[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 223 (Friday, November 20, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60159-60183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27893]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
RIN 1024-AD73
Special Regulations; Areas of the National Park System
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule governs winter visitation and certain recreational
use in Yellowstone National Park for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011
seasons. This final rule is issued to implement the Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 2008 Winter Use Plans Environmental
Assessment (2008 EA) approved October 15, 2009, and will provide
[[Page 60160]]
visitors a range of winter recreation opportunities that are
appropriate to the national park setting and do not unacceptably impact
or impair park resources or values. The rule requires that most
recreational snowmobiles operating in the park meet certain NPS air and
sound emissions requirements, requires that snowmobilers and snowcoach
riders in Yellowstone be accompanied by a commercial guide, and sets
daily entry limits on the numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches that
may enter the park. Traveling off designated oversnow routes will
remain prohibited.
DATES: The effective date for this rule is December 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Sacklin, Management Assistant's
Office, Yellowstone National Park, 307-344-2019.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Park Service (NPS) has been managing winter use issues
in Yellowstone National Park, Grand Teton National Park, and the John
D. Rockefeller, Jr., Memorial Parkway for several decades under the
guidance provided by a number of sources. The history of the issue was
discussed at length in the notice for the proposed rule, 73 FR 65784
(November 5, 2008) and in the 2008 EA.
After the proposed rule was published on November 7, 2008, the U.S.
District Court for the District of Wyoming issued an order reinstating
the 2004 final rule on winter use in the parks, without its sunset
provisions, ``until such time as NPS can promulgate an acceptable rule
to take its place.'' The NPS complied with the court order and on
December 9, 2008, republished the 2004 regulation without its
provisions terminating snowmobile and snowcoach use after the winter of
2006-2007. That regulation, among other things, imposed a limit of 720
snowmobiles per day for Yellowstone, required that all recreational
snowmobiles in Yellowstone be accompanied by a commercial guide, and
required that all recreational snowmobiles operating in the park meet
NPS air and sound emissions requirements for reducing noise and air
pollution.
The NPS is promulgating this final regulation to replace the
reinstated 2004 regulation. It provides that the park will be open to
an appropriate level of oversnow vehicle use for the winter seasons of
2009-2010 and 2010-2011. During this time, NPS will determine a long-
term strategy for Yellowstone winter use.
Rationale for the Final Rule
Overview of Winter Use Program
This rule provides for the enjoyment of the park's amenities by
authorizing strictly managed snowmobile and snowcoach use in the park
for the next two winter seasons. The rule is designed to be consistent
with recent trends in oversnow vehicle use while a new long-term winter
plan and rule are prepared. This rule allows for 318 snowmobiles per
day in Yellowstone, as shown in the following chart, with an additional
50 snowmobiles allowed at Cave Falls.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercially Commercially
Park entrance/location guided guided
snowmobiles snowcoaches
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) North Entrance*................... 12 13
(ii) West Entrance.................... 160 34
(iii) South Entrance.................. 114 13
(iv) East Entrance.................... 20 2
(v) Old Faithful*..................... 12 16
(vi) Cave Falls....................... 50** 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Commercially guided snowmobile tours originating at the North Entrance
and Old Faithful are currently provided solely by Xanterra Parks and
Resorts. Because this concessioner is the sole provider at both of
these areas, this regulation allows reallocation of snowmobiles
between the North Entrance and Old Faithful as necessary, so long as
the total daily number of snowmobiles originating from the two
locations does not exceed 24. For example, the concessioner could
operate 6 snowmobiles at Old Faithful and 18 at the North Entrance if
visitor demand warranted it. This will allow the concessioner to
respond to changing visitor demand for commercially guided snowmobile
tours, thus enhancing the availability of visitor services in
Yellowstone.
** These snowmobiles operate on an approximately 1-mile segment of road
within the park where the use is incidental to other snowmobiling
activities in the Caribou-Targhee National Forest. These snowmobiles
do not need to be guided or to meet NPS air and sound emissions
requirements.
This rule includes strict limits on the number of snowmobiles and
snowcoaches allowed to operate within the park each day. Prior to the
implementation of a managed winter use program in the winter of 2003-
2004, an average of 795 snowmobiles entered Yellowstone each day, with
peak days averaging approximately 1,400. This rule allows for 318
snowmobiles per day in Yellowstone, a reduction from the 720
snowmobiles authorized over the previous five winters (during which
peak use never approached 720, and average use was about 36% of that
limit).
For the past five winters, a managed winter use program has been in
place. Visitors on snowmobiles must use snowmobiles that meet NPS
requirements for air and sound emissions (generally referred to in the
2008 EA as Best Available Technology (BAT)), but here referred to
simply as NPS requirements to avoid confusion with use of the term best
available technology under other environmental laws). Visitors must be
accompanied by a commercial guide; visitors cannot snowmobile in
Yellowstone without a guide. There is a daily limit on numbers of
snowcoaches and snowmobiles. Speed limits are reduced in the busy
travel corridors. The park is closed to oversnow vehicles (OSVs) at
night. An extensive monitoring program is underway.
In the past five winters, an average of 259 snowmobiles (in an
average of 35 commercially guided groups) have travelled in the park
each day, while snowcoach use averaged 31 per day. The peak day for
snowmobiles was 557, while the peak day for snowcoaches was 60. During
the past three winters, the park exceeded 318 snowmobiles on 63 of 252
days the park was open. This rule allows somewhat more than the recent
annual average number of snowmobiles and snowcoaches to enter the park,
but would not accommodate those recent higher use days for snowmobiles.
The most recent use levels indicate that the number of commercially
guided snowmobile groups and the number of persons in those groups are
very similar to those using commercial snowcoaches. In 2008-2009, the
average number of snowmobile groups was 31 per day, while snowcoaches
averaged 29 per day.
[[Page 60161]]
Each snowmobile group included an average of 8.9 people, while each
snowcoach carried an average of 8.5 people.
Resource Impacts From Winter Use
Air quality is very good to excellent in the winter, despite
frequent temperature inversions, which trap pollutants near the ground
and affect air quality. NPS sound and air emission requirements, limits
on numbers, and commercial guiding have all contributed to the
improvements in air quality over historical (pre-2003) use. Only
snowmobiles meeting NPS requirements are allowed. Currently, the
snowmobiles use four-cycle engines that produce far less pollution than
the two-cycle engines that were once used. Snowmobiles meeting NPS air
emission requirements are very similar in their per passenger emissions
to snowcoaches. Snowcoaches use more fuel on a per passenger basis than
do snowmobiles. They average 2-4 miles per gallon while snowmobiles
that meet NPS requirements get 20-26 miles per gallon. In addition,
rough roads and soft snow conditions result in higher fuel consumption
and high emissions for snowcoaches.
Winter use will have some effects on wildlife, just like every
other form of visitor use of the park. Extensive studies of the
behavioral responses of five species (bison, elk, bald eagle, trumpeter
swan, and coyotes) to oversnow traffic showed that these animals rarely
showed high-intensity responses (movement, defense postures, or flight)
to approaching vehicles. The responses to normal snowmobile and
snowcoach use that do occur do not cause the taking, frightening, or
intentional disturbance that is prohibited by NPS regulations.
Furthermore, thirty-five years of census data do not reveal any
relationship between changing winter use patterns and elk or bison
population dynamics. No wildlife populations are currently declining
due to winter use (swan populations are declining, but this decline is
being experienced regionally and due to factors unrelated to winter use
in the park or region). Few animals are expected to be killed as a
result of vehicle collisions. The best available information suggests
negligible to minor effects for most species, with potential moderate
effects for swans and eagles. Use will be well below levels previously
studied by NPS wildlife biologists and well within the limits
recommended by those studies. We conclude that winter use at the
permitted levels does not pose a risk of unacceptable impacts or
impairment to any wildlife population. All visitors utilizing motorized
oversnow vehicles travel with commercial guides, learning about and
enjoying the abundant wildlife sightings.
Soundscapes are good to very good in the park. Snowmobiles that
meet NPS sound requirements are noticeably quieter than traditional
snowmobiles (at idle and while underway). In addition, snowmobiles with
four-cycle engines that meet NPS requirements sound similar to
snowcoaches in the winter and do not sound like traditional two-stroke
snowmobiles. Commercial guiding further reduces sound levels and the
amount of time that snowmobiles can be heard by reducing speeding and
idling and by keeping the vehicles grouped. One concern is that some
vehicles are too loud. However, monitoring results demonstrate that 94%
of all high sound intensity events are caused by snowcoaches. Overly
loud snowcoaches include both older, historic Bombardier snowcoaches
that have not been modified or upgraded, as well as a number of modern
snowcoaches. The NPS intends to implement sound and air emission
requirements for snowcoaches in the long-term plan, subsequent to this
rule, to address this concern. The percent of time that OSVs are heard
has been a concern. As explained further below, however, NPS has
determined that the percentage of time in which OSVs will be audible
under this rule does not cause impairment or unacceptable impacts.
Based on a 2008 winter survey, NPS has found that visitors are
enjoying the park, and they are satisfied with the management that is
in place. Visitors will continue to find wildlife to be both wild and
easily viewed. Under this rule, visitors will continue to find wildlife
to be both wild and easily viewed. All visitors utilizing motorized
vehicles will travel with commercial guides, learning about and
enjoying the abundant wildlife sightings. A winter 2008 survey found a
high level of satisfaction with soundscape conditions, wildlife, and
the managed winter use program.
Personal exposure of employees to air pollutants has generally been
greatly reduced from historic levels. Some monitoring from previous
years indicated small exceedances of national standards for benzene and
formaldehyde. The source could be snowcoaches or snowmobiles, or more
likely both. Last winter's monitoring showed no exceedances of these
standards.
Impairment, Unacceptable Impacts, and Appropriate Use
In addition to determining the environmental consequences of the
alternatives, NPS policy requires consideration of impacts to determine
whether actions would impair park resources. In managing National Park
System units, the NPS may undertake actions that have both beneficial
and adverse impacts on park resources and values. As the 2006 NPS
Management Policies (Management Policies) explain (section 1.4.7.1),
``Virtually every form of human activity that takes place within a park
has some degree of effect on park resources or values, but that does
not mean the impact is unacceptable or that the particular use must be
disallowed.'' The NPS is generally prohibited by law from taking or
authorizing any action that would or is likely to impair park resources
or values. Impairment is an impact that, in the professional judgment
of the responsible NPS manager, would harm the integrity of park
resources or values, including the opportunities that otherwise would
be present for the enjoyment of those resources or values. The
responsible NPS manager generally has discretion to determine what
impacts are allowed that would not impair park resources or values.
The NPS is also required to conserve the resources and values of
the National Park System units and to prioritize the conservation of
park resources over their use whenever the two are found to be in
conflict. The NPS complies with this mandate by ensuring that a
proposed use of the park will not result in unacceptable impacts to
park resources or values, and by further allowing impacts to park
resources only when allowing the impacts is appropriate to fulfill the
purposes of the park and is necessary (meaning that the impacts are
unavoidable and incapable of further mitigation in light of the
authorized appropriate use).
Over the last five winter seasons, the park was intensively managed
in order to provide heightened protection to the environment and
prevent the impairment of park resources and values. As discussed in
the FONSI and based on the analysis in the 2008 EA and monitoring and
studies over the past five years, the NPS has determined that no
impairment of park resources or values occurred during those five
years.
The NPS has also determined that implementation of Alternative 2
(Selected Alternative) and the final rule would not result in
unacceptable impacts or impairment to park resources or values. As
disclosed in the 2008 EA,
[[Page 60162]]
the adverse impacts to wildlife would be negligible to minor, due to
moderate levels of visitor use (with possible moderate effects on swans
and eagles). Guiding would minimize most of these effects. For
soundscapes, the adverse impacts would be negligible to moderate, due
to audibility and maximum sound levels. Exceedances of maximum sound
levels by snowcoaches will be mitigated while this rule is in place
through driver education and reducing snowcoach travel speed. This will
be communicated during pre-season meetings with commercial guides and
outfitters, and to individual drivers during park-sponsored orientation
training. Air quality impacts are forecast to be negligible because the
air and sound emissions requirements and strict daily entry limits will
reduce emissions. Impacts on visitor and employee health and safety in
Yellowstone are expected to be moderately adverse due to possible high
snowcoach noise exposure levels. Avalanche danger at Sylvan Pass also
creates moderate adverse impacts. Both the noise exposure issues and
the avalanche danger would be mitigated in several ways.
As described in the 2008 EA, the NPS's threshold for considering
whether there could be an impairment is based on major (or significant)
effects. The 2008 EA identified less than major effects on wildlife,
natural soundscapes, and air quality for Alternative 2. Indeed, while
some major effects have resulted from snowmobile or snowcoach use over
the past five years--which included some days where snowmobile usage
was nearly double the daily limit now adopted--the NPS has determined
that none of the effects associated with that usage caused any
impairment of park resources. Guided by this analysis and the
professional judgment of National Park Service managers, the NPS has
determined that there would be no impairment of park resources or
values from implementation of the final rule.
Finally, the NPS has determined that the impacts associated with
the OSV use permitted over the next two winter seasons, which are
described at length in the 2008 EA, are both appropriate and necessary
to fulfill the purposes of the park.
Section 1.5 of Management Policies, ``Appropriate Use of the
Parks,'' directs that the National Park Service must ensure that park
uses that are allowed would not cause impairment of, or unacceptable
impacts on, park resources or values. A new form of park use may be
allowed within a park only after a determination has been made in the
professional judgment of the park manager that it will not result in
unacceptable impacts. In addition, section 8.1.2 of the Management
Policies, ``Process for Determining Appropriate Uses,'' directs the NPS
to evaluate the proposed use's consistency with applicable laws,
executive orders, regulations, and policies; consistency with existing
plans for public use and resource management; actual and potential
effects on park resources or values; total costs to the NPS; and
whether the public interest will be served. Finally, section 1.5 of the
Management Policies directs park superintendents to continually monitor
all park uses to prevent unanticipated and unacceptable impacts. If
unanticipated and unacceptable impacts occur, section 1.5 directs the
superintendent to engage in a thoughtful deliberative process to
further manage or constrain the use, or discontinue it.
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The 2008 EA and the 2009 FONSI supporting this final rule contain
the above-described evaluation of the permitted OSV use. In addition,
they demonstrate that no unacceptable impacts are anticipated as a
result of the use. Finally, the Preferred Alternative in the 2008 EA
establishes a comprehensive monitoring and adaptive management plan to
address any unanticipated unacceptable impacts. On this basis, the NPS
has determined that the proposed OSV use permitted over the next two
winter seasons is appropriate to fulfill the purposes of the park.
The NPS has also determined that the proposed OSV use permitted
over the next two winter seasons is necessary to fulfill the purposes
of the park. The National Park Service Organic Act directs the NPS to
promote the use of the national parks by such means and measures as to
conform to the fundamental purpose of said parks, which purpose
includes providing for the enjoyment of the scenery, natural and
historic objects, and wildlife within the parks (16 U.S.C. 1). Section
8.2 of Management Policies confirms that enjoyment of park resources
and values by the people of the United States is one of the fundamental
purposes of all parks. That section further states: ``To provide for
enjoyment of the parks, the National Park Service will encourage
visitor use activities that are appropriate to the purpose for which
the park was established, and are inspirational, educational, or
healthful, and otherwise appropriate to the park environment; and will
foster an understanding of and appreciation for park resources and
values, or will promote enjoyment through a direct association with,
interaction with, or relation to park resources; and can be sustained
without causing unacceptable impacts to park resources or values.''
As explained in the 2008 EA, OSV use of Yellowstone National Park
has been occurring since 1949, and snowmobiles have been used for 48 of
the park's 137 years. Yellowstone is a large park, distances between
attractions at Yellowstone are great, and some form of motorized
vehicular access is needed to access various destination areas.
Snowmobiles and snowcoaches are used for this purpose in the winter
just as private vehicles and buses are used in the summer. They are
both forms of transportation, not recreational activities unto
themselves. Finally, snowmobiles and snowcoaches each provide very
different experiences in that they provide varying levels of direct
interaction with the park's resources and values.
The NPS received approximately 27,500 comments on the 2008 EA and
39,767 comments on the proposed rule. In many cases, the comments
received on the proposed rule were very similar in content to those
received on the 2008 EA. Numerous commenters expressed concerns that
the Preferred Alternative and the rule, would violate the NPS Organic
Act and would be inconsistent with the 2006 NPS Management Policies,
among other things causing unacceptable impacts to park resources and
values. The NPS believes most of these concerns are based on a belief
that snowmobiles do not belong in the park, and should be replaced with
snowcoaches. These concerns do not take into account recent monitoring
and studies that show the nearly equal contribution of snowmobiles and
snowcoaches to the concerns expressed by the commenters (and that
snowcoaches are clearly the source of some concerns). Statistically,
movement responses of wildlife were slightly higher for snowcoaches
than for snowmobiles. Monitoring also indicates that commercially
guided snowmobile groups and snowcoaches contribute similarly to the
amount of time OSVs are heard. Snowcoaches also use more fuel on a per
passenger basis than do snowmobiles. In short, neither OSV type
provides a clear advantage with respect to environmental impacts.
Recent monitoring and studies demonstrate that the regulated use of
both snowcoaches and snowmobiles described in the Selected Alternative
will not result in impairment of park resources or values,
[[Page 60163]]
nor will it result in unacceptable impacts on the park.
Air and Sound Emission Requirements
To mitigate impacts to air quality and the natural soundscape, the
NPS is continuing the requirement that all recreational snowmobiles
meet strict air and sound emissions requirements to operate in the
park, with limited exceptions. For air emissions, all snowmobiles must
achieve a 90% reduction in hydrocarbons and a 70% reduction in carbon
monoxide, relative to EPA's baseline emissions assumptions for
conventional two-stroke snowmobiles. For sound emissions, snowmobiles
must operate at or below 73 dBA as measured at full throttle according
to Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J192 test procedures (revised
1985). The Superintendent will maintain a list of approved snowmobile
makes, models, and years of manufacture that meet NPS requirements. The
certification is good for six years from the date on which a model is
certified as meeting the requirements.
The NPS is continuing the requirement that began with the 2005
model year that all snowmobiles must be certified under 40 CFR part
1051 to a Family Emission Limit (FEL) no greater than 15 g/kW-hr for
hydrocarbons (HC) and 120 g/kW-hr for carbon monoxide (CO). Snowmobiles
must be tested on a five-mode engine dynamometer consistent with the
test procedures specified by the EPA (40 CFR parts 1051 and 1065).
Other test methods could be approved by the NPS.
The NPS is retaining the use of the FEL method for demonstrating
compliance with its emissions requirements because it has several
advantages. First, use of FEL will ensure that all individual
snowmobiles entering the park achieve the NPS's emissions requirements,
unless modified or damaged (under this regulation, snowmobiles which
are modified in such a way as to increase air or sound emissions will
not be in compliance with NPS requirements and therefore not permitted
to enter the park). Use of FEL will also minimize any administrative
burden on snowmobile manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with NPS
requirements because they already provide FEL data to the EPA. Further,
the EPA has the authority to ensure that manufacturers' emissions
claims on their FEL applications are valid. EPA also requires that
manufacturers conduct production line testing (PLT) to demonstrate that
machines being manufactured actually meet the certification levels. If
PLT indicates that emissions exceed the FEL levels, then the
manufacturer is required to take corrective action. Through EPA's
ability to audit manufacturers' emissions claims, the NPS will have
sufficient assurance that emissions information and documentation will
be reviewed and enforced by the EPA. FEL also takes into account other
factors, such as the deterioration rate of snowmobiles (some
snowmobiles may produce more emissions as they age), lab-to-lab
variability, test-to-test variability, and production line variance. In
addition, under the EPA's regulations, all snowmobiles manufactured
must be labeled with FEL air emissions information. This labeling will
help to ensure that NPS emissions requirements are consistent with
these labels. The use of FEL will avoid potential confusion for
consumers.
The air emissions requirements for snowmobiles allowed to operate
in the park should not be confused with standards adopted by the EPA in
a final rule published in the Federal Register on November 8, 2002 (67
FR 68242). The EPA regulations require manufacturers to meet certain
fleet averages for HC and CO emissions. For example, the Phase 1
standards required all snowmobile manufacturers to meet a fleet-wide
average in 2007 of 275 g/kW-hr for CO and 100 g/kW-hr for HC, which
represents a 30% reduction from the baseline emission rates for
uncontrolled snowmobiles. Any particular make/model may emit more or
less than the standard as long as the fleet average does not exceed the
standard. Phase 2 and Phase 3 standards will be implemented in 2010 and
2012, respectively, effectively requiring the equivalent of a 50%
reduction in both HC and CO as compared to average baseline levels. By
comparison, NPS requires that all snowmobiles operating in the park
meet a FEL of 120 g/kW-hr for CO and 15 g/kW-hr for HC. This means that
snowmobiles operating in the park represent the cleanest that are
commercially available.
To determine compliance with the sound emissions requirements,
snowmobiles must be tested using SAE J192 test procedures (revised
1985; or potentially as further revised and adapted for use by NPS).
The NPS recognizes that the SAE updated these test procedures in 2003;
however, the changes between the 2003 and 1985 test procedures could
yield different measurement results. The sound emissions requirement
was initially established using 1985 test procedures (in addition to
information provided by industry and modeling). To ensure consistency
in the test results, the NPS will at this time continue to use the 1985
test. The SAE J192 (revised 1985) test also allows for a tolerance of 2
dBA over the sound limit to account for variations in weather, snow
conditions, and other factors. The NPS understands that an update to
the 2003 J192 procedures may be underway, and the NPS will continue to
evaluate these test procedures and possibly adopt them after these
regulations are implemented. Other test methods could be approved by
NPS on a case-by-case basis.
Snowmobiles may be tested at any barometric pressure equal to or
above 23.4 inches Hg uncorrected (as measured at or near the test
site). This exception to the SAE J192 test procedures maintains
consistency with the testing conditions used to determine the sound
requirement. This allowance for reduced barometric pressure is
necessary since snowmobiles were tested at the elevation of Yellowstone
National Park, where atmospheric pressure is lower than that under the
SAE J192's requirements. Testing data indicate that snowmobiles test
quieter at higher elevation, and therefore some snowmobiles may comply
with the NPS's sound emissions requirements at higher elevations even
though they do not when tests are conducted near sea level.
The NPS will annually publish a list of snowmobile makes, models,
and years of manufacture that meet its emissions and sound
requirements. Snowmobile manufacturers may demonstrate that snowmobiles
are compliant with the air emissions requirements by submitting to the
NPS a copy of their applications used to demonstrate compliance with
EPA's general snowmobile regulation (indicating FEL). The NPS will
accept this application information from manufacturers in support of
conditionally certifying a snowmobile as meeting its air emissions
requirements, pending ultimate review and certification by EPA at the
same emissions levels identified in the application. Should EPA certify
a snowmobile at an emission level that would no longer meet the NPS's
requirements, this snowmobile would no longer be considered by NPS to
be compliant with its requirements and would be phased-out according to
a schedule that will be determined by the NPS to be appropriate. For
sound emissions, snowmobile manufacturers may submit their existing
Snowmobile Safety and Certification Committee (SSCC) sound level
certification form. Under the SSCC machine safety standards program,
snowmobiles are
[[Page 60164]]
certified by an independent testing company as complying with all SSCC
safety standards, including sound standards. This regulation does not
require the SSCC form specifically, as there could be other acceptable
documentation in the future. The NPS will work cooperatively with the
snowmobile manufacturers on appropriate documentation. The NPS intends
to continue to rely on certified air and sound emissions data from the
private sector rather than establish its own independent testing
program. When the NPS certifies snowmobiles as meeting its
requirements, NPS will announce how long that certification applies.
Generally, each snowmobile model will be approved for entry into the
park for six winter seasons after it is first listed. Based on NPS
experience, six years represents the typical useful life of a
snowmobile, and thus six years provides purchasers with a reasonable
length of time where operation is allowed once a particular model is
listed as being compliant. If a manufacturer recertifies a snowmobile
model to NPS requirements for emissions and sound, it could be used for
additional years. It is also based on EPA snowmobile emission
regulations and the deterioration factors that are part of those
regulations (EPA requires that if a manufacturer certifies its
snowmobile will comply with EPA's emission regulations, the snowmobile
will meet those regulations for a period of five years or 5,000 miles).
Individual snowmobiles modified in such a way as to increase sound
and air emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide beyond the
emission restrictions will be denied entry to the park. It is the
responsibility of end users and guides and outfitters to ensure that
their OSVs, whether snowmobiles or snowcoaches, comply with all
applicable restrictions. Air and sound emission requirements for
snowcoaches are described below. In Yellowstone, the requirement that
all snowmobilers travel with commercial guides will assist NPS in
enforcing these requirements, since businesses providing commercial
guiding services in the park are responsible under their contracts with
the park to ensure that their clients use only snowmobiles that meet
the NPS's requirements. In addition, these businesses are required to
ensure that snowmobiles used in the park are not modified in such a way
as to increase sound or air emissions, and that snowmobiles are
properly maintained.
Snowmobiles being operated on the Cave Falls Road, which extends
approximately one mile into Yellowstone from the adjacent national
forest, will be exempt from air and sound emissions requirements.
Because of the low level of impacts resulting from the light use of the
Cave Falls Road, which is incidental to recreational use of the
surrounding national forest, NPS has found it is not necessary to
require these users to comply with requirements that address issues
associated with use of the interior portions of the park.
Under concession contracts issued in 2003, 78 snowcoaches are
currently authorized to operate in Yellowstone (and in the parkway
between Flagg Ranch and Yellowstone's South Entrance). Approximately 29
of these snowcoaches were manufactured by Bombardier and were designed
specifically for oversnow travel. Those 29 snowcoaches were
manufactured before 1983 and are referred to as ``historic
snowcoaches'' for the purpose of this rulemaking. All other snowcoaches
being used are passenger vans or light buses that have been converted
for oversnow travel using tracks and/or skis. During the winter of
2008-2009, an average of 29 snowcoaches entered Yellowstone each day
(during the prior winter, 2007-2008, an average of 35 snowcoaches
entered the park each day).
As of the winter of 2009-2010, all snowcoaches must be commercially
guided. These trained, knowledgeable operators help ensure that air and
sound emission requirements are met, wildlife impacts are minimized,
and visitor and employee safety is assured.
The University of Denver conducted winter emissions measurements in
Yellowstone that involved the collection of emissions data from in-use
snowcoaches and snowmobiles in February 2005 and February 2006. Results
from that work indicate that snowcoaches and snowmobiles meeting NPS
air emission requirements are now very similar in their per passenger
emissions. This work also supports snowmobile air emissions
requirements and the development of snowcoach air emission
requirements. The snowcoach fleet should be modernized to reduce carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions. However, road and snow conditions
and low power-to-weight ratios of snowcoaches contribute considerably
to air emissions. This means that even an upgraded snowcoach fleet
operating in Yellowstone will have days for which fuel consumption and
emission levels might be high.
In comparison with older carbureted snowcoaches, snowcoaches
operating within EPA's Tier I standards are cleaner. In 2004, EPA began
phasing-in Tier II emissions standards for multi-passenger vans, and
they will be fully phased-in during 2009. Tier II standards will
require that vehicles be even cleaner than Tier I, and full emission
controls will function more of the time.
During the duration of this temporary plan, all non-historic
snowcoaches must meet air emission requirements, which will be the EPA
emissions standards in effect when the vehicle was manufactured. This
will be enforced by ensuring that all critical emission-related exhaust
components are functioning properly. Malfunctioning critical emissions-
related components must be replaced with the original equipment
manufacturer (OEM) component where possible. If OEM parts are not
available, aftermarket parts may be used. In general, catalysts that
have exceeded their useful life must be replaced unless the operator
can demonstrate the catalyst is functioning properly. Modifying or
disabling a snowcoach's original pollution control equipment is
prohibited except for maintenance purposes. Individual snowcoaches may
be subject to periodic inspections to determine compliance with
emission and sound requirements.
The restrictions on air and sound emissions in this rule are not a
restriction on what manufacturers may produce but an end-use
restriction on which commercially produced snowmobiles and snowcoaches
may be used in the park. The NPS Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1) authorizes
the Secretary of the Interior to ``promote and regulate'' the use of
national parks ``by such means and measures as conform to the
fundamental purpose of said parks * * * which purpose is to conserve
the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life
therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and
by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future
generations.'' Further, the Secretary is expressly authorized by 16
U.S.C. 3 to ``make and publish such rules and regulations as he may
deem necessary or proper for the use and management of the parks. * * *
'' This exercise of the NPS Organic Act authority is not an effort by
NPS to regulate manufacturers and is consistent with Section 310 of the
Clean Air Act.
Since 2001, the park has been converting its own administrative
fleet of snowmobiles to meet these NPS requirements. These newer
machines have proven successful in fulfilling most of the NPS's
administrative needs throughout the park. However, the NPS recognizes
that some administrative applications, such as off-trail boundary
[[Page 60165]]
patrols in deep powder, towing heavy equipment or disabled sleds,
search and rescue, or law enforcement uses, may require additional
power beyond that supplied by currently available snowmobiles that meet
the NPS's air and sound emissions requirements. In such limited cases,
the NPS will sometimes need to use snowmobiles that do not meet the
requirements this rule imposes upon recreational snowmobiles (which do
not have these special needs because they travel only upon groomed
roads as part of a tour group led by a commercial guide).
Guided Tours and Group Size
In order to mitigate impacts to natural soundscapes and wildlife,
and for visitor and employee safety, all recreational snowmobiles and
snowcoaches operated in Yellowstone must be led by a commercial guide,
except for those snowmobiles being operated on the one-mile segment of
the Cave Falls Road that extends into the park from the adjacent
national forest. This guiding requirement has been found in practice to
reduce conflicts with wildlife along roadways because these commercial
guides are trained to lead visitors safely around the park with minimal
disturbance to wildlife. Commercial guides are educated in safety,
knowledgeable about park rules, and are required to exercise reasonable
control over their clientele, which has reduced unsafe and illegal
snowmobile use. Because of the contractual obligations to which
commercial guides are subject, NPS has found this results in more
effective enforcement of park rules. These guides receive rigorous
multi-day training. They also are experts at interpreting the resources
of the park to their clients. Commercial guides are employed by local
businesses, not by NPS. Commercial guiding also tends to result in
larger snowmobile parties than unguided use, which reduces the overall
number of encounters with wildlife and reduces the amount of time that
OSVs are audible (and, conversely, increases the interval of time that
OSVs are not heard).
No more than eleven snowmobiles will be permitted in a group,
including that of the guide. Except in emergency situations, guided
parties must travel together and remain within a maximum distance of
one-third mile of the first snowmobile in the group. These size and
distance limits require that guided parties do not become separated,
provide for sufficient and safe spacing between individual snowmobiles
within the guided party, and allow the guide(s) to maintain control
over the group to minimize the impacts on wildlife and natural
soundscapes. NPS thus expects that the continuation of the guiding
requirement will facilitate compliance with park regulations and
protect park resources.
Commercial snowmobile guides use a ``follow-the-leader'' approach,
stopping often to talk with the group. They lead snowmobiles single-
file through the park, using hand signals to pass information down the
line from one snowmobile to the next, a system which has proven to be
effective. Signals are used to warn group members about wildlife and
other road hazards, indicate turns, reduce speed, and when to turn on
or off the snowmobile. Further, all commercial guides are trained in
basic first aid and CPR. In addition to first aid kits, they often
carry satellite or cellular telephones, radios, and other equipment for
emergency use. Guides are thus well-equipped to ensure that park
regulations are enforced, wildlife are protected, and to provide a
safer overall experience for visitors.
Since the winter of 2003-2004, all snowmobilers in Yellowstone have
been led by commercial guides, resulting in considerable positive
effects on visitor health and safety. Guides have been proven to be
very effective at enforcing proper touring behavior, such as adherence
to speed limits, staying on the groomed road surfaces, and other
snowmobiling behaviors that are appropriate to safely and responsibly
visit the park. Since implementation of the guiding program, there have
been pronounced reductions in the number of law enforcement incidents
and accidents associated with the use of snowmobiles, even when
accounting for the reduced number of snowmobilers relative to historic
use levels. The use of guides is also beneficial to wildlife, since
guides are trained to respond appropriately when encountering wildlife.
Snowmobile and Snowcoach Routes
Snowmobiles and snowcoaches will continue to be restricted to
designated oversnow routes, which are a subset of the same roads that
are traveled by motor vehicles during the remainder of the year. In
addition to most of the Grand Loop Road, certain side roads will be
open for snowmobile use after noon, based on the successful experience
of the NPS with temporal zoning on Firehole Canyon Drive. Virginia
Cascades will be accessible only via ski and snowshoe.
The final rule also allows for up to 50 snowmobiles to enter
Yellowstone on the Cave Falls Road, an approximately one-mile segment
extending into the southwest corner of the park from the Targhee
National Forest. This short road segment does not connect to the rest
of the oversnow routes in Yellowstone, and connects only to the
national forest lands, which do not have air and sound requirements or
guiding requirements. Use of this route is incidental to recreational
use of the national forest lands, is far removed from the snowmobile
use and the resulting impacts that occur within the interior of
Yellowstone, and is therefore considered separately from the 318
snowmobile limit.
Snowmobile and snowcoach use in the two-mile road segment between
Yellowstone's South Entrance and Flagg Ranch in the John D.
Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway will be governed by Yellowstone
requirements (as is also discussed in the separate rule for the
Parkway). That is all snowmobiles operating on this road segment must
meet the commercial guiding, NPS air and sound requirements, daily use
limits, and other requirements to operate in Yellowstone. Similarly,
all snowcoaches operating on this road segment must meet Yellowstone
requirements.
Monitoring and Adaptive Management
Scientific studies and monitoring of winter visitor use and park
resources (including air quality, natural soundscapes, wildlife,
employee health and safety, water quality, and visitor experience) will
continue. As part of its adaptive management of winter use activities,
NPS will close selected areas of the park to visitor use, including
sections of roads, if these studies indicate that human presence or
activities have unacceptable impacts on wildlife or other park
resources that cannot otherwise be mitigated. A one-year notice will
ordinarily be provided before any such closure is implemented unless
immediate closure is deemed necessary to avoid impairment of park
resources. The Superintendent will continue to have the authority under
various provisions of this rule as well as 36 CFR 1.5 to take emergency
actions to protect park resources and values.
The adaptive management program described in the 2008 EA provides
park managers with a wide variety of tools to ensure that the goals and
objectives of the winter use plans are being achieved. Some of the
techniques available include adjustments in snowmobile or snowcoach use
levels (up or down), adjustments in air and sound emissions
requirements, visitor and guide education, timing of entries, and group
sizes.
Adjustment to the daily entry limits for snowmobiles and
snowcoaches is
[[Page 60166]]
one of several tools available to park managers to ensure that the
goals and objectives of the winter use plan are maintained. Through
adaptive management, if monitoring of use levels of snowmobiles and
snowcoaches allowed under the FONSI indicates acceptable conditions,
the NPS will increase use levels to the extent acceptable conditions
can be maintained. Conversely, if monitoring of use levels of
snowmobiles and snowcoaches allowed under the FONSI indicates
unacceptable conditions, the NPS will reduce use levels to an extent
that acceptable conditions can be maintained. In some cases, additional
rulemaking would be required in order to adjust numbers.
The NPS is implementing a multi-year research proposal intended to
specifically address the question of whether grooming of the Madison to
Norris road segment in Yellowstone has led to alterations of bison
movements and distribution. The question was identified in a report by
Dr. Cormack Gates et al., entitled ``The Ecology of Bison Movements and
Distribution in and Beyond Yellowstone National Park'' (2005). The
research program will involve a linked series of experiments that will
enable researchers to gain insight into how road grooming and other
factors currently affect bison travel. The NPS has begun deploying
cameras along travel routes to gain information on the relationship
between road grooming and bison travel. The research program will
include the analysis of existing data on GPS-collared bison, the
tracking of additional GPS-collared bison, and use of the cameras,
without necessitating the closure of the Gibbon Canyon road segment to
public OSV travel. During the five year period, other roads or routes
may be investigated to help understand the relationship between snow
depth, grooming, and bison movement. For example, the Firehole Canyon
Drive may be closed to oversnow travel and the Grand Loop Road gated to
allow snowmobile and snowcoach travel, but not allow bison movement on
the main road. Bison would then be forced to travel cross-country or
along the ungroomed Firehole Canyon Road. Similarly, the Madison to
Norris Road may be fenced or gated in the vicinity of the new bridge
over the Gibbon River to restrict bison movement on the Madison to
Norris Road and force bison to travel cross-country. Thus, bison
movement in relation to snow depth may be tested without closing a main
road. However, following the five years of data gathering and analysis,
the NPS, in consultation with the researchers, will consider closing
the main Madison to Norris route to observe bison response. That
decision will rely on the results of the data gathering and analysis
and whether such a closure would be likely to yield informative data or
conclusions. If implemented, such a closure would likely last several
seasons.
Maintaining Entry by Sylvan Pass
Sylvan Pass will be open for oversnow travel (both motorized and
non-motorized) for a limited core season, from December 22 through
March 1 each year, subject to weather-related constraints and NPS
capacities. A combination of avalanche mitigation techniques may be
used, including risk assessment analyses as well as forecasting and
helicopter- and howitzer-dispensed explosives. The NPS will continue to
evaluate additional avalanche mitigation techniques and risk assessment
tools in order to further improve safety and visitor access.
From March 2 to March 15, the NPS will maintain the road segment
from the East Entrance to a point approximately four miles west of the
entrance station to provide for opportunities for cross-country skiing
and snowshoeing. Limited snowmobile and snowcoach use will be allowed
in order to provide drop-offs for such purposes.
This approach both addresses the concerns of the communities and
the National Park Service. The City of Cody, Wyoming, as well as Park
County, Wyoming, and the State of Wyoming have clearly articulated the
importance of this route to the community and the historical
relationship between Cody and Yellowstone's East Entrance. They have
spoken for the businesses near Yellowstone's East Entrance and how
those businesses have been negatively impacted in recent years by the
changing patterns of winter visitation and uncertainty regarding winter
use in the park. They have stated how those businesses will continue to
be adversely affected if the pass is closed to OSV travel in the
winter. The community and businesses have also stated the value they
place on the certainty of the road being open in the winter and the
importance of that certainty to their businesses and guests. NPS
acknowledges those values and concerns and has carefully weighed those
considerations.
Avalanche control at Sylvan Pass has long represented a safety
concern to the National Park Service. The 2000 Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS), the 2003 Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement, the 2004 EA, and the 2007 FEIS all clearly identify the
considerable avalanche danger on Sylvan Pass, which has been well known
for many years. Approximately 20 avalanche paths cross the road at
Sylvan Pass. They average over 600 feet of vertical drop, and the East
Entrance Road crosses the middle of several of the paths, putting
travelers at risk of being caught in an avalanche. NPS employees must
cross several uncontrolled avalanche paths to reach the howitzer used
for discharging those avalanches, and the howitzer is at the base of a
cliff prone to both rock-fall and additional avalanche activity (the
howitzer cannot be moved without compromising its ability to reach all
avalanche zones). Artillery shells sometimes fail to explode on impact,
and unexploded rounds remain on the slopes, presenting year-round
hazards to both employees and visitors, both in Yellowstone and the
Shoshone National Forest. Natural avalanches can and do occur, both
before and after howitzer use. Using a helicopter instead of a howitzer
also is a high-risk activity because of other risks, such as high
winds, a helicopter contractor would have to incur.
The NPS may use a combination of techniques that have been used in
the past (howitzer and helicopter), as well as techniques that may be
available in the future. Area staff may use whichever tool is the
safest and most appropriate for a given situation, with the full
understanding that safety of employees and visitors comes first.
Employees in the field make the operational determination when safety
criteria have been met, and operations can be conducted with acceptable
levels of risk. The NPS will not take unacceptable risks. When safety
criteria have been met, the pass will be open; when they have not been
met, the pass will remain closed. As with past winters, extended
closures of the pass may occur, and the NPS will continue to provide
notices of the road status.
Summary of and Responses to Public Comments
The NPS published a proposed rule on November 5, 2008 and accepted
public comments through November 20, 2008. The NPS reopened the comment
period on July 24, 2009 and accepted public comments through September
8, 2009. Comments were accepted through the mail, hand delivery, and
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. A
total of 39,767 comment documents were received.
1. Comment: The numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches that
[[Page 60167]]
should be permitted into the park should be set at numbers higher or
lower than those proposed by the plan.
Response: A limit of 318 will produce an average considerably lower
than those seen in recent years. With a limit of 720 over the last 5
years, snowmobile use did not average more than 300 per day. On most
days, use was much lower than 300 (in January/February 2007, the
average, for example, was 273), but the average was closer to 300 as a
result of the higher numbers seen around Christmas 2006 and other peak
days, when use rose as high as 543 per day. A limit of 318 will greatly
reduce those peaks and thereby is expected to lower the overall
average. For various reasons, it is not expected that the 318 daily
limit will be reached during the next two winters. It will likely be
difficult for all guides and outfitters to fill their allocations:
different sizes of groups will probably create one or two unused
snowmobiles per allocation, and last minute cancellations will probably
leave some allocations unused. Also, using last winter as an example,
one guide company had only 10 snowmobiles available to use, out of an
allocation of 30. Thus, every day, 20 snowmobile allocations went
unused. Finally, unless recent use patterns illustrated in the 2008 EA
shift greatly, the 318 limit will not be reached every day or even
often enough to produce an average more than 300. Also, as explained in
the 2008 EA, NPS cannot allow higher numbers of snowmobile or
snowcoaches to enter the park until the NPS analyzes their effects in
an EIS, because higher numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches have the
potential to create major adverse impacts. Additionally, at this time,
NPS has not conducted sufficient analysis to determine whether higher
numbers would cause unacceptable impacts or would otherwise be an
appropriate use. In a long-term plan and EIS, alternatives with higher
numbers of snowmobiles would be considered.
2. Comment: The method in which snowmobile limits should be set
should be based on seasonal variations, adaptive management, annual
maximums, high demand times (holidays), and/or concession contracts, as
is the case for snowcoaches.
Response: As reflected in the analyses within the judicially
vacated 2007 EIS providing for variable daily limits would have the
potential to create major adverse impacts on park soundscapes,
particularly on days when visitation exceeded 318 snowmobiles and 78
snowcoaches. Such impacts would have to be first be analyzed in an EIS.
Weekends are not necessarily the busiest days; allowing higher
visitation on weekends could deprive visitors the ability to enter on
weekdays. Annual limits would provide variable daily limits as well and
may result in major impacts. Such an alternative must be first analyzed
in an EIS, and could be analyzed in the long-term plan and EIS. The
decision includes an adaptive management program.
3. Comment: The NPS should phase out or ban snowmobiles, and
transition to a snowcoach-only system.
Response: Current science suggests that a snowcoach-only system in
Yellowstone could cause a number of impacts: major soundscape impacts,
high fuel consumption, greater wildlife responses, and more damage to
the snow road surface than from snowmobiles. At this time NPS has not
conducted sufficient analysis to determine whether such a system would
cause unacceptable impacts or would otherwise be an appropriate use. In
a long-term plan and EIS, such a system would be considered.
4. Comment: The NPS should consider alternatives beyond the use of
snowmobiles or snowcoaches, including plowing more roads in the winter
to allow for vehicle use.
Response: As explained on 2008 EA pp. 2-8 to 2-9, plowing was
dismissed as an alternative in this EA because doing so would add
uncertainty and because many winter operators had already invested in
oversnow equipment, assuming a plan similar to this one would indeed be
implemented. The plowing option remains a possibility to consider in
long-term winter use planning.
5. Comment: The current system of commercial guides should be
modified to include non-commercial guides certifying individuals to
lead groups, or the elimination of the requirement for a guide all
together.
Response: The concept of non-commercial guiding or unguided access
(both with training programs) has been analyzed in previous winter
plans and will be evaluated in a long-term winter plan. Additionally,
the NPS may consider the Certified Group Leader concept in its future
long-term winter use planning. The NPS will consider non-commercial
guides in long-term winter use planning. The interim plan will last for
two winters, which is not sufficient time to design and implement pilot
or test programs and study and report on their effects.
6. Comment: Snowmobile numbers should be regulated through
variations in when and where snowmobiles can access the park, such as
``snowmobile only'' days and/or limiting snowmobile use to certain
areas of the park.
Response: Alternating kinds of visitation by week or day would be
logistically difficult to implement and would not provide the
consistency needed for effective trip planning for visitors in a short-
term plan. In a long-term plan, the alternatives will consider a
variety of spatial or temporal zoning as the comment suggests.
The requirement to use commercial guides has the effect of grouping
all snowmobilers and many snowcoaches into certain time windows.
Generally, these are two hour windows in the mornings and afternoons at
the entrances and midday at Old Faithful. Outside of those periods
commercial use is greatly reduced, and the opportunity to walk or ski
in silence is more readily available. The NPS wishes to protect park
soundscapes at all times of the winter, not just these less busy time
periods. While visitors are certainly free to visit at less busy times
to seek natural quiet, the NPS believes they also should be able to
find it at other times. The NPS believes that adoption of the rule
would offer ample opportunities for quiet.
7. Comment: The NPS should consider alternative elements that focus
on non-motorized uses such as promoting cross country skiing, and snow
shoeing.
Response: NPS will continue to facilitate non-motorized recreation
and set ski tracks on the edges of snow roads. Snowshoers and cross-
country skiers also have impacts on wildlife. The best available
science indicates that cross-country skiers are more likely than
snowmobiles to elicit a startle or flight response in wildlife as a
result of their less regular use patterns and quiet approach to
animals. Yellowstone is a large park, and it is 30 miles from West
Yellowstone to Old Faithful and 50 miles from Mammoth Hot Springs to
Old Faithful. Most visitors cannot ski or snowshoe these distances. For
most visitors to enjoy locations in Yellowstone such as Old Faithful or
the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone, motorized access is necessary. Ski
and snowshoe opportunities are available throughout the park, and many
people access trailheads via snowmobile or snowcoach.
8. Comment: Only certain types of snowmobiles and/or snowcoaches
with special technology should be allowed in the park.
Response: Electric snowmobiles could be used in Yellowstone under
this winter use plan if they meet all other requirements. NPS is not
aware of their commercial availability. Four-stroke
[[Page 60168]]
snowmobiles have been operated by concessioners within the park for the
past six years. There are currently air and sound requirements for
snowmobiles, and future requirements for snowcoaches are expected.
Snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements have considerably
cleaner emissions and are quieter than snowmobiles that do not meet NPS
requirements. The NPS continues to encourage snowmobiles (and
snowcoaches) to employ improved technologies. NPS will continue to move
towards air and sound requirements for snowcoaches, and snowcoaches
will be required to adhere to noise and air emissions requirements,
similar to those of snowmobiles.
9. Comment: The park should consider additional actions such as
increasing law enforcement activities, lowering speed limits, stopping
accommodation of winter use, prohibiting tours and allowing trips to
set destinations only, and expansion of educational programs regarding
winter use opportunities at Yellowstone.
Response: NPS will continue enforcement of its regulations. While
an adjustment to speed limits may be analyzed further in the long-term
winter use planning effort, a much lower speed limit would not allow
access to Yellowstone's widely-spaced attractions. The NPS believes
providing motorized oversnow access to the features of Yellowstone for
the next two winter seasons helps fulfill the mission of the park to
provide for visitor use and enjoyment of those resources. The current
commercial guiding program provides an excellent way for the public to
learn about the park and appropriate behavior. In the long-term plan,
the NPS will evaluate alternatives that look at education programs for
unguided or non-commercial guided opportunities.
10. Comment: The interim plan should be modified to include
different timeframes for how long it would be in effect and different
seasonal entry points.
Response: NPS believes the 2-year duration of the plan is necessary
to provide adequate time to develop a new long-term winter use plan. In
a long-term plan, the alternatives will consider a variety of spatial
or temporal zoning as the comment suggests.
11. Comment: Winter use management should include either high fees
for snowmobile use or subsidized snowcoach use.
Response: NPS will consider the fee suggestion in future long-term
winter use planning.
12. Comment: NPS should create a lottery, permit, or reservation
system to limit winter use access, including a safety test or other
educational component to assist the park in enforcement. Allocations
among guides and outfitters should be fair and equal.
Response: Through the use of commercial guides, a reservation
system is in place so that visitors can plan ahead for access to the
park. Other allocation systems and education opportunities will be
evaluated in the long-term winter use planning. The commercial guiding
program has substantially assisted the park in improving compliance
with park regulations.
13. Comment: Areas outside the park should be designated for
snowmobile use, the park should be periodically shut down to allow for
regeneration of the ecosystem, and snowmobiles should be required to
stay on certain tracks if use is allowed in the Park.
Response: Whether areas outside the Park are also available for
snowmobiling is not within the scope of this decision-making process.
Snowmobiles in Yellowstone have always been restricted to park roads
and have never been permitted off-road. The sheer size of Yellowstone
means that more than one road is necessary to provide adequate visitor
access. The No Action Alternative considered in the 2008 EA have closed
the park and therefore better protected air quality. However, that
alternative would have seriously limited access to much of the park for
those not capable of skiing or snowshoeing long distances. Snowmobiles
as well as snowcoaches offer visitors the opportunity to enjoy
Yellowstone. With the requirement to use only snowmobiles that meet NPS
air and sound requirements and are accompanied by a commercial guide,
snowmobiles serve as a form of access to the features of Yellowstone,
not a separate recreational activity.
14. Comment: NPS should require that winter users maintain 100
meter animal distance when stopping.
Response: The NPS requires visitors stay at least 100 yards (91 m)
away from bears and wolves and at least 25 yards (23 m) away from all
other animals--including bison, elk, bighorn sheep, deer, moose, and
coyotes.
15. Comment: Snowmobiles should only be allowed for use by rangers,
the disabled, or for emergency operations.
Response: Administrative use of snowmobiles is also managed by the
NPS winter use plan, and as explained above, most NPS snowmobiles now
meet NPS air and sound requirements. Similarly, researchers must also
use snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements. Snowmobiles
that do not meet NPS air and sound requirements are used
administratively only where necessary for the performance of park
duties (for example, in deeper snow associated with boundary patrol).
Snowmobiles provide a different type of interaction with the park's
attractions than do snowcoaches. Providing some level of access via
both snowmobiles and snowcoaches provides for different kinds of
enjoyment of the park's scenery and natural and historic objects and
wildlife
16. Comment: The interim plan should not use adaptive management to
address existing park violations of NPS mandates.
Response: This rule does not authorize violations of any NPS
mandates. NPS will continue enforcement of its regulations under any
scenario, and the NPS will use adaptive management and monitoring
results to make adjustments to the plan's implementation.
17. Comment: The 2004 rule should be retained, and the NPS should
reaffirm its commitment to keeping Sylvan Pass open.
Response: Due to a pending appeal and other litigation related to
reinstatement of the 2004 rule, relying on the reinstated 2004 rule
would create substantial uncertainty regarding winter access, and NPS
does not believe it is a viable option. In addition, there has been no
current NEPA analysis or other determination that use at the levels
authorized under that regulation is consistent with the NPS's statutory
and other mandates. The findings of the 2007 EIS, as well as the court
order vacating it, both suggest that those use levels are probably not
consistent with those requirements. In order to help assure winter
access to Yellowstone, the NPS is completing planning and rulemaking to
replace the 2004 regulation reinstated by the Wyoming Court. A separate
decision has been made, and separate regulations will be published, for
Grand Teton National Park and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial
Parkway.
This decision continues the implementation of the Sylvan Pass
Agreement (subject to weather-related constraints and NPS fiscal,
staff, infrastructural, equipment, and other safety-related capacities)
during this interim plan. Management of the Pass will continue to be
evaluated in a long-term plan.
18. Comment: The NPS air and sound requirements should be
eliminated so that individuals can drive their snowmobiles on park
roads.
[[Page 60169]]
Response: The NPS continues to require snowmobiles (and encourage
snowcoaches) to employ improved technologies. Eliminating the air and
sound requirements could lead to a return of historical conditions,
which were found in 2000 to constitute impairment of park resources.
Even if such use could be authorized, it would at a minimum have to be
analyzed in an EIS. This comment will be considered in the course of
the long-term planning process.
19. Comment: The 2008 EA selected an incorrect ``no-action'', as it
did not represent the current level of activity.
Response: NPS disagrees. When the 2008 EA was prepared, the 2007
rule had been vacated. No snowmobile or snowcoach use would have been
authorized without action by the NPS, because the authorizations in the
2004 rule had expired pursuant to the sunset date provisions. After the
2008 EA was issued, the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming
reinstated the 2004 rule without the sunset clauses, and as a result,
up to 720 snowmobiles per day were allowed for the winter of 2008-09.
Due to a pending appeal, there is still uncertainty regarding that
reinstatement. As explained above, there has been no current NEPA
analysis or other determination that use at the levels authorized under
that regulation is consistent with the NPS's statutory and other
mandates. Accordingly, the No Action Alternative analyzed in the 2008
EA represents a more logical and useful benchmark against which impacts
can be compared, and therefore continues to better satisfy the purposes
of the no action alternative under NEPA.
20. Comment: The snowcoach-only alternative was improperly
dismissed.
Response: A snowcoach-only transportation system would have
numerous impacts and might not be the least impacting form of
transportation. While NPS agrees that preservation of resources is key
to the fundamental mandate of Yellowstone and the entire National Park
System, the suggestion that the Yellowstone National Park enabling
statute and the NPS Organic Act mandate snowcoach use is incorrect.
These acts direct the agency to protect park resources and provide for
enjoyment without incurring impairment. If NPS is to provide for any
sizeable visitor access to Yellowstone in the winter, motorized vehicle
use is necessary, and NPS believes that a limit of 318 snowmobiles per
day and 78 snowcoaches per day effectively allows the agency to protect
its resources while providing for visitation during this two-winter
period.
21. Comment: The NPS has received a larger percentage of comments
from the past planning efforts supporting a transition from snowmobiles
to snowcoaches.
Response: The NPS has reviewed all comments received throughout the
past and present winter use planning efforts in compliance with the
NEPA and other relevant laws and regulations. The NPS is mandated to
consider all of these comments in order to provide the decision-maker
with a fully informed environmental analysis to base their decision on.
NPS cannot base its decision simply on the sheer numbers of comments in
support or against snowmobile, snowcoach, or solely non-motorized
winter use. Snowcoach use has slowly and steadily increased. Somewhat
more visitors still prefer to visit Yellowstone via snowmobiles.
Snowcoaches do facilitate conversations between guides and visitors,
but the guiding requirement for snowmobiles also has a similar result.
If visitors double up on snowmobiles, the cost is comparable to
snowcoach tickets for multiple individuals. Snowmobiles and snowcoaches
both cause similar soundscape, wildlife and air quality impacts.
Snowcoaches may consume more fuel per capita than do the snowmobiles
that meet NPS air and sound requirements for use in Yellowstone. As the
FONSI indicates, it is no longer clear that snowcoaches are the ``least
impacting'' oversnow vehicles.
22. Comment: The Park should work with surrounding communities to
educate the public regarding responsible and appropriate behavior
within Yellowstone National Park.
Response: The current commercial guiding program provides an
excellent way for the public to learn about the park and appropriate
behavior. In the long-term plan, the NPS will evaluate alternatives
that look at education programs for unguided or non-commercial guided
opportunities.
23. Comment: The NPS should provide the public and use a
transparent and candid interpretation of the findings related to
snowmobile impacts on park resources.
Response: The NPS has used the most current information available
in preparing the 2008 EA and this decision. That information has led to
a new and better understanding of the contribution of both snowmobiles
and snowcoaches to impacts on park resources.
24. Comment: The proposed rule and impact analysis violates the
NPS's Organic Act of 1916, findings within the 2008 EA, the court
ruling of the U.S District Court for Wyoming, other previous decisions
on this issue, and other provided court precedents.
Response: As a result of the Wyoming District Court's order, the
reinstated 2004 rule was in effect for the winter of 2008-2009. This
interim rule would be in effect for two winter seasons. NPS believes
the two-year duration of the plan is necessary to provide adequate time
to develop a new long-term winter use plan. NPS believes the rule is
consistent with all applicable court decisions concerning prior winter
use plans, and other applicable authorities.
25. Comment: The methodologies of the analyses were flawed because
it did not compare the impacts of snowcoaches versus snowmobiles
adequately, consider the historical precedent of snowmobile use, and
used existing concessioner contracts as the basis for use numbers.
Response: The computations in the 2008 EA were based on actual
field measurements in Yellowstone, not on hypothetical modeling or
estimates. Given the average passenger load on snowmobiles and
snowcoaches in Yellowstone and the actual fuel economies of these
vehicles, snowcoaches consume more fuel per passenger than snowmobiles.
As indicated by the August 2008 peer-reviewed paper, ``Portable
Emission Measurements of Yellowstone National Park Snowcoaches and
Snowmobiles'' by Gary A. Bishop, Ryan Stadtmuller, Donald H. Stedman,
and John D. Ray in the Journal of the Air and Waste Management
Association (59:936-942), snowcoaches and snowmobiles are very similar
in the per-passenger emissions. The soundscape modeling in the 2007 EIS
(which was not challenged on this issue) indicated that a snowcoach-
only alternative would cause major adverse effects to soundscapes. More
recent monitoring information indicates snowcoaches are audible for
similar time periods as commercially guided snowmobile groups. Also
work on snowcoach sound indicates that the loud coaches include some
modern vehicles, as well as those historic coaches that have not been
retrofitted.
26. Comment: The false studies like the two-stroke emission test
(where they used a very old, very out of tune two-stroke engine and
compared the results against a brand new fuel efficient car) are a
criminal use of taxpayer money.
Response: Current snowmobile emission information was based on
modern snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements. Two-stroke
snowmobile air emissions information used standard EPA emission
factors.
[[Page 60170]]
27. Comment: The economic baseline analysis used in the 2008 EA
should be 540 snowmobiles per day, as opposed to zero.
Response: As discussed above, the No Action Alternative analyzed in
the 2008 EA represents the most logical and useful benchmark against
which impacts can be compared, and therefore continues to best satisfy
the purposes of the no action alternative under NEPA.
As discussed below, the economic analysis in this rule used a
different baseline, based on the reinstated 2004 rule and its limit of
720 snowmobiles per day.
28. Comment: The NPS methodology for determining a comment period
was improper and does not need to relate to the winter use season.
Response: Little time was available to complete the 2008 EA, so the
public comment period on the EA in 2008 was quite limited. The NPS
regrets any difficulties entering comments into its Web-based public
comment system, but notes that comments sent by regular mail were also
accepted. The NPS also provided an additional 45-day comment period on
the proposed rule and took into account all comments received on the
rule and 2008 EA. Thus a full 60-day comment period was provided on the
proposed action.
29. Comment: NPS Management Policies prohibit the impairment of
park resources and values, and snowmobile use constitutes an
impairment.
Response: No impairment to park resources was found for the
Selected Alternative.
30. Comment: No limit should be established for snowmobile access
until impairment of park resources has been identified and proven. The
standard of how impairment is applied to soundscapes is too strict.
Response: The Organic Act charges NPS with providing for enjoyment
of the national parks ``by such means as will leave them unimpaired.''
However, nothing in the Organic Act suggests that impairment is the
only consideration that may justify imposing limitations on use. The
Organic Act clearly authorizes appropriate limitations on use as needed
to protect park resources and values. Recreational uses may be
prohibited if they are not an appropriate use, which does not
necessarily mean that they cause impairment. NPS also manages uses so
as to minimize conflicts among them. The NPS Management Policies
explain when recreational and other uses may be prohibited or
restricted. The natural soundscape is one of the ``park resources and
values'' that NPS is required to conserve and protect from impairment
under the NPS Organic Act.
31. Comment: A potential precedent may be set that would restrict
un-guided automobile use inside the park during the summer.
Response: This is a winter use plan not a summer plan. Issues and
concerns are different in the winter than in the summer, and this plan
does not set a precedent for summer visitation.
32. Comment: Unacceptable impacts to park resources were not
adequately addressed in the 2008 EA--more action is needed to prevent
the unacceptable impacts caused by snowmobile use within the park.
Response: The NPS finds that the negligible to moderate impacts of
the Selected Alternative described in the 2008 EA and FONSI do not meet
the criteria described in the FONSI for either unacceptable impacts or
impairment, and are therefore consistent with the NPS's statutory
requirements under the Organic Act.
33. Comment: Snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements
are not impacting the air quality within the park and give off fewer
emissions.
Response: All snowmobiles allowed into the parks (with certain
minor exceptions) must meet NPS air and sound requirements. These are
the cleanest snowmobiles on the market. Impacts on air quality were
analyzed and discussed in the EA and FONSI.
34. Comment: Air quality is adversely affected by the use of
snowmobiles in the park, primarily due to exhaust, and that it is the
duty of the NPS to prevent adverse impacts to air quality.
Response: Alternative 1 considered in the 2008 EA would close the
park to visitor oversnow vehicle use and therefore fully protect air
quality. However, Alternative 1 would deny access to much of the park
for those not capable of skiing or snowshoeing. The Selected
Alternative would allow only snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound
requirements into the park. Recent use levels have been similar to or
higher than the levels expected under the Selected Alternative, and air
quality has been very good to excellent in the park. It is therefore
expected to remain very good to excellent.
35. Comment: Snowmobiles and snowcoaches have the same impact on
air quality.
Response: Snowcoach use has been carefully analyzed in the winter
use plan, particularly since their impacts upon park soundscapes,
wildlife, and air quality are at times greater than those of
snowmobiles. As indicated by the August 2008 peer-reviewed paper,
``Portable Emission Measurements of Yellowstone National Park
Snowcoaches and Snowmobiles'' by Gary A. Bishop, Ryan Stadtmuller,
Donald H. Stedman, and John D. Ray in the Journal of the Air and Waste
Management Association (59:936-942), snowcoaches and snowmobiles are
very similar in the per-passenger emissions. Snowcoaches also use more
fuel than snowmobiles, even accounting for the different passenger
loads.
36. Comment: While the NPS claims to have independent ``authority
and jurisdiction to administer some provisions of the Clean Air Act''
in the 2008 EA, the State of Wyoming has primacy under the Clean Air
Act; therefore, the NPS has no authority to rely on air quality
standards to limit snowmobile access in the park.
Response: NPS agrees the States of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho play
a primary role in implementation of the Clean Air Act as it affects the
park. However, as the Federal Land Manager, the NPS also has
responsibilities to protect air quality and air quality-related values
in the park. The Clean Air Act is not the sole applicable authority. As
explained above, this is an exercise of the NPS Organic Act authority
over use within the park, not an effort by NPS to regulate
manufacturers, and it is consistent with Section 310 of the Clean Air
Act. Air quality is expected to remain very good to excellent under the
rule. The Organic Act reserves ample discretion to the Park Service to
determine how best to provide for enjoyment of the Park. Thus, NPS has
exclusive responsibility to determine the appropriate level and type of
public access into national parks; indeed, many other national parks
are closed entirely to motorized access in the winter.
37. Comment: The analysis of air quality was flawed, since air
quality monitoring was not conducted along road corridors and the range
of impacts from pollution was not fully accounted for in the analysis.
The analysis of air quality impacts was improper since the NPS has not
properly explained how an action would have ``major'' impacts on air
quality within the park.
Response: The 2008 EA used new impact threshold definitions in
order to address exactly the sorts of issues raised by this comment.
The definitions for this EA were intentionally adjusted downward to be
more conservative--that is, more protective--of park resources. The
definitions are not based on parkwide metrics; rather, they are based
on actual monitoring data, which are gathered at the two places where
oversnow vehicle use is highest, Old Faithful and West Yellowstone. The
NPS used the National Ambient Air
[[Page 60171]]
Quality Standards (NAAQS) in assessing air quality impacts because they
provide an objective standard established by the EPA in order to
protect air quality and protect public health.
38. Comment: The compaction of snow is a benefit of snowmobile use,
as it prevents erosion.
Response: Snowmobile and snowcoach use under this rule is confined
to a portion of the existing road system. The area of compacted snow
comprises a negligible portion of the park acreage and has a negligible
effect on overall snowmelt, runoff patterns, and erosion.
39. Comment: National parks are for the entire public, not just for
environmentalists or special interest groups.
Response: National parks are open to the general public. Winter use
management is intended to address specific issues while providing
opportunities for all visitors to enjoy the parks consistent with NPS
legal mandates and policies.
40. Comment: Studies have shown that black carbon emissions have
adverse effects on the snowpack and should be analyzed before a rule is
enacted.
Response: Monitoring of pollution deposition in the snowpack has
been underway for more than 10 years, and this concern has not been
identified in Yellowstone. As indicated in the 2008 EA, this monitoring
will continue.
41. Comment: Many snowmobile operators drive too fast in the park
Response: All snowmobiles are to be commercially guided, which
generally has eliminated speeding and other past problems. This is
demonstrated, among other things, by the reduction in citations for
such violations.
42. Comment: Banning or limiting all automobiles within the park
should be explored, since snowmobiles are not the only motorized type
of vehicle that creates impacts.
Response: Regarding automobiles in the summer, this is not a summer
use plan, but rather a winter use plan, so such decision-making is
beyond the scope of the rule. In the winter, the majority of the park
has long been closed to automobiles, with the roads groomed for
oversnow vehicle use. Plowing the roads for automobile use will likely
be analyzed in the long-term winter use plan.
43. Comment: Snowmobile use adversely affects human health and
safety because of air pollution, snowmobile accidents and crashes, and
improper snowmobile operation.
Response: Concerning health and safety, results of the most recent
personal exposure monitoring from winter 2008-2009 shows no exceedances
of standards. With the requirement for commercial guiding, law
enforcement incidents related to snowmobile use have dropped
dramatically in the past five years, as compared to the 1990s, thus
indicating fewer accidents and violations.
44. Comment: The analysis of health and safety is flawed because
NPS must utilize health and safety metrics that have reasoned basis in
relevant health standards for determining major health and safety
impacts resulting from snowmobile use.
Response: NPS safety managers use OSHA and NIOSH metrics for
measuring exposure of employees to sound and air pollution, which are
standard measures used by safety professionals in determining hazards.
45. Comment: Snowmobile operators use caution and are polite to
other users; I did not see any blue haze.
Response: NPS monitoring has shown dramatic improvements in winter
conditions relative to historical use.
46. Comment: The cost of continuing snowmobile use at the park,
conducting studies on this matter, and maintaining the East Entrance
Road would be too much for the amount of snowmobilers that currently
access the park. Furthermore, keeping Sylvan Pass open is too dangerous
for park staff.
Response: Winter operations in Yellowstone are expensive for
snowmobile or snowcoach access. The interim plan continues to implement
the Sylvan Pass Agreement reached with the City of Cody, Park County,
Wyoming, and the State of Wyoming. Sylvan Pass will be open only when
safety criteria have been met.
47. Comment: The Park's assertion that the snowcoach-only
alternative would have hazardous effects on oversnow travel is
erroneous.
Response: If travel were restricted to snowcoaches only, a
consequent increase in such traffic would result assuming visitation
levels remain anywhere near current levels. This increase could
compound the problems already seen in the park with rutting and damage
to snow roads from coaches. That is why the NPS is implementing size
and weight restrictions on coaches.
48. Comment: The Park informed commercially guided snowmobile
businesses that 14 snowmobiles a day would be allowed per concessioner,
yet the number now being proposed has been decreased to nine per day.
Response: NPS recognizes that some visitors will not be able to
take snowmobiles into Yellowstone. However, most visitors will be able
to take a snowcoach instead. Some visitors may have to adjust their
plans and visit the park on different days.
49. Comment: The Park needs the revenue from snowmobiling
activities, so entrance fees would have to be increased as a result of
banning snowmobiles from entering the Park. Otherwise, the entrance
fees should be increased in order to increase law enforcement patrols.
Response: Decisions regarding the appropriate type of winter use
and numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches are made without regard to
entrance fee revenues. Entrance fees related to winter use are a small
part of Yellowstone's overall budget and a small part of the fee
revenue that Yellowstone receives. Winter use accounts for 100,000 of
the approximately 3.2 million people that visit Yellowstone each year.
50. Comment: Law enforcement efforts would not necessarily be
decreased with the commercial snowmobile guide requirement, as is
stated in the 2008 EA. Snowmobile use within the park requires
increased law enforcement, since many snowmobile operators do not abide
by the rules and regulations of the park.
Response: The NPS has reviewed the methodology used to calculate
law enforcement incidents and believes they correctly show a decrease
with the implementation of the managed use program, including
commercial guiding. With the managed use program, the NPS believes that
many of the incidents observed in the past (for example, snowmobilers
speeding or going off road) rarely occur today.
51. Comment: The potential banning or limitations placed on
snowmobile access to the park would create adverse impacts to
surrounding businesses, tourists, as well as the NPS, since snowmobile
outfitters and businesses that benefit from tourism would have to
increase the cost of snowmobile tours for tourists.
Response: The 2008 EA and rulemaking analyzed socioeconomic impacts
using IMPLAN modeling. Though this model does not incorporate every
potential factor in the socioeconomic setting, it allows an objective
analysis structure that may be applied to the entire planning area and
cumulative impact study area. With respect to the number of snowmobile
and snowcoach entries permitted under the Selected Alternative and
resulting impacts on operators and visitors, the
[[Page 60172]]
permitted entries (318 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches) represent an
8.2% increase in snowmobiles and a 123% increase in snowcoaches
compared to the 2007-2008 average of 294 snowmobiles and 35 snowcoaches
per day. The percentage increases represented by the Selected
Alternative are even larger compared to the 2008-2009 average of 205
snowmobiles and 29 snowcoaches per day. While the 2008-2009 use likely
reflects visitor uncertainty brought on by recent court decisions, NPS
does not think that use levels will increase considerably over the next
two years that the Selected Alternative will be in effect. This is
because of the current economic slowdown and because NPS does not
expect a considerable increase in use over such a short period of time.
52. Comment: The economic interests that currently depend on
snowmobiling could switch to business ventures related to snowcoaches
and the NPS needs to consider the value of the natural surroundings in
their analysis, since the park does not exist to provide profit for
businesses located outside the park. They may switch to business
ventures related to cross country skiing and snowshoeing.
Response: Gateway communities provide services to park visitors
that the NPS cannot provide or has chosen not to provide. Through the
planning process, the NPS determines appropriate type of winter use and
numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches. Through the concessions
contract process, the NPS then determines the nature of the business
opportunities available and provides potential concessioners the
opportunity to submit bid to provide those services. Businesses may
then compete to provide those services in the park. The NPS recognizes
that each type of use and access (snowmobile, snowcoach, ski, snowshoe)
creates impacts and the impacts must be weighed with regard to the
protection of park resources while providing for visitor enjoyment.
53. Comment: Snowmobile use inside the park creates undesirable
impacts to soundscapes within the park, disrupts the quiet serenity the
park offers in the absence of snowmobiles, and may very well be
inconsistent with desirable conditions.
Response: Even with sound from cumulative effects of all oversnow
vehicles, NPS expects soundscapes impacts to stay within moderate
levels, levels that would be fully acceptable and would be consistent
with its desired conditions and with the 2006 Management Policies. NPS
agrees that winter serenity is important and believes that the level of
use permitted by the Selected Alternative (by snowmobiles that meet NPS
air and sound requirements, combined with snowcoach use) will result in
large portions of the day without the sound of oversnow vehicles.
54. Comment: NPS should explain the adaptive management thresholds
(primarily soundscape thresholds), consistency with other NPS mandates,
obligation to conserve park resources and leave them unimpaired
throughout the entire park, legal basis for considering soundscapes as
a park resource, what an unacceptable impact is, and baseline in
gauging the impacts on snowmobile use on soundscapes.
Response: The adaptive management thresholds are a management tool
only; they do not represent the unacceptable impacts or impairment
thresholds described in section 1.4 of the Management Policies. Rather,
they are a conservative measure used to alert the NPS manager that
additional attention to a particular park resource or value is merited.
By reacting to the exceedance of a conservative adaptive management
threshold, NPS can seek to ensure that no unacceptable impacts or
impairment occur. Accordingly, the fact that these thresholds have been
exceeded in the past in no way undermines NPS's determination that
``sound from recreational oversnow vehicles [is] well within acceptable
ranges.''
In backcountry areas and travel corridors, the OSV impacts were
essentially compared against natural ambient. That is, the natural
ambient was the existing ambient (minus the low percentage of aircraft
sounds). In the Old Faithful developed area, the natural ambient was
not measurable due to other existing non-natural sounds (the heating
and ventilating systems in buildings adjacent to the monitoring site
are continuously audible).
The 2008 EA contains an explanation of the relationship between
major impacts, unacceptable impacts, and impairment. NPS notes that the
term ``major'' as used in the 2008 EA is equated with ``significant''
effects within the meaning of NEPA. Accordingly, if a major impact were
predicted, the NPS would prepare an EIS.
For soundscapes, one of the ``clear bright lines'' separating
acceptable impacts from unacceptable impacts is whether implementation
of an alternative would unreasonably interfere with the natural
soundscape, be inconsistent with Yellowstone's purposes or values,
impede the attainment of Yellowstone's desired future conditions,
create an unsafe or unhealthful environment, or diminish opportunities
for current or future generations.
NPS understands that this ``line'' does not establish a
``quantitative'' standard as the commenter requests. However, the
intensity of many impacts, and the manner in which those impacts
translate into impairment or unacceptable impacts, cannot be described
quantitatively. In such instances, they must rely on qualitative
standards which are based on the NPS manager's best professional
judgment.
The soundscape impact threshold definitions in the 2008 EA make
clear that recreational oversnow vehicle noise is a subject of this EA
and rulemaking; however, overflights and administrative vehicles are
clearly identified as contributing to the cumulative soundscapes
impacts, with appropriate mitigations also identified.
55. Comment: Newer snowmobiles, specifically ones that meet NPS air
and sound requirements, do not create noise pollution--a majority of
the impacts to soundscapes within the park emanate from NPS
contractors.
Response: Recent monitoring indicates that commercially guided
snowmobile groups and snowcoaches contribute similarly to the
audibility of oversnow vehicles. Early in the managed winter use
program, some contractors were using snowmobiles that did not meet NPS
requirements. Newer contracts are correcting this problem, and the NPS
continues to move towards a requirement that NPS and concession
employees only use snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound
requirements.
56. Comment: The soundscapes impacts presented in the 2008 EA could
be mitigated through further management of snowmobiles and snowcoaches
by the NPS.
Response: The NPS has only recently understood that modern
snowcoaches are also significant contributors to the concerns regarding
loud oversnow vehicles, and the NPS is still working on methodologies
and test procedures for sound testing of snowcoaches. The lack of a
stable, long-term plan has slowed implementation of snowcoach sound and
air emission requirements. An individual snowcoach represents a
significant investment, and snowcoaches are operating under 10-year
contracts that were awarded in 2003. Therefore the NPS believes the
long-term planning process should establish the test procedures and
specifics of snowcoach sound and air emission requirements.
57. Comment: Experiences on a snowmobile could not be replaced with
[[Page 60173]]
a snowcoach, such as the feeling of openness, experience of the
scenery, experience of the ability to access public lands.
Response: NPS recognizes that snowmobiles and snowcoaches offer
different types of experiences for visitors.
58. Comment: Snowmobile use has a negative impact on visitor
experience from the noise, exhaust, and wildlife disturbance.
Response: A visitor survey in 2008 specifically addressed
soundscapes and wildlife and found a high level of visitor
satisfaction.
59. Comment: Snowcoach use should be increased based on past
visitation trends, as snowcoaches could enhance the visitor experience.
Response: Snowcoach ridership has increased (except for the winter
of 2008-2009 when uncertainty and economic concerns reduced all winter
use). With more snowcoaches, NPS now understands that snowmobiles and
snowcoaches both contribute to air quality, soundscapes, and wildlife
impacts. Snowcoach limits have not been reached (the peak day in the
last three years was 60 of 78 authorized). Based on these concerns, the
NPS cannot increase snowcoach numbers during this interim plan. The
number of snowcoaches to be allowed will be addressed in the long-term
winter use plan.
60. Comment: The mission and purpose of the NPS is to preserve
national parks for future generations; snowmobile use is considered
both consistent and inconsistent with this purpose.
Response: The NPS mission is to preserve and protect the park
resources while providing for visitor enjoyment. The managed winter use
program during the past five winters has allowed that to occur.
61. Comment: The interim rule should be finalized by November 15,
2009, so people could plan for the coming season. The opening date
caveat that assumes accumulation of sufficient snow is improper.
Response: When the NPS reopened the comment period on the proposed
rulemaking in July, it notified the public of its intent to have a rule
in place for the upcoming winter season, so that people could plan
accordingly. The December 15 opening date for oversnow vehicle access
has been flexible for different types of vehicles, depending on snow
accumulation. When there is insufficient snow for snowmobiles or steel-
tracked snowcoaches, rubber tracked snowcoaches have been allowed.
62. Comment: Snowmobiles are an important historical use; any
recent decline in use is not related to demand but the current
litigation that has occurred.
Response: NPS believes that uncertainty brought on by litigation
(and recently, the economic downturn) has contributed to reduced
snowmobile numbers.
63. Comment: Current requirements for guided snowmobile use put
experiencing the park out of the reach many visitors.
Response: Yellowstone has always been an expensive place to visit
in the winter, and the NPS understands that guiding and snowmobile
technology requirements can add to the cost of a visit. The northern
areas of the park can be visited via wheeled vehicle, where visitors
are able to view many features and wildlife from the roadside or via
short walks, ski, or snowshoe trips.
64. Comment: The visitor use survey raises legitimacy concerns, and
the survey may be biased.
Response: The survey used appropriate methodologies to help begin
to understand the human dimensions of wildlife and soundscapes. The
methods and draft instruments were made available for public review as
part of the Paperwork Reduction Act process.
65. Comment: The NPS finding that there would be impacts on visitor
access and circulation under Alternative 1 in the 2008 EA is incorrect
because not all reasonable alternatives were considered, the beneficial
impacts were not considered, and the thresholds applied did not take
into consideration the expiration of the 2004 rule.
Response: For reasons explained therein, the NPS considered two
alternatives in the 2008 EA: No Action, which presumed no snowmobile or
snowcoach access, and the Proposed Action, which called for 318
snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches. A wide range of alternatives was
considered in the earlier 2007 EIS, including the alternative
specifically recommended by the commenter (allow access only from South
Entrance to Old Faithful in the winter). In the 2007 EIS, major adverse
impacts were found to visitor access and experience with this
alternative (3A in that document). A wide range of alternatives will be
considered in the long-term plan and EIS.
66. Comment: Snowmobiles provide the opportunity to enjoy the
scenic nature of the parks.
Response: Snowmobiles and snowcoaches each provide various
opportunities for visitors to enjoy the park, and each provides
different experiences for visitors.
67. Comment: Snowmobile use affects the scenic quality and
landscapes of the park as a result of exhaust and haze.
Response: The impacts that the commenters are describing seem to be
those that were experienced before the managed winter program took
effect. Snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements and
snowcoaches produce similar air emissions on a per passenger basis. The
blue haze no longer occurs.
68. Comment: The use of snowmobiles in the park is adversely
impacting vegetation, including impacting critical habitat.
Response: Snowmobiles and snowcoaches have always been limited to
the roads that visitors use in the summer months. Off-road travel is
prohibited in the park. The NPS is not aware of any effects to
vegetation as a result of snowmobile or snowcoach use.
69. Comment: Snowmobile use in the park disrupts wildlife during
the winter months when the animals are more vulnerable from such
impacts as noise. Others feel snowmobile and snowcoach use does not
disturb wildlife. Referenced studies should be considered.
Response: Thousands of observations of wildlife reactions to nearby
oversnow vehicles have extensively documented patterns of behavioral
responses in some bird and ungulate species. Substantial changes in
behavior are uncommon, and none of the observed responses suggest
immediate threats to the health or welfare of these wildlife
populations. Furthermore, the populations of these species within the
park have either grown or remained stable during the decades in which
winter use expanded dramatically. The exception--the trumpeter swan--
declined throughout the region due to causes unrelated to winter use.
Although important research questions remain regarding the ecological
effects of winter use at Yellowstone, no compelling evidence has
emerged regarding impacts to the studied wildlife populations from
recent research to support dramatic reductions in winter access to the
park.
The rule will continue winter use at approximately the same levels
as experienced in the past five years. All winter visitors to
Yellowstone will be required to travel in a guided group, whether with
a commercial snowmobile guide or in a guided snowcoach. Effects on
wildlife are expected to be similar to those seen in the last five
years, primarily negligible to minor (with possible moderate effects to
swans and eagles).
[[Page 60174]]
70. Comment: NPS findings regarding the impacts of snowcoaches and
snowmobiles on wildlife are inconsistent with the recommendations of
NPS biologists.
Response: As discussed in the FONSI, there have been some ambiguous
and somewhat inconsistent statements in past papers on wildlife
impacts. NPS has determined, however, that the Selected Alternative is
consistent with the biologists' actual recommendations.
The 2008 EA states, ``White et al. erred in stating winter use
should be limited to 50,000 oversnow visitors. [emphasis in original]
Rather, they intended that the phrase read `<50,000 over-snow vehicles'
'' (White 2008). White 2008 is a citation to a memo from Dr. White
available at http://www.nps.gov/yell/parkmgmt/upload/correction_2006winuserpt.pdf which clarifies that the intended limit was indeed
50,000 vehicles, not visitors. Had the record actually suggested a
limit of 50,000 visitors, rather than vehicles, NPS would have noted as
much in its discussion of the snowcoach-only transportation system in
the 2007 FEIS, which would accommodate 129,600 oversnow visitors (120
snowcoaches x 12 passengers per coach x 90 days per season).
In some reports, park wildlife biologists have recommended that
oversnow use be limited to the numbers observed during the ``past three
years [2001-2004] of their study.'' One example, a memo by P.J. White
of November 9, 2008, has been interpreted by some to mean that
snowmobile use should be limited to no more than approximately 260
snowmobiles per day and snowcoaches be limited to no more than
approximately 30 per day (which were the averages those years).
Other papers by the same authors, however, discussed a wider time
frame (1999-2006) and higher levels of use. The peer-reviewed
scientific journal article, ``Behavioral Responses of Bison and Elk in
Yellowstone to Snowmobiles and Snow Coaches'' by John J. Borkowski,
P.J. White, Robert A. Garrott, Troy Davis, Amanda R. Hardy and Daniel
J. Reinhart. Ecological Applications 16(5) 2006, pp. 1911-1925) makes
it clear that the monitoring period they are referring to is 1999
through 2004. Average daily oversnow vehicle use ranged from 593 per
day during the 2002 winter to 178 oversnow vehicles per day in 2004.
Maximum daily numbers ranged up to 1168 oversnow vehicles during the
study. Cumulative oversnow vehicle entries for the winter season for
the West Entrance alone ranged up to 46,885 for the winter season (data
are found on page 1915 of the paper). At the conclusion (p. 1924), the
authors state:
This study documented that winter visitors traveling on OSVs
were essentially confined to the groomed roads, typically behaved
appropriately when viewing wildlife, and rarely approached wildlife
except when animals were on or immediately adjacent to the road.
These attributes have allowed elk and bison in Yellowstone to
habituate somewhat to OSV recreation, commonly demonstrating no
observable response, and rarely displaying ``fight or flight''
responses when animals were off road. Further, available data
provide no evidence that levels and patterns of OSV traffic during
the past 35 years adversely affected the population dynamics or
demography of elk and bison. Thus, we suggest regulations
restricting the levels and travel routes of OSVs during our study
were effective at reducing disturbances to bison and elk below a
level that would cause measurable fitness effects. We acknowledge
the potential for fitness effects to develop if OSVs or other
stressors become more severe or prolonged. Thus, we recommend park
managers consider maintaining OSV traffic levels at or below those
observed during our study [1999-2004]. Regardless, numerous studies
have shown that scientific findings rarely persuade people to alter
their values or beliefs (e.g., Meadow et al. 2005). Thus, we suspect
that varying interpretations of the behavioral and physiological
response data will continue to exist because of the diverse values
and beliefs of the many constituencies of Yellowstone National Park.
The Selected Alternative maintains the restrictive regulations that
reduced disturbances and maintains OSV traffic levels well below those
observed from 1999-2004, and is thus fully consistent with the
recommendations of this peer-reviewed article and the biologists'
subsequent clarifications.
71. Comment: The NPS did not adequately show that major impacts to
wildlife (such as the road packing/grooming impacts to bison) are
avoided under the current interim winter use plan.
Response: The issue of bison use of groomed roadways is addressed
in detail in the 2008 EA. Impact threshold definitions were based on
the best information from NPS wildlife scientists, the 2006 Management
Policies, and federal laws. The NPS notes that the Selected Alternative
would result only in negligible to minor effects on park wildlife (with
possible moderate effects on swans), and that wildlife monitoring will
continue.
72. Comment: Sylvan Pass and the East Entrance are an important
point of access to the Park--a higher number should be used to satisfy
demand and justify keeping the East Entrance open.
Response: The NPS will honor the agreement reached with the State
of Wyoming, Park County, Wyoming, and the City of Cody regarding Sylvan
Pass. To that end, 20 snowmobiles and 2 snowcoaches per day are
allocated to the East Entrance.
73. Comment: The East Entrance and Sylvan Pass should not be used
because of the costs to keep the entrance open versus the revenue
generated--the funds saved by closing this area could be used for other
park operations.
Response: The NPS reached an agreement with the Sylvan Pass Study
Group and this plan continues to implement the agreement (which
recognizes weather-related constraints and NPS fiscal, staff,
infrastructural, equipment, and other safety-related capacities).
Management of the pass will continue to be evaluated in a long-term
plan.
74. Comment: The 15-day comment period on the draft rule was not
sufficient time to offer comment, irrelevant of the NPS justification--
this violates the intent of NEPA. Further, the NPS should have accepted
email comments on this issue.
Response: The NPS provided 15 days for comment on the 2008 EA and a
total of 60 days for comment on the proposed rule. The decision took
into account all the comments received on the proposed rule and 2008
EA. The NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) web-based
system allows for electronic submission of comments. The NPS regrets
any difficulties entering comments into the PEPC system, but notes that
comments sent by regular mail were also accepted.
75. Comment: The current interim plan did not include a full range
of alternatives as required under NEPA. By changing the number of
snowmobile allowed in the interim plan compared to what was previously
allowed, and without providing a reasoned explanation, the NPS is not
compliant with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Response: As discussed in the purpose and need for the 2008 EA,
this EA and rulemaking considered only those options that would have
allowed the NPS to open the parks for an interim period without causing
major impacts. NPS did not examine options that it knew, based on
previous analyses, modeling data, or monitoring data, would cause major
impacts. Such impacts must first be analyzed in an EIS. In order to
ensure that some motorized access could occur for the upcoming winter,
NPS proposed an approach it believed could likely be supported by a
Finding of No Significant Impact, which required that
[[Page 60175]]
no major impacts from the decision could be experienced.
The past five years of monitoring and studies has provided the NPS
with information that it did not have in earlier winter use decisions.
Using current monitoring and science, the NPS is drawing different
conclusions regarding winter use and the contributions of snowmobiles
and snowcoaches to those impacts.
As the Supreme Court has recently clarified in Federal
Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations (2009), there is
no heightened standard for agency policy changes. An agency need not
provide a more detailed analysis for a new policy; it simply must
provide the same level of reasoned analysis that should justify any
agency decision. NPS has indicated the reasoning for the reduced
numbers of snowmobiles in the 2008 EA.
76. Comment: The interim plan should have been an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) level of analysis, as opposed to an EA, so the
proposed rule is invalid. Furthermore, the level of analysis was flawed
because the NPS has changed its definition of impacts between the
various planning processes.
Response: The 2008 EA, which did not reveal any impacts greater
than moderate, is an appropriate NEPA analysis document to support this
interim winter use decision and rulemaking. The rule will continue a
program which has been in place for the past five winters, and whose
impacts are well understood through monitoring. While the interim plan
is in place, a wider range of alternatives can be analyzed in a long-
term plan and EIS.
Throughout the several recent winter use processes, NPS's desired
conditions have remained the same. The definition of impacts has
changed in recognition of the use of monitoring data versus modeling
analysis to determine impacts. The 2007 EIS primarily used computer
modeling, whereas the 2008 EA used the results from monitoring.
77. Comment: The interim plan/EA violated NEPA because it did not
provide a proper level of analysis, would result in the impairment of
park resources, and is pre-decisional because the proposed rule was
released two days after the 2008 EA was available for public comment.
The NPS should terminate the 2008 NEPA process.
Response: A final decision was not made in December 2008. NPS did
not finalize this decision until nearly a year later, after also
allowing an additional 45-day public comment period for the proposed
rule. NPS sought to create an interim winter use plan that would
probably not have a significant impact on the environment, which among
other things means that it would not require the preparation of an EIS.
That does not mean, however, that NPS had prejudged the outcome of the
process. The proposed rule called for implementing the Preferred
Alternative in the 2008 EA, and the NPS solicited public comment on
both. NPS issued its FONSI on October 15, 2009. That decision and this
final rule took into account all the comments received on the 2008 EA
and proposed rule.
78. Comment: There are potential inconsistencies with the NPS's
previously published winter use National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) documents. The 2008 proposed rule and the 2008 EA on which it is
based do not address the bulk of EPA's written comments regarding the
2007 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for winter use plans in
Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. EPA has concerns with the
proposed rule and has mitigation and monitoring recommendations. EPA
will wait for the forthcoming EIS scoping period to revisit and clarify
concerns with previous winter use analyses.
Response: The past five years of monitoring and studies have
provided the NPS with information that it did not have in earlier
winter use decisions. Using current monitoring and science, the NPS is
drawing different conclusions regarding winter use and the
contributions of snowmobiles and snowcoaches to those impacts. The
definition of impacts has changed in recognition of the use of
monitoring data versus modeling analysis to determine impacts. The 2007
EIS primarily used computer-based modeling, whereas the 2008 EA used
monitoring.
79. Comment: Management should avoid unacceptable or major impacts
and use a mitigated FONSI as one method to address impacts from
snowmobile use.
Response: The Selected Alternative does do more than prevent
unacceptable impacts: it avoids all impacts that are greater than
moderate. It protects the very good to excellent air quality, minimizes
impacts upon park wildlife, and protects park soundscapes. Also, the
plan would implement an adaptive management program that managers could
utilize to adjust visitation to protect park resources even more, if
for some reason monitoring determines resources are not adequately
protected during these two winter seasons. Furthermore, by reacting to
the exceedance of a conservative adaptive management threshold, NPS can
ensure that no unacceptable impacts or impairment occur.
80. Comment: There is no evidence that my comments on previous
efforts had been reviewed, so the NPS should ensure that comments
submitted on the draft rule are reviewed and considered.
Response: All comments submitted on the 2008 EA and proposed rule
were reviewed and considered. Comments made in prior planning processes
are beyond the scope of this rule, but NPS did review and consider all
timely comments in those processes and this one.
81. Comment: The NPS had conflicting statements about the
environmentally preferred alternative between different NEPA efforts.
Response: The environmentally preferred alternative is determined
by the range of alternatives that are being considered in the specific
NEPA document. The 2007 EIS did not contain an alternative with the
numbers of snowmobiles and snowcoaches that are in the Selected
Alternative (318 and 78, respectively). Most alternatives called for
more snowmobiles or snowcoaches, or had only limited portions of the
park open to oversnow access. The Selected Alternative provides access
to all park features in a highly managed program whose impacts are well
understood.
82. Comment: Allowing snowmobile use is in conflict with purpose
for which Yellowstone was established, the mandates of the NPS such as
the National Park Service Act of 1916, and NPS Management Policies
because of the impact this use has to wildlife, noise, and visitor
experience.
Response: While NPS agrees that public enjoyment is part of the
fundamental mandate of Yellowstone and the entire National Park System,
the suggestion that the Yellowstone statute and the NPS Organic Act
mandate some particular level or type of snowmobile use is incorrect.
While NPS agrees that preservation of resources is key to the
fundamental mandate of Yellowstone and the entire National Park System,
the suggestion that the Yellowstone statute and the NPS Organic Act
mandate snowcoach use is incorrect. These acts merely direct the agency
to conserve park resources and provide for enjoyment without incurring
impairment. If NPS is to provide for any significant visitor access to
Yellowstone in the winter, motorized vehicle use is necessary, and NPS
believes that the limit of 318 snowmobiles per day and 78 snowcoaches
per day is consistent with the park's mandate.
The NPS Management Policies state that ``NPS managers must always
seek
[[Page 60176]]
ways to avoid, or to minimize to the greatest extent practicable,
adverse impacts on park resources and values.'' (Section 1.4.3) This
means that NPS managers must take reasonable, affirmative steps toward
avoiding or minimizing adverse impacts, but it does not go so far so as
to constrain the NPS's discretion to allow impacts that the NPS deems
necessary and appropriate to provide for the enjoyment or conservation
of the park.
83. Comment: The scope of the interim plan was misdirected, as
snowmobiles have a small impact when looking at the bigger picture.
Response: Historically, oversnow vehicle use (especially
snowmobiles) caused most of the impacts associated with winter use in
Yellowstone, for example, accounting for the majority of air pollution.
During the past five years, with the managed use program, most of those
historic issues have been addressed, and the NPS now understands that
snowmobiles and snowcoaches are contributing similarly to winter use
related impacts.
84. Comment: Because the definition of the word ``natural'' was
misapplied by the NPS, and because snowmobiles travel along developed
park highways and not off-road, the executive order that regulates off-
road vehicles is not applicable and snowmobile use is not subject to
special regulation.
Response: NPS recognizes that Executive Order 11644 (Use of Off-
Road Vehicles on Public Lands, as amended by E.O. 11989) applies to all
federal agencies that allow snowmobiling. The Executive Order defines
off-road vehicle as ``any motorized vehicle designed for or capable of
cross-country travel * * *.'' That Executive Order requires federal
agencies to promulgate regulations. The NPS regulation, which is found
at 36 CFR 2.18, requires promulgation of special regulations like this
rule.
85. Comment: The desired conditions established in the 2008 EA were
not subject to public review and that public comment must be solicited
on these conditions.
Response: The desired conditions in the 2008 EA were similar to the
desired conditions identified in the 2007, 2004, 2003 and 2000 winter
use plans and have been subject to public review in all those past
planning processes.
86. Comment: Including a winter use monitoring plan in the scope of
the 2008 EA was unnecessary since oversnow motorized vehicle use should
not be permitted.
Response: The winter-specific monitoring complements other
monitoring programs. For example, the park monitors atmospheric
deposition (including mercury), visibility (including ozone), and fine
particulates at other stations.
87. Comment: There are resources that the NPS needed to further
analyze such as subnivian fauna and climate change.
Response: A review of long-term climate trends was presented in the
2007 EIS and will be considered in the new long-term winter use plan.
Subnivian fauna were dismissed as an impact topic because snowmobile
and snowcoach use is confined to paved and hard-packed gravel roads
that visitors use in the summer. Impacts to subnivian fauna, which may
occur elsewhere as a result of cross-country motorized use, do not
occur in Yellowstone.
88. Comment: NPS misinterprets the Organic Act, Yellowstone Park
Act, Clean Air Act, General Authorities Act, the NPS Management
Policies, Executive Orders, and the Park's Master Plan. The proposed
rule is fundamentally flawed. Some argue that these laws require that
snowmobiles be banned, while others argue that conservation should not
predominate over recreation.
Response: While the NPS agrees that public enjoyment is part of the
fundamental mandate of Yellowstone and the entire National Park System,
the suggestion that the Yellowstone statute and the NPS Organic Act
mandate some particular level or type of use is incorrect.
Under 36 CFR 2.18, snowmobile use is prohibited except where
specific routes are designated, on terms that, among other things, are
consistent with park values and do not damage park resources. That
regulation implements Executive Order 11644, as amended by Executive
Order 11989, which applies to all federal agencies that allow
snowmobiling.
Nothing in the Organic Act suggests that impairment is the only
consideration that may justify imposing limitations on use. For
example, the portion of the Organic Act that charges NPS with
conserving the scenery, natural and historic objects, and wildlife
within the parks can also justify limitations on use.
NPS Management Policies state that ``NPS managers must always seek
ways to avoid, or to minimize to the greatest extent practicable,
adverse impacts on park resources and values.'' (section 1.4.3) This
means that NPS managers must take reasonable, affirmative steps toward
avoiding or minimizing adverse impacts, but it does not go so far so as
to constrain the NPS's discretion to allow impacts that the NPS deems
necessary and appropriate to provide for the enjoyment or conservation
of the Park.
The NPS formulated this interim winter use plan for Yellowstone in
full compliance with the appropriate laws, policies, and executive
orders. The amount and type of snowmobile and snowcoach use, and the
restrictions on that use, will allow visitors to enjoy the park while
protecting park resources.
89. Comment: The proposed rule does not take into consideration the
precedent related to providing non-commercial opportunities in national
parks, as this action would set a precedent for banning other types of
vehicles in other parks.
Response: The concept of non-commercial guiding or unguided access
(both with training programs) has been analyzed in previous winter
plans and will be evaluated in alternatives in a long-term plan. This
is a winter plan, not a summer use plan and does not set a precedent
for other seasons or types of visitor access, nor does it limit what
may be studied in a long-term winter use plan.
90. Comment: The proposed rule is not consistent with the 2008
Wyoming Court Order, and does not provide the certainty that the order
called for. The interim rule constitutes a final agency action subject
to judicial review, so the NPS should not take final agency action on
the interim rule.
Response: The NPS believes the interim rule is consistent with all
applicable court orders.
91. Comment: Compared to snowmobiles, snowcoaches produce greater
emissions so these snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound requirements
should be allowed in the park.
Response: As discussed above, snowmobiles and snowcoaches produce
similar per-passenger emissions. NPS anticipates implementing NPS air
and sound requirements for snowcoaches in the future, but not during
these two winter seasons.
92. Comment: The plan is inaccurate because there is a lack of any
measurable criteria.
Response: The adaptive management plan contains both quantitative
and qualitative thresholds.
93. Comment: Poor air quality within the park stresses wildlife,
deteriorates visitor experience, and contributes to climate change.
Response: The 2008 EA analysis looked at impacts to wildlife,
soundscapes, and air quality which can directly or indirectly affect
these resources. It identified minor impacts to wildlife, moderate
impacts to
[[Page 60177]]
soundscapes, and negligible impacts to air quality.
94. Comment: Snowmobile use in the Park should be banned to reduce
global warming, conserve oil resources, and to fight the ``obesity
epidemic.''
Response: Snowmobiles meeting NPS emission requirements get 20-26
miles per gallon--a fuel economy far better than traditional two-stroke
snowmobiles, and similar on a per-passenger basis to snowcoaches.
Skiers and snowshoers use snowmobiles and snowcoaches to access trails
in the park.
95. Comment: The NPS overstated impacts to public and employee
health and safety by analyzing the No Action Alternative.
Response: In taking a hard look at the impacts of the No Action
Alternative (closing the park to guided snowmobile and snowcoach
access), the NPS recognized some impacts would still occur as a result
of administrative access needed to protect park resources. NPS deemed
those impacts to be moderate for employee health and safety.
Changes to the Final Rule
After taking the public comments into consideration and after
additional internal review, one change was made to the final rule, in
addition to non-substantive editorial changes made to improve clarity
of the rule. This change is as follows:
Paragraph 7.13(l)(6) has been revised to delete references to
snowmobiles manufactured prior to 2004. The NPS certifies snowmobiles
as meeting NPS requirements for a period of six years. Winter 2009-2010
will be the last winter model year 2004 snowmobiles that were certified
as meeting NPS air and emission requirements will be allowed to operate
in Yellowstone. Thus, in this final rule, previous references to model
year 2003 and earlier snowmobiles were deleted.
Summary of Economic Analysis
The results of the cost-benefit analysis indicate this regulation
will have de minimis negative impacts. This determination is based on a
consideration of current economic conditions, visitor trends from
recent years and continued uncertainty of park policies from court
decisions. In addition, this winter use plan will only be in place for
a two-year interim period. In order to capture the widest range of
possibilities, two scenarios were analyzed within this analysis. The
``expected scenario'' includes the impacts that are most likely to
occur and the ``maximum scenario'' includes the worst possible impacts
that might occur. NPS believes the expected scenario is most likely to
occur. Given that, the selected alternative will not have an annual
economic effect of $100 million, and will not adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of
government relative to the baseline. Additionally, the selected
alternative will not impose significant impacts on small businesses.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
The baseline conditions for this regulatory action are influenced
by recent court decisions. When the Environmental Analysis was issued
in 2008, the 2007 winter use regulation had been vacated and the
authorization for snowmobile access in the 2004 winter use regulation
had expired pursuant to its sunset provision. Thus, without regulatory
action by NPS at that time, no snowmobile access would have been
permitted, wheeled vehicle travel would have continued on roads that
had been traditionally plowed, and the park would have been open to
skiing and snowshoeing.
In November 2008 the Wyoming District Court ordered the
reinstatement of the 2004 regulation, without its sunset provision,
until NPS promulgates a regulation to take its place. The result of
that decision was the continued authorization for snowmobile and
snowcoach access as provided by the 2004 regulation. While there has
been no current NEPA analysis or other determination that snowmobile
use at the levels authorized under that regulation is consistent with
NPS statutory and other mandates, these conditions describe baseline
for purposes of this regulatory analysis.
In addition the recent economic downturn has also influenced winter
use. Use in the winter of 2008-2009 dropped from the previous winter in
part due to economic conditions.
NPS constructed two baseline scenarios to capture the possible
range of impacts. The ``expected scenario'' assumes that under baseline
conditions snowmobile and snowcoach use will not exceed the levels
permitted under the selected alternative. Indeed, to be conservative,
NPS assumed that snowmobile and snowcoach use under baseline conditions
in this scenario would equal that permitted under the selected
alternative. That assumption is considered most likely to hold given
recent trends in snowmobile use, the current economic downturn, the
short two-year interim period, and the likelihood of continued
uncertainty of the public regarding the winter use plan. Given that
assumption, changes in snowmobile and snowcoach use under the selected
alternative will be de minimis, as indicated in Table 1.
Table 1--Winter Season Snowmobile and Snowcoach Use Under the Expected
Scenario
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Snowmobile Snowcoach Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................... 28,620 7,020 35,640
Selected Alternative............. 28,620 7,020 35,640
--------------------------------------
Change....................... 0 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``maximum scenario'' assumes that under baseline conditions
snowmobile and snowcoach use will match levels permitted under the 2004
regulation. That regulation permits 720 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches
to access YNP per day. Therefore, under the maximum scenario the
selected alternative would reduce snowmobile use by 402 entries per day
(720 entries per day under baseline minus 318 entries per day under the
selected alternative). Snowcoach use would not be reduced (78 entries
per day under baseline minus 78 entries per day under the selected
alternative). Therefore, as many as 36,180 snowmobile entries would be
reduced in the maximum scenario over the 90-day winter use season. NPS
does not believe the maximum scenario is likely to occur given the
downward trend of snowmobile use in recent winter seasons, the current
economic downturn, the short two-year interim period, and the
likelihood of continued
[[Page 60178]]
uncertainty of the public regarding the winter use plan.
Table 2--Winter Season Snowmobile and Snowcoach Use Under the Maximum
Scenario
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Snowmobile Snowcoach Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................... 64,800 7,020 71,820
Selected Alternative............. 28,620 7,020 35,640
--------------------------------------
Change....................... -36,180 0 -36,180
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits and Costs
As indicated in Tables 1 and 2, the impacts of the selected
alternative to snowmobile use range from a reduction of zero to 402
entries per day, with zero being the most likely to occur. Impacts to
visitors are quantified as ``consumer surplus,'' which includes the
maximum willingness to pay for such activities minus the costs of
participation. Therefore, consumer surplus measures the net benefits of
visitation. These total consumer surplus changes are presented in Table
3, including total present values over the two-year period that the
regulation will be in effect.
NPS estimates that businesses will not incur impacts from the
selected alternative under the expected scenario. That conclusion is
based on the changes in snowmobile and snowcoach use presented in Table
1, which are considered most likely. However, in the unlikely event
that the maximum scenario would occur, negative impacts would be
incurred. Those impacts would be associated with the decrease in
snowmobile use presented in Table 2. These impacts are termed
``producer surplus,'' which are a net benefits that measure similar to
the consumer surplus values accruing to visitors. Total producer
surplus changes for businesses under the selected alternative are
presented in Table 3.
Table 3--Quantified Consumer and Producer Surplus Impacts for the Selected Alternative
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expected scenario Maximum scenario
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total present value Amortized annual value Total present value Amortized annual value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discount Rate: ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................
3 percent....................................... $0 $0 -$31,305,000 -$15,884,000
7 percent....................................... 0 0 -30,729,000 -15,884,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 recommends a 7 percent discount rate in general, and a 3 percent discount rate when analyzing the impacts
to private consumption. Values are 2003 dollars rounded to the nearest 1,000.
It is possible for visitors who do not access the park by
snowmobile or snowcoach to incur increases in consumer surplus from
decreased snowmobile use. In the current analysis, the expected
scenario is most likely to occur with de minimis changes in snowmobile
and snowcoach use; therefore, no impacts associated with this
phenomenon would likely occur. Under the maximum scenario, this
phenomenon would increase the consumer surplus of visitors who do not
access the park by snowmobile or snowcoach. However, given recent
visitor trends and the relatively low level of snowmobile and snowcoach
use contemplated under the selected alternative, it is not possible at
this time to estimate any such changes in visitor use. Therefore, while
recognizing that such impacts to visitors are possible under the
selected alternative; NPS is unable to quantify those impacts.
In addition to the potential impacts described above, NPS believes
there may be a positive impact on ``passive'' users under the maximum
scenario. These users are individuals who do not directly use park
resources and perhaps never intend to do so. Economists refer to the
values these users hold using several different terms, including non-
use values, passive use values, and existence values. The underlying
motivations for these values include the satisfaction of knowing that a
particular resource is protected or a desire to preserve the resource
for future generations. Under the maximum scenario, these passive users
may be more confident that park resources are being protected, and will
therefore incur benefits arising from the knowledge that park resources
may be more protected by the Selected Alternative. Under the expected
scenario, however, de minimis changes in snowmobile and snowcoach use
would occur and with commensurate impacts to these passive users.
Other benefits that could not be quantified include the potential
reduction in costs of road grooming and maintenance, winter staffing,
snowmobile safety hazards, and law enforcement. In general, decreasing
snowmobile activity under the maximum scenario may allow the park to
redirect resources towards other activities that will protect park
resources and address park management needs. Under the expected
scenario, these impacts are expected to be de minimis.
Explanation of the Selected Alternative
The Selected Alternative was chosen because it best balances winter
use with protection of park resources to ensure that the impairment of,
or unacceptable impacts to, park resources and values does not occur.
The Selected Alternative demonstrates the NPS commitment to monitor
winter use and to use the results to adjust the winter use program. The
results of the monitoring program, including data obtained regarding
air quality, wildlife, soundscapes, and health and safety, were used in
formulating the alternatives in the 2008 EA. The Selected Alternative
applies the lessons learned over the last several winters relative to
commercial guiding, which demonstrated, among other
[[Page 60179]]
things, that 100% commercial guiding has been very successful and
offers the best opportunity for achieving goals of protecting park
resources and allowing balanced use of the park. Law enforcement
incidents have been reduced well below historic numbers, even after
taking into account reduced visitation. That reduction is attributed to
the quality of the guided program.
The Selected Alternative uses strictly limited oversnow vehicle
numbers, combined with air and sound emission requirements and 100%
commercial guiding, to help ensure that the purpose and need for the
environmental impact statement is best met. With access via snowmobile,
snowcoaches, or non-motorized means, park visitors will have a range of
appropriate winter recreational opportunities. With the significant
restrictions built into snowmobile and snowcoach use, this plan also
ensures that these recreational activities will not impair or
irreparably harm park resources or values.
The Selected Alternative also supports the communities and
businesses both near and far from the park and will encourage them to
have an economically sustainable winter recreation program that relies
on a variety of modes for access to the park in the winter. Peak
snowmobile numbers allowed under the Selected Alternative are well
below the historic averages, but the snowmobile and snowcoach limits
should provide a viable program for winter access to the park.
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. These conclusions are based on the report ``Economic
Analysis: Selected Winter Use Plan for Yellowstone National Park''
(Best and Vigil, October 16, 2009).
(2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
Implementing actions under this rule will not interfere with plans by
other agencies or local government plans, policies, or controls since
this is an agency specific change.
(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. It only affects the use of over-snow machines within
specific national parks. No grants or other forms of monetary
supplement are involved.
(4) OMB has determined that this rule raises novel legal or policy
issues. The issue has generated local as well as national interest on
the subject in the Greater Yellowstone Area. The NPS has been the
subject of numerous lawsuits regarding winter use 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.). A
final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been conducted and contained
in the report ``Economic Analyses: Selected Winter Use Plan for
Yellowstone National Park'' (Best and Vigil, October 16, 2009).
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This 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. This
rulemaking has no effect on methods of manufacturing or production and
specifically affects the Greater Yellowstone Area, not national or U.S.
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. A statement
containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. This rule addresses public use
of national park lands, and imposes no requirements on other agencies
or governments.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule does not
have significant takings implications. Access to private property
located within or adjacent to the parks will be afforded the same
access during winter as before this rule. No other property is
affected.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism summary impact statement. A Federalism summary impact
statement is not required. It addresses public use of national park
lands, and imposes no requirements on other agencies or governments.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and
a submission under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
The 2008 Winter Use Plans Environmental Assessment (2008 EA) was
prepared and made available for public review and comment. A Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed October 15, 2009. The 2008 EA
and FONSI are available by contacting the Yellowstone National Park
Management Assistant's Office or at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated this
rule and determined that it has no potential effects on federally
recognized Indian tribes.
The NPS has evaluated potential effects on federally recognized
Indian tribes and have determined that there are no potential effects.
Numerous tribes in the area were consulted in the development of the
previous winter use planning documents. Their major concern was to
reduce the adverse effects on wildlife by snowmobiles. This
[[Page 60180]]
rule does that through implementation of the guiding requirements and
disbursement of snowmobile use through the various entrance stations.
Information Quality Act
In developing this rule we did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
Administrative Procedure Act: Comment periods on the proposed rule
were provided from November 5, 2008, through November 20, 2008, and
from July 24, 2009, to September 8, 2009, for a total of 60 days.
This rule is effective on December 15, 2009. The National Park
Service recognizes that new rules ordinarily go into effect thirty days
after publication in the Federal Register. For this regulation,
however, we have determined under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) and 318 DM 6.25 that
this rule should be effective on December 15, 2009, the traditional
date for commencement of the park's winter use season. This rule
implements the winter use plans for Yellowstone and relieves the
restrictions on the use of snowmobiles and snowcoaches that would exist
in its absence. In addition, good cause exists for the effective date
of December 15, 2009, for the following reasons:
(1) The NPS has in good faith publicly stated that the 2009-2010
winter season for Yellowstone National Park would commence on December
15, 2009, and the public and businesses have made decisions based on
the widespread public knowledge of this opening date.
(2) The finding of no significant impact for this rule was signed
on October 15, and was made available to the public for 30 days prior
to the signing of this rule. By December 15, the public therefore will
have had more than 60 days notice of the NPS decision.
(3) There would be no benefit to the public in delaying the
effective date of this rule, given that there has already been
substantial notice of the opening date and that the park will be open
under conditions substantially similar to those in effect for the past
three years, other than the reduced entry limits. The above-described
harms to the public resulting from a procedural delay of this rule
should therefore be avoided, and an effective date of December 15,
2009, is warranted.
Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation are
John Sacklin, Management Assistant, Yellowstone National Park; Jason
Waanders, Office of the Solicitor, and Phil Selleck, Regulations
Program Manager, National Park Service, Washington DC.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
District of Columbia, National parks, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
0
For the reasons given in the preamble, 36 CFR part 7 is amended as set
forth below:
PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM
0
1. The authority for part 7 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued
under DC Code 10-137 (2001) and DC Code 50-2201 (2001).
0
2. Amend Sec. 7.13 by revising paragraph (l) to read as follows:
Sec. 7.13 Yellowstone National Park.
* * * * *
(l)(1) What is the scope of this regulation? The regulations
contained in paragraphs (l)(2) through (l)(17) of this section apply to
the use of snowcoaches and recreational snowmobiles. Except where
indicated, paragraphs (l)(2) through (l)(17) do not apply to non-
administrative oversnow vehicle use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner
employees, or other non-recreational users authorized by the
Superintendent.
(2) What terms do I need to know? The definitions in this paragraph
(l)(2) also apply to non-administrative oversnow vehicle use by NPS,
contractor, or concessioner employees, and other non-recreational users
authorized by the Superintendent.
Commercial guide means a guide who operates a snowmobile or
snowcoach for a fee or compensation and is authorized to operate in the
park under a concession contract. In this section, ``guide'' also means
``commercial guide.''
Historic snowcoach means a Bombardier snowcoach manufactured in
1983 or earlier. Any other snowcoach is considered a non-historic
snowcoach.
Oversnow route means that portion of the unplowed roadway located
between the road shoulders and designated by snow poles or other poles,
ropes, fencing, or signs erected to regulate oversnow activity.
Oversnow routes include pullouts or parking areas that are groomed or
marked similarly to roadways and are adjacent to designated oversnow
routes. An oversnow route may also be distinguished by the interior
boundaries of the berm created by the packing and grooming of the
unplowed roadway. The only motorized vehicles permitted on oversnow
routes are oversnow vehicles.
Oversnow vehicle means a snowmobile, snowcoach, or other motorized
vehicle that is intended for travel primarily on snow and has been
authorized by the Superintendent to operate in the park. An oversnow
vehicle that does not meet the definition of a snowcoach must comply
with all requirements applicable to snowmobiles.
Snowcoach means a self-propelled mass transit vehicle intended for
travel on snow, having a curb weight of over 1,000 pounds (450
kilograms), driven by a track or tracks and steered by skis or tracks,
and having a capacity of at least 8 passengers. A snowcoach has a
maximum size of 102 inches wide, plus tracks (not to exceed 110 inches
overall); a maximum length of 35 feet; and a Gross Vehicle Weight
Rating (GVWR) not exceeding 25,000 pounds.
Snowmobile means a self-propelled vehicle intended for travel on
snow, with a curb weight of not more than 1,000 pounds (450 kg), driven
by a track or tracks in contact with the snow, and which may be steered
by a ski or skis in contact with the snow.
Snowplane means a self-propelled vehicle intended for oversnow
travel and driven by an air-displacing propeller.
(3) May I operate a snowmobile in Yellowstone National Park? (i)
You may operate a snowmobile in Yellowstone National Park in compliance
with use limits, guiding requirements, operating hours and dates,
equipment, and operating conditions established under this section. The
Superintendent may establish additional operating conditions and must
provide notice of those conditions in accordance with Sec. 1.7(a) of
this chapter or in the Federal Register.
(ii) The authority to operate a snowmobile in Yellowstone National
Park established in paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section is in effect
through the winter season of 2010-2011.
(4) May I operate a snowcoach in Yellowstone National Park? (i)
Snowcoaches may only be operated in Yellowstone National Park under a
concessions contract. Snowcoach operation is subject to the conditions
stated in the concessions contract and all other conditions identified
in this section.
(ii) All non-historic snowcoaches must meet NPS air emissions
[[Page 60181]]
requirements, which mean the applicable EPA emissions standards for the
vehicle that were in effect at the time it was manufactured.
(iii) All critical emission-related exhaust components (as listed
in 40 CFR 86.004-25(b)(3)(iii) through (v)) must be functioning
properly. Such critical emissions-related components may only be
replaced with the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) component,
where possible. Where OEM parts are not available, aftermarket parts
may be used if they are certified not to worsen emission and sound
characteristics.
(iv) Modifying or disabling a snowcoach's original pollution
control equipment is prohibited except for maintenance purposes.
(v) Individual snowcoaches may be subject to periodic inspections
to determine compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (l)(4)(ii)
through (l)(4)(iv) of this section.
(vi) The authority to operate a snowcoach in Yellowstone National
Park established in paragraph (l)(4)(i) of this section is in effect
only through the winter season of 2010-2011.
(5) Must I operate a certain model of snowmobile? Only commercially
available snowmobiles that meet NPS air and sound emissions
requirements as set forth in this section may be operated in the park.
The Superintendent will approve snowmobile makes, models, and years of
manufacture that meet those requirements. Any snowmobile model not
approved by the Superintendent may not be operated in the park.
(6) How will the Superintendent approve snowmobile makes, models,
and years of manufacture for use in the park? (i) Beginning with the
2005 model year, all snowmobiles must be certified under 40 CFR part
1051, to a Family Emission Limit no greater than 15 g/kW-hr for
hydrocarbons and to a Family Emission Limit no greater than 120 g/kW-hr
for carbon monoxide.
(A) 2004 model year snowmobiles may use measured emissions levels
(official emission results with no deterioration factors applied) to
comply with the emission limits specified in paragraph (l)(6)(i) of
this section.
(B) The snowmobile test procedures specified by EPA (40 CFR parts
1051 and 1065) must be used to measure air emissions from model year
2004 and later snowmobiles.
(ii) For sound emissions, snowmobiles must operate at or below 73
dBA as measured at full throttle according to Society of Automotive
Engineers J192 test procedures (revised 1985). Snowmobiles may be
tested at any barometric pressure equal to or above 23.4 inches Hg
uncorrected. The Superintendent may revise these testing procedures
based on new information and/or updates to the SAE J192 testing
procedures.
(iii) Snowmobiles meeting the requirements for air and sound
emissions may be operated in the park for a period not exceeding 6
years from the date upon which first certified.
(iv) The Superintendent may prohibit entry into the park of any
snowmobile that has been modified in a manner that may adversely affect
air or sound emissions.
(v) These air and sound emissions requirements do not apply to
snowmobiles being operated on the Cave Falls Road in Yellowstone.
(7) Where may I operate my snowmobile in Yellowstone National Park?
(i) You may operate your snowmobile only upon designated oversnow
routes established within the park in accordance with Sec. 2.18(c) of
this chapter. The following oversnow routes are so designated for
snowmobile use through the winter of 2010-2011:
(A) The Grand Loop Road from its junction with Upper Terrace Drive
to Norris Junction.
(B) Norris Junction to Canyon Junction.
(C) The Grand Loop Road from Norris Junction to Madison Junction.
(D) The West Entrance Road from the park boundary at West
Yellowstone to Madison Junction.
(E) The Grand Loop Road from Madison Junction to West Thumb.
(F) The South Entrance Road from the South Entrance to West Thumb.
(G) The Grand Loop Road from West Thumb to its junction with the
East Entrance Road.
(H) The East Entrance Road from Fishing Bridge Junction to the East
Entrance.
(I) The Grand Loop Road from its junction with the East Entrance
Road to Canyon Junction.
(J) The South Canyon Rim Drive.
(K) Lake Butte Road.
(L) In the developed areas of Madison Junction, Old Faithful, Grant
Village, West Thumb, Lake, Fishing Bridge, Canyon, Indian Creek, and
Norris.
(M) Firehole Canyon Drive, between noon and 9 p.m. each day.
(N) North Canyon Rim Drive, between noon and 9 p.m. each day.
(O) Riverside Drive, between noon and 9 p.m. each day.
(P) Cave Falls Road.
(ii) The Superintendent may open or close these routes, or portions
thereof, for snowmobile travel after taking into consideration the
location of wintering wildlife, appropriate snow cover, public safety,
avalanche conditions, and other factors. Notice of such opening or
closing will be provided by one or more of the methods listed in Sec.
1.7(a) of this chapter.
(iii) This paragraph (l)(7) also applies to non-administrative
over-snow vehicle use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner employees, or
other non-recreational users authorized by the Superintendent.
(iv) Maps detailing the designated oversnow routes will be
available from Park Headquarters.
(8) What routes are designated for snowcoach use? (i) Authorized
snowcoaches may be operated on the routes designated for snowmobile use
in paragraphs (l)(7)(i)(A) through (l)(7)(i)(O) of this section. The
restricted hours of snowmobile use described in paragraphs (1)(7)(i)(M)
through (1)(7)(i)(O) do not apply to snowcoaches. Snowcoaches may also
be operated on the following additional oversnow routes through the
winter of 2010-2011:
(A) Fountain Flat Road.
(B) The Grand Loop Road from Canyon Junction to Washburn Hot
Springs overlook.
(C) For rubber-tracked snowcoaches only, the Grand Loop Road from
Upper Terrace Drive to the junction of the Grand Loop Road and North
Entrance Road, and within the Mammoth Hot Springs developed area.
(ii) The Superintendent may open or close these oversnow routes, or
portions thereof, or designate new routes for snowcoach travel after
taking into consideration the location of wintering wildlife,
appropriate snow cover, public safety, and other factors. Notice of
such opening or closing shall be provided by one of more of the methods
listed in Sec. 1.7(a) of this chapter.
(iii) This paragraph (l)(8) also applies to non-administrative
snowcoach use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner employees, and other
non-recreational users authorized by the Superintendent.
(9) Must I travel with a commercial guide while snowmobiling in
Yellowstone and what other guiding requirements apply? (i) All
recreational snowmobile operators must be accompanied by a commercial
guide.
(ii) Snowmobile parties must travel in a group of no more than 11
snowmobiles, including that of the guide.
(iii) Guided parties must travel together within a maximum of one-
third mile of the first snowmobile in the group.
(iv) The guiding requirements described in this paragraph (l)(9) do
not apply to snowmobiles being operated on the Cave Falls Road.
[[Page 60182]]
(10) Are there limits established for the number of snowmobiles and
snowcoaches permitted to operate in the park each day? The number of
snowmobiles and snowcoaches allowed to operate in the park each day is
limited to a certain number per entrance or location. The limits are
listed in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercially Commercially
Park entrance/location guided guided
snowmobiles snowcoaches
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) North Entrance *.................. 12 13
(ii) West Entrance.................... 160 34
(iii) South Entrance.................. 114 13
(iv) East Entrance.................... 20 2
(v) Old Faithful *.................... 12 16
(vi) Cave Falls....................... ** 50 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Commercially guided snowmobile tours originating at the North Entrance
and Old Faithful are currently provided solely by Xanterra Parks and
Resorts. Because this concessioner is the sole provider at both of
these areas, this regulation allows reallocation of snowmobiles
between the North Entrance and Old Faithful as necessary, so long as
the total daily number of snowmobiles originating from the two
locations does not exceed 24. For example, the concessioner could
operate 6 snowmobiles at Old Faithful and 18 at the North Entrance if
visitor demand warranted it. This will allow the concessioner to
respond to changing visitor demand for commercially guided snowmobile
tours, thus enhancing the availability of visitor services in
Yellowstone.
** These snowmobiles operate on an approximately 1-mile segment of road
within the park where the use is incidental to other snowmobiling
activities in the Caribou-Targhee National Forest. These snowmobiles
do not need to be guided or to meet NPS air and sound emissions
requirements.
(11) When may I operate my snowmobile or snowcoach? The
Superintendent will determine operating hours and dates. Except for
emergency situations, any changes to operating hours will be made on an
annual basis, and the public will be notified of those changes through
one or more of the methods listed in Sec. 1.7(a) of this chapter.
(12) What other conditions apply to the operation of oversnow
vehicles? (i) The following are prohibited:
(A) Idling an oversnow vehicle for more than 5 minutes at any one
time.
(B) Driving an oversnow vehicle while the driver's motor vehicle
license or privilege is suspended or revoked.
(C) Allowing or permitting an unlicensed driver to operate an
oversnow vehicle.
(D) Driving an oversnow vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for
the safety of persons, property, or park resources or otherwise in a
reckless manner.
(E) Operating an oversnow vehicle without a lighted white headlamp
and red taillight.
(F) Operating an oversnow vehicle that does not have brakes in good
working order.
(G) The towing of persons on skis, sleds, or other sliding devices
by oversnow vehicles, except in emergency situations.
(ii) The following are required:
(A) All oversnow vehicles that stop on designated routes must pull
over to the far right and next to the snow berm. Pullouts must be used
where available and accessible. Oversnow vehicles may not be stopped in
a hazardous location or where the view might be obscured, or operated
so slowly as to interfere with the normal flow of traffic.
(B) Oversnow vehicle drivers must possess a valid motor vehicle
driver's license. A learner's permit does not satisfy this requirement.
The license must be carried by the driver at all times.
(C) Equipment sleds towed by a snowmobile must be pulled behind the
snowmobile and fastened to the snowmobile with a rigid hitching
mechanism.
(D) Snowmobiles must be properly registered and display a valid
registration from a state or province in the United States or Canada,
respectively.
(iii) The Superintendent may impose other terms and conditions as
necessary to protect park resources, visitors, or employees. The public
will be notified of any changes through one or more methods listed in
Sec. 1.7(a) of this chapter.
(iv) This paragraph (l)(12) also applies to non-administrative
over-snow vehicle use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner employees, or
other non-recreational users authorized by the Superintendent.
(13) What conditions apply to alcohol use while operating an
oversnow vehicle? In addition to 36 CFR 4.23, the following conditions
apply:
(i) Operating or being in actual physical control of an oversnow
vehicle is prohibited when the driver is under 21 years of age and the
alcohol concentration in the driver's blood or breath is 0.02 grams or
more of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood or 0.02 grams or more of
alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
(ii) Operating or being in actual physical control of an oversnow
vehicle is prohibited when the driver is a snowmobile guide or a
snowcoach driver and the alcohol concentration in the operator's blood
or breath is 0.04 grams or more of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood
or 0.04 grams or more of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
(iii) This paragraph (1)(13) also applies to non-administrative
over-snow vehicle use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner employees, or
other non-recreational users authorized by the Superintendent.
(14) Do other NPS regulations apply to the use of oversnow
vehicles? (i) The use of oversnow vehicles in Yellowstone is subject to
Sec. Sec. 2.18(a) and (c), but not subject to Sec. Sec. 2.18 (b),
(d), (e), and 2.19(b) of this chapter.
(ii) This paragraph (l)(14) also applies to non-administrative
over-snow vehicle use by NPS, contractor, or concessioner employees, or
other non-recreational users authorized by the Superintendent.
(15) Are there any forms of non-motorized oversnow transportation
allowed in the park? (i) Non-motorized travel consisting of skiing,
skating, snowshoeing, or walking is permitted unless otherwise
restricted under this section or other NPS regulations.
(ii) The Superintendent may designate areas of the park as closed,
reopen such areas, or establish terms and conditions for non-motorized
travel within the park in order to protect visitors, employees, or park
resources. Notice will be made in accordance with Sec. 1.7(a) of this
chapter.
(iii) Dog sledding and ski-joring are prohibited.
(iv) Bicycles are prohibited on oversnow routes in Yellowstone.
(16) May I operate a snowplane in Yellowstone National Park? The
operation of a snowplane in Yellowstone is prohibited.
(17) Is violating any of the provisions of this section prohibited?
(i) Violating
[[Page 60183]]
any of the terms, conditions or requirements of paragraphs (l)(1)
through (l)(16) of this section is prohibited.
(ii) Anyone who violates any of the terms, conditions or
requirements of this regulation will be considered to have committed
one separate offense for each term, condition or requirement that they
violate.
Dated: November 16, 2009.
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. E9-27893 Filed 11-17-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P