U.S. Highway 177, just south of the town 
of Sulphur, Oklahoma, approximately 90 miles south of Oklahoma City. 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area encompasses 9,888.83 acres of land 
and water and is created by the Arbuckle Dam. The recreation area 
includes many lakes and creeks, with the largest water areas being the 
Lake of the Arbuckles and Veterans Lake.
    Chickasaw National Recreation Area is the first national park in 
the state of Oklahoma. It is also one of the most heavily visited parks 
for its size in the National Park System, with over 3 million total 
visits including 1.5 million visits a year to use the park's 
recreational facilities. Chickasaw remains relatively undeveloped. 
Summer visitors engage in camping, picnicking, hiking, mountain biking, 
horseback riding, hunting, sightseeing, auto touring, nature viewing, 
photography, boating, waterskiing, fishing, and swimming.
    The significance of Chickasaw stems from the following resources 
and values of the park:
     The availability of both mineral and fresh 
water, which come from one of the most complex geological and 
hydrological features in the United States.
     The presence of the cultural landscape of Platt 
Historic District, which reflects the era of 1933-1940 when the 
Civilian Conservation Corp (CCC) implemented NPS ``rustic'' designs.
     The availability of recreational opportunities 
for visitors to experience a wide range of outdoor experiences--
swimming, boating, fishing, hiking, observing nature, hunting, camping, 
biking, horseback riding, family reunions, and picnicking.
     The presence of a transition zone where the 
eastern deciduous forest and the western prairies meet, which is unique 
to the central part of the United States.

Purpose of Chickasaw National Recreation Area

    Chickasaw National Recreation Area was originally established by 
act of Congress as Sulphur Springs Reservation in 1902 near Sulphur, 
Oklahoma. Congress enlarged Sulphur Springs Reservation slightly and 
established it as Platt National Park in 1906. Later, it was combined 
with Lake of the Arbuckles to create the present day Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area.
    The purpose of the park is addressed in the following statements 
that are excerpts from the park's Strategic Plan. The laws establishing 
Chickasaw provided for the National Park Service to:
     Provide for the proper utilization and control 
of springs and waters of its creeks.
     Provide for efficient administration of other 
adjacent areas containing scenic, scientific, natural, and historic 
values.
     Provide public outdoor recreation use and 
enjoyment of Arbuckle Reservoir.
     Permit hunting and fishing in some areas.
    Therefore, the purpose of Chickasaw is the protection of springs 
and waters; the preservation of sites of archaeological or ethnological 
interest; the provision of outdoor recreation; the administration of 
scenic, scientific, natural, and historic values; the memorialization 
of the Chickasaw Indian Nation; and the provision for hunting and 
fishing.

Authority and Jurisdiction

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

PWC Use at Chickasaw National Recreation Area

    Visitation at Chickasaw has remained relatively stable the last 
three years, with an average of 3 million visitors annually, including 
traffic passing through the park on U.S. Highway 177. Approximately 1.5 
million visitors annually use the recreation area's facilities, 
including visitors pursuing recreational activities on the reservoir 
and those engaging in other recreational opportunities. Based on ranger 
observations and contacts, most PWC users are from the immediate 
region; within a radius of about 200 miles are Oklahoma City and the 
Dallas/Fort Worth area, with a population of about 5.5 million.

[[Page 15279]]

    The majority of PWC use occurs primarily from April through 
September, although PWC users may be on the lake year-round. PWC users 
spend an average of four hours on the lake during a daily visit.
    The park began counting PWC in 1996, and through the end of June 
2001 approximately 1,820 PWC had been counted in the park (on a 
cumulative basis), compared to about 7,150 boats. Based on the number 
of annual launch ramp permits issued, PWC use declined from 1997 to 
2000. In addition to annual permits, day use permits are also issued. 
These do not specify the type of boat being used and, based on staff 
observations, the percent of PWC entering the lake is higher for day 
use permits during the warm weather season. On busy summer weekends in 
2001 and 2002, park staff observed between 34 and 94 PWC per day in the 
recreation area.
    According to park records, approximately 59 PWC per day were 
observed during the midweek July 4, 2002, holiday period (Wednesday 
through Friday). Approximately 114 PWC per day were observed on 
Saturday and Sunday during that holiday weekend.
    Lake of the Arbuckles is the only lake in Chickasaw open to PWC 
use; the ``Superintendent's Compendium'' (1.5 and 1.7) has closed all 
lakes of 100 acres or less to PWC use, including Veterans Lake (67 
acres). The central part of the main body of the lake is a high-use 
area for PWC. Four areas of Lake of the Arbuckles are closed to all 
vessels to protect swimmers. Those areas are: the Goddard Youth Camp 
Cove, a 150 foot wide zone around the picnic area at the end of Hwy 110 
(known as ``The Point'') beginning at the buoy line on the north side 
of the picnic area and extending south and east into the cove to the 
east of the picnic area, the cove located directly north of the north 
branch of the F Loop Road, and the Buckhorn Campground D Loop beach 
shoreline. These closures are sometimes violated in the Buckhorn and 
The Point areas when visitors on PWC and boats access picnic sites.
    There are several areas designated as flat wake zones and are 
described as: the Guy Sandy arm upstream (north) of the east/west buoy 
line located near Masters pond, the Guy Sandy Cove (boat launch) west 
of the buoy marking the entrance to the cove, Rock Creek upstream 
(north) of the east/west buoy line at approximately 
034[deg]27[min]50[sec] north latitude, the Buckhorn Ramp bay, east of 
the north/south line drawn from the Buckhorn Ramp Breakwater Dam, a 150 
foot wide zone along the north shore of the Buckhorn Creek arm starting 
at the north end of the Buckhorn Boat Ramp Breakwater Dam and 
continuing southeast to the Buckhorn Campground D Loop Beach, the cove 
south and east of the Buckhorn Campground C and D Loops, the cove 
located east of Buckhorn Campground B Loop and adjacent to Buckhorn 
Campground A Loop, the second cove east of Buckhorn Campground B Loop, 
fed by a creek identified as Dry Branch, and Buckhorn Creek upstream 
(east) of the east/west buoy line located at approximately 
096[deg]59[min]3.50[sec] longitude, know as the G Road Cliffs area.
    Conflicts in visitor use can arise in areas that restrict boats of 
any kind, such as the end of Highway 110 and along the Buckhorn 
Pavilion to the F Loop picnic areas along the lake. These areas attract 
swimmers who may or may not be associated with a boat or PWC, and the 
conflict occurs when these vessels come into the areas to beach, pick 
up passengers, or change operators.
    From 1995 to 2000 there were 20 vessel accidents in the recreation 
area, eight of which involved PWC. Four of the PWC accidents were 
collisions with boats, two were collisions with other PWC, and two 
involved PWC operators falling or being thrown off their vessels. Six 
of the eight accidents resulted in personal injury, and two only in 
property damage. The accidents occurred in the following areas: 
Buckhorn Arm (4), Guy Sandy Arm (2), Point Arm (1), and the central 
lake area (1). From 2001 to present, a total of seven accidents have 
been reported, five boat-only accidents and two PWC-only accidents.

Resource Protection and Public Use Issues

Chickasaw National Recreation Area Environmental Assessment

    As a companion document to this NPRM, NPS has issued the Personal 
Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment for Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was open for public 
review and comment from March 10, 2003, through April 8, 2003. The EA 
has been posted on the NRA's Web site (http://www.nps.gov/chic/CHICPWCEA.pdf). A copy may be requested by calling Susie Staples at 
580-622-3161, extension 1-220, or by writing the Superintendent, 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 1008 W. 2nd Street, Sulphur, OK 
73086.
    The purpose of the environmental assessment was to evaluate a range 
of alternatives and strategies for the management of PWC use at 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area to ensure the protection of park 
resources and values while offering recreational opportunities as 
provided for in the National Recreation Area's enabling legislation, 
purpose, mission, and goals. The analysis assumed alternatives would be 
implemented beginning in 2002 and considered a 10-year period, from 
2002 to 2012.
    The environmental assessment evaluated four alternatives concerning 
the use of PWC at Chickasaw National Recreation Area. Three of the 
alternatives considered in the environmental assessment would permit 
PWC use in the park under certain conditions. Alternative A would 
reestablish the PWC policies that existed prior to November 6, 2002, 
when PWC use was permitted in Chickasaw National Recreation Area under 
the current Superintendent's Compendium (1.5 and 1.7) (Revised October 
23, 2002, http://www.nps.gov/chic/compen02.htm) Alternative B would 
permit PWC use in roughly the same areas as Alternative A with some 
additional restrictions, and monitoring and enforcement policies. 
Alternative C would build on the enforcement and monitoring policies 
and other restrictions in Alternative B, by adding additional area and 
operating restrictions to further limit the use of PWC.
    In addition to these three alternatives for permitting restricted 
PWC use, a no-action alternative was considered that would prohibit all 
PWC use within the National Recreation Area. All four alternatives were 
evaluated with respect to PWC impacts on water quality, air quality, 
soundscapes, wildlife, wildlife habitat, shoreline vegetation, visitor 
conflicts, visitor safety, and cultural resources.
    Based on the analysis, NPS determined that Alternative B is the 
park's preferred alternative. Alternative B best accomplishes the 
objectives of managing PWC use and fulfilling the park's mission 
without restricting lawful use. This document proposes regulations to 
implement portions of Alternative B at Chickasaw National Recreation 
Area.
    The NPS will consider the comments received on this proposal, as 
well as the comments received on the Environmental Assessment. In the 
final rule, the NPS will implement Alternative B, as proposed, or 
choose a different alternative or combination of alternatives. 
Therefore, the public should review and consider the other alternatives 
contained in the Environmental Assessment when

[[Page 15280]]

making comments on this proposed rule.
    The following summarizes the predominant resource protection and 
public use issues associated with PWC use at Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area. Each of these issues is analyzed in the Chickasaw 
National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use Environmental 
Assessment.

Water Quality

    The vast majority of PWC in use today are powered by conventional 
two-stroke, carbureted engines, which discharge as much as 30% of their 
fuel unburned directly into the water. Hydrocarbons, including benzene, 
toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene (BTEX) and polyaromatic hydrocarbons 
(PAHs), are released. These discharges have potential adverse effects 
on water quality.
    PAHs, including those from PWC emissions, adversely affect water 
quality by means of harmful phototoxic effects on ecologically 
sensitive plankton and other small water organisms. This in turn can 
affect aquatic life and ultimately aquatic food chains. The primary 
concern is in shallow water ecosystems.
    Lake of the Arbuckles, located completely within Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area, serves as a potable water supply for the cities of 
Ardmore, Davis, and Wynnewood, as well as the Wynnewood Refining 
Company, through water allocations from the Arbuckle Master Conservancy 
District. Additionally, the city of Dougherty and the Goddard Youth 
Camp contract with the Water Conservancy District for potable water. 
PWC emissions may cause impacts on water quality and subsequent 
concerns from entities using Lake of the Arbuckles as a potable water 
supply.
    Continuing PWC use with the additional management restrictions 
proposed in this NPRM would have negligible adverse impacts on water 
quality in 2002 and 2012 based on all ecotoxicological benchmarks and 
on the human health benchmark for benzo(a)pyrene. PWC impacts on water 
quality from benzene in Lake of Arbuckles would be minor in 2002 and 
2012; impacts in the flat wake zones would be potentially moderate in 
2002, decreasing to minor in 2012. (For an explanation of terms such as 
``negligible'' and ``adverse,'' see page 68 of the Environmental 
Assessment.)
    Cumulative water quality impacts from all boating activity would be 
negligible in 2002 and 2012 except for benzene under the human health 
benchmark. Cumulative impacts from benzene could be potentially major 
in 2002, decreasing to moderate in 2012 as a result of improved engine 
technology. Benzene impacts in Lake of the Arbuckles could be greater 
if a strong thermocline became established, reducing the volume of 
water available for mixing and dilution. Conversely, impacts in the 
flat wake zones could be reduced by the inflow of water from the 
streams feeding the lake. Testing of water quality for benzene in Lake 
of the Arbuckles would be necessary in order for the recreation area to 
confirm the estimates of impacts following a high-use day. Impacts 
would also be reduced by prohibiting refueling of PWC while in the 
water.
    The PWC use being proposed is not expected to result in an 
impairment of the water quality resource.

Air Quality

    PWC emit various compounds that pollute the air. In the two-stroke 
engines commonly used in PWC, the lubricating oil is used once and is 
expelled as part of the exhaust; and the combustion process results in 
emissions of air pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOC), 
nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM), and carbon 
monoxide (CO). PWC also emit fuel components such as benzene that are 
known to cause adverse health effects. Even though PWC engine exhaust 
is usually routed below the waterline, a portion of the exhaust gases 
go into the air. These air pollutants may adversely impact park visitor 
and employee health, as well as sensitive park resources.
    For example, in the presence of sunlight VOC and NOX 
emissions combine to form ozone. Ozone causes respiratory problems in 
humans, including cough, airway irritation, and chest pain during 
inhalation. Ozone is also toxic to sensitive species of vegetation. It 
causes visible foliar injury, decreases plant growth, and increases 
plant susceptibility to insects and disease. Carbon monoxide can affect 
humans as well. It interferes with the oxygen carrying capacity of 
blood, resulting in lack of oxygen to tissues. NOX and PM 
emissions associated with PWC use can also degrade visibility. 
NOX can also contribute to acid deposition effects on 
plants, water, and soil. However, because emission estimates show that 
NOX from PWC are minimal (less than 5 tons per year), acid 
deposition effects attributable to PWC use are expected to be minimal.
    Continuing PWC use at Chickasaw as proposed would result in a 
moderate adverse impact from CO, a minor adverse impact from VOC, and 
negligible adverse impact from PM10 and NOX in 
2002. In 2012 the impact level for CO would remain moderate adverse, 
and VOC, PM10, and NOX impacts would be 
negligible. Extending the flat wake zone in the area of the Buckhorn 
development area would reduce the emissions of all pollutants except 
NOX in comparison to the PWC use under the Superintendent's 
Compendium (1.5 and 1.7) which has less flat wake restrictions.
    Cumulative emissions levels for CO would be moderate adverse in 
both 2002 and 2012. Impact for VOC would decrease from moderate in 2002 
to minor in 2012, while impacts for PM10 and NOX 
would be negligible. This proposed rule would maintain existing air 
quality conditions, with future reductions in PM10, HC, and 
VOC emissions due to improved emission controls.
    The PWC use being proposed would not result in an impairment of air 
quality.

Soundscapes Values

    The primary soundscape issue relative to PWC use is that other 
visitors may perceive the sound made by PWC as an intrusion or 
nuisance, thereby disrupting their experiences. This disruption is 
generally short term because PWC travel along the shore to outlying 
areas. However, as PWC use increases and concentrates at beach areas, 
related noise becomes more of an issue, particularly during certain 
times of the day. Additionally, visitor sensitivity to PWC noise varies 
from anglers (more sensitive) to swimmers at popular beaches (less 
sensitive).
    The biggest difference between noise from PWC and that from 
motorboats is that the former frequently leave the water, which 
magnifies noise in two ways. Without the muffling effect of water, the 
engine noise is typically 15 dBA louder and the smacking of the craft 
against the water surface results in a loud ``whoop'' or series of 
them. With the rapid maneuvering and frequent speed changes, the 
impeller has no constant ``throughput'' and no consistent load on the 
engine. Consequently, the engine speed rises and falls, resulting in a 
variable pitch. This constantly changing noise is often perceived as 
more disturbing than the constant noise from motorboats.
    Under the proposed rule, PWC noise would continue to have minor to 
moderate, temporary, adverse impacts over the short and long term at 
most locations on Lake of the Arbuckles and the immediate surrounding 
area. Impact levels would be related to the number of PWC operating, as 
well as the

[[Page 15281]]

sensitivities of the other visitors. Expanding the flat wake zone 
around Buckhorn developed area would have a beneficial effect, although 
it would not change overall impact types of threshold levels. Over the 
long term PWC noise levels would be reduced with the introduction of 
newer engine technologies.
    Cumulative noise impacts from PWC, motorboats, and other visitors 
would be minor to moderate because these sounds would be heard 
occasionally throughout the day, and they could predominate on busy 
days during the high-use season.
    The PWC use being proposed would not result in an impairment of the 
park's soundscape.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

    PWC use affects wildlife by interrupting normal activities, causing 
alarm or flight, causing animals to avoid habitat, displacing habitat, 
and affecting reproductive success. This is thought to be caused by PWC 
speed, noise, and access to sensitive areas, especially in shallow 
water. Waterfowl and nesting birds are the most vulnerable to PWC. 
Fleeing a disturbance created by a PWC user may force birds to abandon 
eggs during crucial embryo development stages, prevent nest defense 
from predators, and contribute to stress and associated behavior 
changes. Impacts on sensitive species, such as the bald eagle, are 
documented below under ``Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern 
Species.''
    At Chickasaw, wildlife typically stay near the shoreline due to 
habitat constraints, with some species present on the water surface 200 
feet (or more) from shore. No cases of PWC operators deliberately 
harassing or chasing birds or other wildlife on the Lake of the 
Arbuckles have been documented, nor have collisions with waterfowl or 
wildlife. Additionally, bird breeding season occurs in the early spring 
when few PWC are present. Most mammals are either transient visitors 
from inland parts or the recreation area or are already acclimated to 
human intrusion. Aquatic mammals such as beaver are mobile and avoid 
nose and disturbance associated with PWC use. Their breeding areas are 
typically backwater areas not frequented by PWC.
    With respect to effects on wildlife, PWC use under this proposed 
rule would have a similar impact as PWC use under the current 
requirements and under the Superintendent's Compendium (1.5 and 1.7). 
PWC use would have negligible to minor, temporary, adverse effects on 
wildlife and wildlife habitat. Continued use of PWC at Chickasaw would 
have negligible to no adverse effects on fish, and negligible to minor 
impacts on waterfowl and other wildlife.
    Cumulative impacts on wildlife from all visitor activities would be 
negligible to minor.
    This proposed rule would not result in an impairment of wildlife or 
wildlife habitat.

Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species

    PWC use could potentially affect special status species similar to 
other wildlife by inducing flight and alarm responses, disrupting 
normal behaviors and causing stress, degrading habitat quality, and 
potentially affecting reproductive success.
    The animal species at Chickasaw that have the potential to be 
affected by proposed PWC regulation include the federally listed bald 
eagle (threatened), whooping crane (endangered) and interior least tern 
(endangered). The two rare species, not legally protected under the 
Endangered Species Act, include the alligator snapping turtle and the 
Oklahoma cave amphipod. No Federal or State listed plant species are 
known to occur in Chickasaw.
    The Bald Eagle, Interior Least Tern, and Whooping Crane are 
primarily winter residents at Chickasaw, although whooping cranes were 
sighted over Lake of the Arbuckles in October 2002 (NPS 2002c). There 
is no documented evidence of breeding or nesting by these species in 
Chickasaw. Off-season PWC use would have negligible or minor effects on 
the birds occasionally feeding in the area. The alligator snapping 
turtle could be exposed to PWC use along the shoreline during the 
nesting season; however, the turtles are only likely to occur within 
the flat wake zones which would minimize adverse effects because of 
reduced vessel speed in those zones. There would be no direct impact to 
the amphipod, which may occur in the caves along the shoreline, since 
PWC could not access those waters since the caves are too small.
    PWC use under the proposed rule may affect, but is not likely to 
adversely affect, any listed wildlife or plant species at Chickasaw. 
While some disturbances could occur to transient wildlife species from 
off-season PWC use, the impacts would not be of sufficient duration or 
intensity to cause adverse impacts. No impacts would occur in areas 
where PWC use would be prohibited.
    Cumulative impacts from all park visitor activities are not likely 
to adversely affect listed species. Listed wildlife species are only 
transient winter residents, and any impacts on individual plants would 
not jeopardize species populations within the park.
    No impairment to any listed species would occur under this proposed 
rule.

Shorelines and Shoreline Vegetation

    PWC provide access to the shoreline, and operators may disembark to 
explore or sunbathe. As a result, shoreline vegetation could be 
trampled in order to access shoreline trails or to explore along the 
shore. PWC users are able to access areas where most other motorcraft 
cannot go, which may disturb sensitive plant species such as water 
willow and a variety of water grasses. In addition, wakes created by 
PWC may affect shorelines and cause erosion.
    The increased flat wake zone around the Buckhorn developed area 
would reduce impacts on shoreline vegetation in that area. In all other 
areas of the lake, PWC use and impacts under the proposed rule would be 
the same as those under previous use conditions. Overall, PWC use would 
result in a negligible to minor, localized, adverse impact on shoreline 
vegetation over the short and long term, with no perceptible changes in 
plant community size, integrity, or continuity.
    Therefore, under the proposed rule, PWC use would have negligible 
to minor, localized, adverse impacts on sensitive shoreline vegetation 
over the short and long term, with no perceptible changes in plant 
community size, integrity, or continuity. The proposed PWC use 
restrictions would not result in an impairment of shoreline vegetation.

Visitor Experience

    PWC use is viewed by some segments of the public as a nuisance due 
to the noise, speed, and overall environmental effects of PWCs, while 
others believe that PWC are no different from other motorized vessels 
and that people have a right to enjoy the sport. The primary concern 
involves changes in noise, pitch, and volume due to the way PWC are 
operated. Additionally, the sound of any watercraft can carry for long 
distances, especially on a calm day.
    To determine impacts, the level of PWC use was calculated for areas 
of the national recreation area. Other recreational activities and 
visitor experiences that are proposed in these locations were also 
identified. Visitor surveys and staff observations were evaluated to 
determine visitor attitudes and satisfaction in areas where PWC are 
used. Baseline visitor survey data at Chickasaw suggest that the vast 
majority of visitors are satisfied with their current and past 
experiences.

[[Page 15282]]

    Impacts on PWC Users. Other than the increased flat wake zone 
around the Buckhorn developed area, no additional areas would be closed 
to PWC use except on an as-needed basis, such as seasonal or permanent 
closures to protect threatened or endangered species and/or sensitive 
park resources. Fueling personal watercraft away from the water surface 
would possibly result in a minor inconvenience. Management restrictions 
under this proposed rule would result in minor to moderate adverse 
impacts on visitors who use PWC at Chickasaw.
    Impacts on Other Boaters. Impacts on other boaters would be very 
similar to those previously experienced, because restrictions under the 
proposed rule would be specific only to PWC operators and would not 
affect areas or hours of operation or the number of users permitted on 
the lake. There could be fewer PWC users on the lake, and this would 
reduce conflicts with boaters. Impacts on other boaters would continue 
to be negligible to minor, long term, and adverse.
    Impacts on Other Visitors. Impacts on other shoreline users would 
be similar to those previously experienced. Other visitors, 
particularly swimmers, may notice a slight beneficial impact due to the 
extended flat wake zone around the Buckhorn developed area and PWC 
operators refueling their watercraft in areas away from the shoreline. 
Impacts on other visitors would continue to have negligible to minor 
adverse impacts on the experiences of these shoreline visitors.

Visitor Conflicts and Safety

    The National Transportation Safety Board reported that in 1996 PWC 
represented 7.5% of all state-registered recreational boats, but were 
involved in 36% of all boating accidents. In the same year, PWC 
operators accounted for more than 41% of people injured in boating 
accidents. PWC operators accounted for approximately 85% of the persons 
injured in accidents studied in 1997.
    In part, this is believed to be a boater education issue (e.g., 
inexperienced operators lose control of the craft), but it also is a 
function of the PWC operation (e.g., no brakes or clutch; when drivers 
let up on the throttle to avoid a collision, steering becomes 
difficult).
    Newer models will reportedly have improved safety devices such as 
better steering and braking systems, however, it will take time to 
infuse the market with these types of newer machines.
    Under the proposed rule, there would be the following impacts on 
swimmers and other boaters:
    PWC User / Swimmer Conflicts. Impacts would be similar to the 
previous situation, since the number of PWC operating within the 
recreation area probably would not change. Extending the flat wake zone 
around the Buckhorn developed area, along with continued PWC use, would 
result in a negligible change in visitor experiences or conflicts with 
swimmers. However, continued violations of the flat wake zone and an 
expected increase of 1% per year in PWC use at congested locations, 
particularly boat launches near popular swim areas, could affect 
swimmers in the long term. Swimmers would benefit from PWC operators 
having to fuel their watercraft away from the water surface since it is 
likely that less raw fuel would be present in the water. Based on this 
analysis, PWC activity at Lake of the Arbuckles would have minor 
adverse impacts on the experiences of swimmers. Swimmers at other 
Chickasaw locations would continue to experience negligible adverse 
impacts because of the lower level of PWC use in other areas in 
Chickasaw.
    PWC User/Other Boater Conflicts. Impacts would be similar to the 
previous situation. Overall, PWC use would continue to have minor to 
moderate adverse impacts on other motorized boat users at Chickasaw. 
Impacts would be concentrated at localized areas, primarily launches at 
The Point, Buckhorn, and Guy Sandy.

Cultural Resources

    The National Park Service has a responsibility to consider the 
impact its actions have on cultural resources (archeological and 
ethnographic) in the park system. Chickasaw has cultural resources 
potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic 
Places near Lake of the Arbuckles. These known sites may indicate the 
presence of other, unknown sites along the shores of the lake. 
Shoreline erosion and uncontrolled visitor access may affect these 
resources since riders are able to access / beach / launch in areas 
less accessible to most motorized vessels. Archeological sites may 
exist on the shoreline and under water. Erosion could cause problems 
with sites protected under the Native American Graves Protection and 
Repatriation Act.
    Native American resources or use areas may be affected by erosion 
along shorelines, or by uncontrolled visitor access since riders are 
able to access / beach / launch in areas less accessible to most 
motorized vessels.
    Potential impacts on archaeological and submerged cultural 
resources directly attributable to unrestricted PWC use are difficult 
to quantify. The most likely impact on archaeological and submerged 
cultural sites would result from PWC users landing in areas otherwise 
inaccessible to most other national recreation area visitors and 
illegally collecting or damaging artifacts. According to park staff, 
looting and vandalism of cultural resources is not a substantial 
problem. A direct causal relationship between impacts and PWC use is 
difficult to identify, since many of these areas are also accessible to 
backcountry hikers or other watercraft users.
    Continuing PWC use under a special regulation with additional 
prescriptions is not expected to adversely affect the overall condition 
of cultural resources because project-by-project inventories and 
mitigation would still be conducted. This proposed rule would not 
result in an impairment of cultural resources.
    Appropriate Native American tribes were contacted and no concerns 
have been expressed regarding PWC use at Lake of the Arbuckles. The 
following tribes were contacted; Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Caddo Tribal 
Council, The Chickasaw Nation, The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Comanche 
Tribal Business Committee, The Pawnee Business Council, The Wichita 
Executive Committee. None of the tribes had any comments on the 
proposed action. In addition, the Oklahoma Archeological Survey was 
contacted. There comment was that they had no objections to the 
project. An ethnographic study of the Platt District has been initiated 
and that portion of the national recreation area is a significant 
ethnographic resource. However, it would appear that the activity areas 
in the Platt District are far enough from the lake so as not to be 
influenced by PWC use. A specific survey for ethnographic resources in 
the Lake of the Arbuckles District has not been undertaken, but no 
specific concerns about this area have been expressed.
    The proposed rule would not impact any known ethnographic resources 
or traditional use areas along the shoreline of Lake of the Arbuckles. 
No cumulative impacts on ethnographic resources have been identified 
and the proposed rule would not impair ethnographic resources.

The Proposed Rule

    As established by the April 2000 National Park Service rule (36 CFR 
3.24), PWC use is prohibited in all National Park System areas unless

[[Page 15283]]

determined appropriate. The process used to identify appropriate PWC 
use at Chickasaw National Recreation Area considered the known and 
potential effects of PWC on park natural resources, traditional uses, 
public health and safety. The proposed rule is designed to manage PWC 
use within the National Recreation Area in a manner that achieves the 
legislated purposes for which the park was established while providing 
reasonable access to the park by PWC.
    NPS proposes to continue PWC use at Chickasaw National Recreation 
Area under a special regulation in Sec.  7.50(b) with additional 
management restrictions. The following provisions are included in the 
proposed rule and would remain the same as those previously enforced in 
the Superintendent's Compendium (36 CFR 1.5 and 1.7): prohibited launch 
areas and safety/operating restrictions.
    The following Oklahoma State regulations would also apply and be 
enforced pursuant to 36 CFR 3.1:
     12-year-old and younger PWC operators must be 
accompanied by an adult.
     PWC may not be operated within 50 feet of 
another vessel while traveling at 10 mph or faster.
     Use of a manufacturer installed cutoff switch is 
required.
     Towing a water-skier is prohibited unless a 
cutoff switch is installed.
     PWC must have an observer in addition to the 
operator.
     PWC are not allowed to operate from sunset to 
sunrise.
     PFD are mandatory for all PWC riders.
    Under this proposed rule the following additional PWC restrictions 
would be enforced:
     The fueling of PWC would be prohibited on the 
water surface. The proposed rule required that fueling be allowed only 
while the PWC is on a trailer and away from the water surface.
     Flat wake zones would be established around the 
Buckhorn developed area and would extend from the existing launch ramp 
cove to the Buckhorn C Loop Cove in a 150-foot buffer along the 
shoreline and in the Buckhorn Ramp bay, east of the north/south line 
drawn from the Buckhorn Ramp Breakwater Dam. Several other flat wake 
areas would also be established around developed areas throughout the 
Lake including the Guy Sandy arm near Masters Pond, the Guy Sandy Cove 
and Rock Creek.
     Four exclusion areas would also be established 
in Goddard Youth Camp Cove, near The Point, the cove north of the north 
branch of F Loop Road and the shoreline around Buckhorn Campground D 
Loop. The exclusion areas are popular swimming areas and these closures 
will improve visitor safety.

Economic Summary

    Alternative A would permit PWC use as previously managed within the 
park before the ban, while Alternatives B and C would permit PWC use 
with additional requirements. Alternative B is the preferred 
alternative, and includes monitoring and closures to protect park 
resources, state boater registration requirements, no-wake zones, and 
restrictions on fueling and operator age. In addition to those 
requirements, Alternative C also includes an education requirement and 
restrictions on the number of permits issued, time and area of 
operation, and emissions. Alternative D is the no-action alternative 
and represents the baseline conditions for this economic analysis. 
Under that alternative, all PWC use would remain prohibited from the 
park. All benefits and costs associated with Alternatives A, B, and C 
are measured relative to that baseline.
    The primary beneficiaries of Alternatives A, B, and C would be the 
park visitors who use PWCs and the businesses that serve them such as 
rental shops, gas stations, restaurants, and hotels. Over a ten-year 
horizon from 2003 to 2012, the present value of benefits to PWC users 
is expected to range between $5,399,420 and $8,222,440, depending on 
the alternative analyzed and the discount rate used. The present value 
of benefits to businesses over the same timeframe is expected to range 
between $25,560 and $368,570. These benefit estimates are presented in 
Table 1. The amortized values per year of these benefits over the ten-
year timeframe are presented in Table 2.

   Table 1.--Present Value of Benefits for PWC Use in Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 2003-2012 (2001 $) a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PWC Users         Businesses                        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative A:
    Discounted at 3% b............      $8,222,440  $48,270 to $368,570.  $8,270,710 to $8,591,010.
    Discounted at 7% b............       6,749,250  39,620 to 302,540...  6,788,870 to 7,051,790.
Alternative B:
    Discounted at 3% b............       7,400,220  41,480 to 308,410...  7,441,700 to 7,708,630.
    Discounted at 7% b............       6,074,340  34,050 to 253,150...  6,108,390 to 6,327,490.
Alternative C:
    Discounted at 3% b............       6,577,970  31,150 to 208,490...  6,609,120 to 6,786,460.
    Discounted at 7% b............       5,399,420  25,560 to 171,140...  5,424,980 to 5,570,560.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Benefits were rounded to the nearest ten dollars, and may not sum to the indicated totals due to independent
  rounding.
b Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 recommends a 7% discount rate in general, and a 3% discount rate
  when analyzing impacts to private consumption.


  Table 2.--Amortized Total Benefits per Year for PWC Use in Chickasaw
              National Recreation Area, 2003-2012 (2001 $)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Amortized total benefits per year a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative A:
    Discounted at 3% b.............  $969,580 to $1,007,128.
    Discounted at 7% b.............  966,582 to 1,004,016.
Alternative B:
    Discounted at 3% b.............  872,394 to 903,687.
    Discounted at 7% b.............  869,697 to 900,892.

[[Page 15284]]

 
Alternative C:
    Discounted at 3% b.............  774,790 to 795,580.
    Discounted at 7% b.............  772,395 to 793,122.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a This is the present value of total benefits reported in Table 1
  amortized over the ten-year analysis timeframe at the indicated
  discount rate.
b Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 recommends a 7% discount
  rate in general, and a 3% discount rate when analyzing impacts to
  private consumption.

    The primary group that would incur costs under Alternatives A, B, 
and C would be the park visitors who do not use PWCs and whose park 
experiences would be negatively affected by PWC use within the park. At 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area, non-PWC uses include boating, 
canoeing, fishing, and hiking. Additionally, the public could incur 
costs associated with impacts to aesthetics, ecosystem protection, 
human health and safety, congestion, nonuse values, and enforcement. 
However, these costs could not be quantified because of a lack of 
available data.
    Because the costs of Alternatives A, B, and C could not be 
quantified, the net benefits associated with those alternatives 
(benefits minus costs) also could not be quantified. However, the 
magnitude of costs associated with PWC use would likely be greatest 
under Alternative A, and lower for Alternatives B and C, respectively, 
due to increasingly stringent restrictions on PWC use.
    From an economic perspective, the selection of Alternative B as the 
preferred alternative was considered reasonable even though the 
quantified benefits are smaller than under Alternative A. That is 
because the costs associated with non-PWC use, aesthetics, ecosystem 
protection, human health and safety, congestion, and nonuse values 
would likely be greater under Alternative A than under Alternative B. 
Quantification of those costs could reasonably result in Alternative B 
having the greatest level of net benefits.

Compliance With Other Laws

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    This document is not a significant rule and has not been reviewed 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
    (1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on 
the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities.
    The National Park Service has completed the report ``Economic 
Analysis of Management Alternatives for Personal Watercraft in 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area'' (MACTEC Engineering) dated June 
2003. The report found that this proposed rule will not have a negative 
economic impact. In fact this rule, which will not impact local PWC 
dealerships and rental shops, may have an overall positive impact on 
the local economy. This positive impact on the local economy is a 
result of an increase of other users, most notably canoeists, swimmers, 
anglers and traditional boaters seeking solitude and quiet, and 
improved water quality.
    (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 does not raise novel policy issues. This regulation 
is one of the special regulations being issued for managing PWC use in 
National Park Units. The National Park Service published the 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 but no significant changes to use are proposed in 
this rule.

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.). 
This certification is based upon the finding in a report prepared by 
the National Park Service entitled, ``Economic Analysis of Management 
Alternatives for Personal Watercraft in Chickasaw National Recreation 
Area'' (MACTEC Engineering) dated June 2003. 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 the 
potential loss for these types of businesses as a result of this rule 
would be minimal to none.

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 significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per 
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector.
    This rule is an agency specific rule and imposes no other 
requirements on other agencies, governments, or the private sector.

[[Page 15285]]

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have 
significant taking implications. A taking implication assessment is not 
required. No takings 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 
and only allows use within a small portion 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 
an Environmental Assessment (EA). The EA was open for public review and 
comment from March 10, 2003, through April 8, 2003. The EA has been 
posted on the NPS Web site (http://www.nps.gov/chic/CHICPWCEA.pdf). A 
copy may be requested by calling Susie Staples at 580-622-3161, 
extension 1-220, or by writing the Superintendent, Chickasaw National 
Recreation Area, 1008 W. 2nd Street, Sulphur, OK 73086.

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. The following tribes were contacted; 
Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Caddo Tribal Council, The Chickasaw Nation, 
The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Comanche Tribal Business Committee, The 
Pawnee Business Council, The Wichita Executive Committee. None of the 
tribes had any comments on the proposed action.

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.  7.50 Chickasaw 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. 
E-mail: [email protected].

Drafting Information

    The primary authors of this regulation are: Sarah Bransom, 
Environmental Quality Division, Denver; Kym Hall, Special Assistant, 
Washington, DC; and Steven P. Burrough, Natural Resource Program 
Manager and Mark Foust, Chief Ranger, Chickasaw NRA.

Public Participation

    If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments by any one of 
several methods. You may mail written comments to: Superintendent, 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 1008 W. Second Street, Sulphur, OK 
73086, comment by electronic mail to: [email protected], or comment by 
Fax at: 580-622-2296. 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 Superintendent, 
Chickasaw National Recreation Area, 1008 W. Second Street, Sulphur, OK.
    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.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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. Add new paragraph (b) to Sec.  7.50 to read as follows:


Sec.  7.50  Chickasaw Recreation Area.

* * * * *
    (b) Personal watercraft (PWC).
    (1) PWC may operate on Lake of the Arbuckles except in the 
following closed areas:
    (i) The Goddard Youth Camp Cove.
    (ii) A 150 foot wide zone around the picnic area at the end of 
Highway 110 known as ``The Point'', beginning at the buoy line on the 
north side of the picnic area and extending south and east into the 
cove to the east of the picnic area.
    (iii) The cove located directly north of the north branch of F Loop 
Road.
    (iv) A 150 foot wide zone around the Buckhorn Campground D Loop 
shoreline.
    (2) PWC may not be operated at greater than flat wake speed in the 
following locations:
    (i) The Guy Sandy arm north of the east/west buoy line located near 
Masters Pond.
    (ii) The Guy Sandy Cove west of the buoy marking the entrance to 
the cove.
    (iii) Rock Creek north of the east/west buoy line at approximately 
034[deg]27'50''North Latitude.
    (iv) The Buckhorn Ramp bay, east of the north south line drawn from 
the Buckhorn Ramp breakwater Dam.

[[Page 15286]]

    (v) A 150 foot wide zone along the north shore of the Buckhorn 
Creek arm starting at the north end of the Buckhorn Boat Ramp 
Breakwater Dam and continuing southeast to the Buckhorn Campground D 
Loop beach.
    (vi) The cove south and east of Buckhorn Campground C and D Loops.
    (vii) The cove located east of Buckhorn Campground B Loop and 
adjacent to Buckhorn Campground A Loop.
    (viii) The second cove east of Buckhorn Campground B Loop, fed by a 
creek identified as Dry Branch.
    (ix) Buckhorn Creek east of the east/west buoy line located at 
approximately 096[deg]59'3.50'' Longitude, known as the G Road Cliffs 
area.
    (x) Within 150 feet of all persons, docks, boat launch ramps, boats 
at anchor, boats from which people are fishing, and shoreline areas 
near campgrounds.
    (3) PWC may only be launched from the following boat ramps:
    (i) Buckhorn boat ramp.
    (ii) The Point boat ramp.
    (iii) Guy Sandy boat ramp.
    (iv) Upper Guy Sandy boat ramp.
    (4) The fueling of PWC is prohibited on the water surface. Fueling 
is allowed only while the PWC is away from the water surface and on a 
trailer.
    (5) 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: March 11, 2004.
Paul Hoffman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 04-6640 Filed 3-24-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-2H-P