Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Proposed Rules 32383

will end after all persons scheduled to

speak and persons present in the

audience who wish to speak have been

heard.

Any disabled individual who has

need for a special accommodation to

attend a public hearing should contact

the individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

Public Meeting

If only one person requests an

opportunity to speak at a hearing, a

public meeting, rather than a public

hearing, may be held. Persons wishing

to meet with OSM representatives to

discuss the proposed amendment may

request a meeting by contacting the

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings

will be open to the public and, if

possible, notices of meetings will be

posted at the locations listed under

ADDRESSES. A written summary of each

meeting will be made a part of the

Administrative Record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review).

Executive Order 12778

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 2 of Executive Order 12778

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that, to the extent allowed

by law, this rule meets the applicable

standards of subsections (a) and (b) of

that section. However, these standards

are not applicable to the actual language

of State regulatory programs and

program amendments since each such

program is drafted and promulgated by

a specific State, not by OSM. Under

sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30

U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))

provides that agency decisions on

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal

which is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any government entity or the private

sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 935

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: June 12, 1996.

Claude L. Downing,

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 96–16008 Filed 6–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 3

RIN 1024–AC46

National Park Service; Boating and

Water Use Activities, Prohibited

Operations

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The National Park Service

(NPS) is proposing to amend its boating

regulations to include the authority to

regulate the access to NPS waters of

individuals and vessels that have

recently operated in waters infested

with injurious non-indigenous aquatic

plant and animal species. The purpose

of the proposed rule is to protect park

aquatic natural resources and

supporting built infrastructure. This

proposed rule includes criteria for

decontamination of vessels and

equipment to allow access to park

waters. In addition, these rules identify

how vessels may be allowed to operate

under a permit system outlined in the

general regulations. These rules will

allow the NPS to regulate individual

and vessel access to park waters to

prevent the accidental introduction of

injurious exotic aquatic nuisance

species into park waters.

The NPS will use lists developed by

other Federal agencies like the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service and various State

departments of natural resources to

identify targeted prohibited species. The

NPS may, however, develop its own

lists based upon sound scientific

research. Any species identified by the

NPS will be listed and identified

through the public notice process.

Various States have active aquatic exotic

species prevention programs and

regularly identify and mark infested

bodies of water. The NPS will, through

its Resource Education programs, ensure

that all park users are informed and

warned about targeted species and the

proper way to control their spread by

decontaminating their vessels and

associated gear. This proposed rule will

bring the NPS into conformity with

programs currently in place in several

states.

DATES: Written comments will be

accepted through August 23, 1996.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be

addressed to: Superintendent, Great

Lakes Systems Support Office, Midwest

Field Area, National Park Service, 1709

Jackson Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68102.

Attention: John Townsend.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Townsend at the above address or by

calling 402–221–3475.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The NPS is granted broad statutory

authority under 16 U.S.C. Section 1 et

seq. (National Park Service Organic Act)

and 16 U.S.C. Sections 1a–2(h) to

‘‘* * * regulate the use of the Federal

areas known as national parks,

monuments, and reservations * * * by

such means and measures as conform to

the fundamental purpose of the said

parks * * * which purpose is to

conserve the scenery and the natural

and historic objects and the wildlife

therein * * *’’.
32384 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Proposed Rules

The National Park Service

Management Policies (1988) provide

overall direction in implementing the

intent of this Congressional mandate

and other applicable Federal legislation.

The policy of the NPS regarding

protection and management of natural

resources is ‘‘The National Park Service

will manage the natural resources of the

national park system to maintain,

rehabilitate, and perpetuate their

inherent integrity’’ (Chapter 4:1). Where

conflict arises between human use and

resource protection, where the NPS has

a ‘‘reasonable basis to believe a resource

is or would become impaired, the Park

Service may, * * * otherwise place

limitations on public use’’ (Chapter 1:3). The integrity and quality of many

national park waters and aquatic

ecosystems, and dependent economic

values and infrastructure, are threatened

by the introduction of a variety of

injurious non-indigenous aquatic

species, both flora and fauna. These

exotic aquatic animals and plants cause

irreparable harm to the core values and

resources for which the National Park

System was created and can impose

costly economic impacts on businesses

and government entities through loss of

production time and detection,

mitigation, remediation and control

activities. It is estimated that six of the

over 150 known exotic aquatic species

found within United States waters have

alone caused over $1.5 billion in

damages since 1906 (U.S. Congress,

Office of Technology Assessment). One such example is the exotic zebra

mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). The

zebra mussel is a small, fresh water,

filter feeding mollusk that attaches itself

to any hard surface, human-made or

natural. This species was accidently

introduced into North American waters

in 1986 and has since spread throughout

the Great Lakes and into the major

eastern and Midwestern river systems.

The ecological and economic impacts of

zebra mussels have been extensive.

These include effects to other organism,

water quality, water clarity, and

disruption of native aquatic

communities and impacts to

navigational devices, municipal water

systems, sewage treatment plants, utility

power plants, marinas and recreational

and commercial vessel owners.

The primary vector in the spread of

the zebra mussel, like most aquatic

exotic species, is by in-water or trailered

vessel transport from infested to

unifested waters. During the summer of

1995 zebra mussels were found on

trailered vessels as far west as

California. There is evidence that

contaminated wet suits are also a vector

for accidental introduction. There is no

evidence that transport by naturals such

as birds or aquatic wildlife has led to

the establishment of viable zebra mussel

populations. Additionally, on November 29, 1990,

Congress passed the ‘‘Nonindigenous

Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and

Control Act of 1990’’ (16 U.S.C. 4701) to

do just what this regulation proposes—

to prevent introductions or control

infestations of injurious non-indigenous

aquatic nuisance species. This proposed rule will allow the NPS

to regulate individual and vessel access

to park waters to prevent or minimize

the risk of unintentional introduction of

injurious non-indigenous aquatic

species into park waters. Minimizing

such risks is particularly important

since once introduced and established,

many exotic species are extremely

costly and nearly impossible to

eliminate. This proposed rule also

prohibits the transportation,

introduction or attempted introduction

of injurious non-indigenous aquatic

species into park waters.

Public Participation

It is the policy of the Department of

the Interior, whenever practicable, to

afford the public an opportunity to

participate in the rulemaking process.

Accordingly, interested persons may

submit written comments regarding this

proposed rule to the address noted at

the beginning of this rulemaking. The

NPS will review all comments and

consider making changes to the rule

based upon analysis of the comments.

Drafting Information: The primary

authors of this proposed rule are James

A. Loach, Superintendent, Great Lakes

System Support Office, Midwest Field

Area Office; Brian R. Adams, Chief

Ranger, St. Croix National Scenic

Riverway; and Dennis Burnett,

Washington Office of Ranger Activities,

National Park Service.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule does not contain

collections of information requiring

approval by the Office of Management

and Budget under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995.

Compliance With Other Laws

This rule was not subject to Office of

Management and Budget review under

Executive Order 12866. The Department

of the Interior has determined 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.). To

the contrary, this rulemaking will lessen

the possible economic impacts to

businesses and industry should exotics

like the zebra mussel become

established in NPS waterways.

In fact, the NPS and other entities will

incur substantially increased costs over

time as a result of monitoring,

mitigation, remediation and control

activities if these rules are not

implemented. These rules seek to

prevent a growing problem by moving

away from a reliance on both short and

longer term, costly, and often

environmentally unsound, control

methods. Prevention appears to be the

only cost effective approach. There is

also the prospect that these regulations

may have a positive secondary effect on

local businesses and small entities

providing cleaning and

decontamination services to the public.

The NPS has determined that this

rulemaking will not have a significant

effect on the quality of the human

environment, health and safety because

it is not expected to:

(a) Increase public use to the extent of

compromising the nature and character

of the area or causing physical damage

to it;

(b) Introduce non-compatible uses

that may compromise the nature and

characteristic of the area, or cause

physical damage to it;

(c) Conflict with adjacent ownerships

or land uses; or

(d) Cause a nuisance to adjacent land

owners or occupants.

Based on this determination, the

regulation is categorically excluded

from the procedural requirements of the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) by Departmental guidelines in

516 DM 6 (49 FR 21438). As such,

neither an Environmental Assessment

(EA) nor an Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 3

National parks, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing, it is

proposed to amend 36 CFR Chapter I as

follows:

PART 3—BOATING AND WATER USE

ACTIVITIES

1. The authority citation for Part 3

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 1a-2(h), 3.

2. Section 3.6 is amended by adding

paragraphs (m) through (o) to read as

follows:

§ 3.6 Prohibited operations.

* * * * *

(m) Entering by vessel, launching a

vessel, operating a vessel, or knowingly

allowing another person to enter, launch

or operate a vessel, or attempting to do

any of these activities, in NPS waters,

when that vessel or the trailer or the
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Proposed Rules 32385

carrier of that vessel has been in water

contaminated or infested with injurious

non-indigenous aquatic nuisance

species, except as provided in

paragraghs (m)(1) and (m)(2).

(1) Vessels, trailers or other carriers of

vessels entering NPS waters from

contaminated waters will be cleaned

using the technique specific to the

aquatic nuisance species.

(2) The superintendent may allow for

limited or restricted access to park

waters under a permit system in

accordance with the criteria and

procedures of § 3.3 of this chapter.

(i) Violating a term or condition of a

permit issued in accordance with § 3.3

is prohibited.

(ii) Violating a term or condition of a

permit issued pursuant to § 3.3 of this

chapter may also result in the

suspension or revocation of the permit

by the superintendent.

(3) For this section, an injurious nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species

means a species that threatens the

diversity or abundance of native species

or the stability of an aquatic ecosystem,

or that threatens the commercial,

agricultural, aquacultural or recreational

development dependent on such an

ecosystem, and includes only those

organisms that pose a substantial risk to

native species and the development and

infrastructure dependent upon such

aquatic resources. Species include those

listed by Federal, State or local agencies

as injurious non-indigenous aquatic

nuisance species.

(4) For this section, contaminated or

infested waters means any waters

supporting viable or reproducing

populations of injurious non-indigenous

aquatic nuance species as identified by

any Federal, State, or local agency.

(5) For paragraph (m) of this section,

vessel means every type or description

of craft, including seaplanes on the

water, used or capable of being used as

a means of transportation on water,

including a buoyant devise permitting

or capable of free flotation.

(n) Transporting in any way, an

injurious non-indigenous aquatic

nuisance species on park waters or

roads.

(o) Placing or dumping into park

waters, or attempting to place or dump,

bait containers, live wells or other

water-holding devices that are or were

filled with waters holding or

contaminated by injurious nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species.

3. Section 3.23 is amended by adding

paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 3.23 SCUBA and snorkeling.

* * * * *

(c) Using a wet suit or associated

water use and diving equipment used in

waters infested with injurious nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species

prior to decontamination by a process

appropriate to the nuisance species.

Dated: March 15, 1996.

George T. Frampton, Jr.,

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and

Parks.

[FR Doc. 96–15973 Filed 6–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[NM–23–1–7101b; FRL–5500–8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; New

Mexico; Supplement to the New

Mexico State Implementation Plan To

Control Air Pollution in Areas of

Bernalillo County Designated

Nonattainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve

a revision to the New Mexico State

Implementation Plan addressing

nonattainment areas in Bernalillo

County. The purpose of proposing to

approve this revision is to update the

narrative portion of the ‘‘April 14, 1993,

Supplement to the New Mexico State

Implementation Plan to Control Air

Pollution in Area(s) of Bernalillo County

Designated Nonattainment’’ (see the

Federal Register published on

December 21, 1993) to reflect EPA’s

approval for lifting the construction ban

in Bernalillo County. In the final rules

section of this Federal Register, EPA is

approving the State’s State

Implementation Plan revision as a direct

final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial revision amendment

and anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for the approval is set

forth in the direct final rule. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to this proposed rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this rule. If the EPA receives

adverse comments, the direct final rule

will be withdrawn, and all public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be postmarked by July 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

mailed to Jole C. Luehrs, Chief, Air

Permits Section (6PD–R), U.S. EPA

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,

Texas 75202–2733. Copies of the State’s

petition and other information relevant

to this action are available for

inspection during normal hours at the

following locations:

U.S. EPA, Region 6, Air Permits Section

(6PD–R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite

700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, U.S. EPA, 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

City of Albuquerque, Environmental

Health Department, One Civic Plaza,

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103.

Anyone wishing to review this

petition at the Region 6 EPA office is

asked to contact the person below to

schedule an appointment 24 hours in

advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Samuel R. Mitz, Air Permits Section

(6PD–R), EPA Region 6, telephone (214)

665–8370.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the

information provided in the Direct Final

Rule which is located in the Rules

Section of this Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,

Nonattainment areas.

Dated: April 11, 1996.

Lynda F. Carroll,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–16024 Filed 6–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 19–2–725–b; FRL–5511–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California—

Mammoth Lakes Nonattainment Area;

PM10

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

submitted by the State of California for

the purpose of bringing about

attainment in the Mammoth Lakes

Planning Area (MLPA) of the national

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)

for particulate matter with an