Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Berberis nevinii (Nevin's barberry), 58793-58803 [07-5063]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(e) Expedited Processing of Request.
* * *
(f) Denial of Request. In denying a
request for records, in whole or in part,
the Commission shall state the reason
for denial, set forth the name and title
or position of the person responsible for
the denial of the request, make a
reasonable effort to estimate the volume
of the records denied, and provide this
estimate to the person making the
request, unless providing such an
estimate would harm an interest
protected by the exemption pursuant to
which the request is denied, and, if an
appeal is denied, notify the requester of
the right to obtain judicial review of the
Commission’s action under 5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(B)–(G).
(g) Partial Response to Request. * * *
4. In section 2702.4, remove the
introductory text and paragraphs (c) and
(d) and revise paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
§ 2702.4
Materials available.
(a) FOIA Reading Room. Materials
which may be made publicly available
for inspection and copying at the
Commission’s on-site FOIA Reading
Room, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW., Suite
9500, Washington, DC, include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Final opinions, including
concurring and dissenting opinions, as
well as orders, made in the adjudication
of cases;
(2) Those statements of policy and
interpretations which have been
adopted by the agency and are not
published in the Federal Register;
(3) Administrative staff manuals and
instructions to staff that affect a member
of the public;
(4) Copies of all records, regardless of
form or format, which have been
released to any person under this
subpart and which, because of the
nature of their subject matter, the
Commission determines have become or
are likely to become the subject of
subsequent requests for substantially the
same records; and
(5) A general index of records referred
to under this paragraph.
(b) E–FOIA Reading Room. Materials
created on or after November 1, 1996
under paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of
this section may also be accessed
electronically through the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.fmshrc.gov.
5. Revise section 2702.6 to read as
follows:
§ 2702.6
Fee schedule.
(a) Search fee. The fee for searching
for information and records shall be the
salary rate (that is, basic pay plus 16%)
of the employee making the search. This
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
hourly rate is listed on the
Commission’s Web site at https://
www.fmshrc.gov. Fees for searches of
computerized records shall be the actual
cost to the Commission but shall not
exceed $300 per hour. This fee includes
machine time and that of the operator
and clerical personnel. If search charges
are likely to exceed $50, the requester
shall be notified of the estimated
amount of fees, unless the requester has
indicated in advance his willingness to
pay fees as high as those anticipated.
Fees may be charged even if the
documents are not located or if they are
located but withheld on the basis of an
exemption.
(b) Review fee. The review fee shall be
charged for the initial examination by
the Chief FOIA Officer of documents
located in response to a request in order
to determine if they may be withheld
from disclosure, and for the deletion of
portions that are exempt from
disclosure, but shall not be charged for
review by the Chairman or the
Commissioners. See § 2702.3. The
review fee is the salary rate (that is,
basic pay plus 16%) of the employee
reviewing the records. This hourly rate
is listed on the Commission’s Web site
at https://www.fmshrc.gov.
(c) Duplicating fee. The copy fee for
each page of paper up to 81⁄2″x14″ shall
be $.15 per copy per page. Any private
sector services required will be assessed
at the charge to the Commission. The fee
for copying photographs and other
nonstandard documents will be the
actual direct cost incurred by the
Commission. For copies prepared by
computer, such as tapes or printouts,
the Commission shall charge the actual
cost, including operator time, of
production of the tape or printout. For
other methods of reproduction or
duplication, the Commission will
charge the actual direct costs of
producing the document(s). If
duplication charges are likely to exceed
$50, the requester shall be notified of
the estimated amount of fees, unless the
requester has indicated in advance his
willingness to pay fees as high as those
anticipated.
6. In § 2702.7, revise paragraph (a)
and paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
§ 2702.7
fees.
No fees; waiver or reduction of
(a) No fees shall be charged to any
requester, including commercial use
requesters, if the anticipated cost of
processing and collecting the fee would
be equal or greater than the fee itself.
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that fees of less than $20
shall be waived.
(b) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58793
(2) The Chief FOIA Officer, upon
request, shall determine whether a
waiver or reduction of fees is warranted.
Requests shall be made concurrently
with requests for information under Sec.
2702.3. In accordance with the
procedures set forth in Sec. 2702.3,
appeals of adverse decisions may be
made to the Commission within 5
working days. Determination of appeals
will be made by the Commission within
10 working days of receipt.
Dated: October 11, 2007.
Michael F. Duffy,
Chairman, Federal Mine Safety and Health
Review Commission.
[FR Doc. E7–20380 Filed 10–16–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6735–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018–AU84
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Berberis nevinii (Nevin’s
barberry)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period, revisions to proposed
critical habitat, notice of availability of
draft economic analysis, and amended
Required Determinations.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on the
proposed designation of critical habitat
for Berberis nevinii (Nevin’s barberry)
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). We are also
using this comment period to announce
revisions to proposed critical habitat
subunits 1B, 1D, and 1E as described in
the proposed rule published in the
Federal Register on February 6, 2007,
and announce the availability of the
draft economic analysis for the
proposed critical habitat designation
and an amended Required
Determinations section of the proposal.
The draft economic analysis estimates
potential costs to be approximately
$169,000 to $172,000 in undiscounted
dollars over a 20-year period in areas
proposed as critical habitat and
approximately $1.7 to $433.5 million in
undiscounted dollars over a 20-year
period (or 40-year period for impacts
related to management of Vail Lake) in
areas proposed for exclusion from
critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
58794
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the Act. We are reopening the comment
period to allow all interested parties to
comment simultaneously on the
proposed rule, our revisions to the
proposed rule, the associated draft
economic analysis, and the amended
Required Determinations section.
Comments previously submitted need
not be resubmitted as they will be
incorporated into the public record as
part of this comment period and will be
fully considered in preparation of the
final rule.
DATES: We will accept public comments
until November 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments and materials to us by any
one of the following methods:
(1) E-mail: Please submit electronic
comments to
fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov. Include
‘‘Nevin’s barberry’’ in the subject line.
For more information, please see the
Public Comments Solicited section
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
(2) Facsimile: You may fax your
comments to 760/431–5901.
(3) U.S. mail or hand-delivery: You
may submit written comments and
information to Jim Bartel, Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road,
Carlsbad, CA 92011.
(4) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office, at the address listed
in the ADDRESSES section (telephone:
760/431–9440). Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Public Comments Solicited
We will accept written comments and
information during this reopened
comment period on the proposed
critical habitat designation for Berberis
nevinii published in the Federal
Register on February 6, 2007 (72 FR
5552), the revisions to proposed critical
habitat described herein (see Revisions
to Proposed Critical Habitat section),
and the draft economic analysis of the
revised proposed designation. We will
consider information and
recommendations from all interested
parties. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(1) Critical Habitat Subunits 1B, 1D,
and 1E as revised in this notice (see
Revisions to Proposed Critical Habitat
section).
(2) The reasons why habitat should or
should not be designated as critical
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
habitat under section 4 of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether
the benefit of designation would
outweigh threats to the species caused
by the designation such that the
designation of critical habitat is
prudent.
(3) Specific information on the
amount and distribution of Berberis
nevinii habitat; what habitat or habitat
features are essential to the conservation
of this species and why; which areas
occupied at the time of listing
containing these features should be
included in the critical habitat
designation and why; and which areas
not occupied at the time of listing but
currently occupied should be included
in the final designation and why.
(4) The geographical extent, number
of plants, and/or reproductive status of
native Berberis nevinii occurrences,
particularly those in the Loma Linda
Hills area (vicinity of San Timoteo
Canyon and Scott Canyon) in San
Bernardino County and those in western
Riverside County (including in the
vicinity of Vail Lake, the Agua Tibia
Mountain foothills on the Cleveland
National Forest (CNF), in the Soboba
Badlands east of the San Jacinto
Wildlife Area, the Jurupa Hills area, and
near the City of Temecula).
(5) Specific information on three
historical Berberis nevinii records from
Los Angeles County—two from the
Arroyo Seco near the City of Pasadena
(California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) element occurrences 8 and 9)
and one from the Big Tujunga Wash
near San Fernando (CNDDB element
occurrence 10)—such as whether the
species still exists in these areas and
where.
(6) Whether any areas not currently
known to be occupied by Berberis
nevinii, but essential to the conservation
of the species, should be included in the
designation.
(7) Information that demonstrates a
species-specific pollinator-plant
relationship for Berberis nevinii;
information on seed dispersal
mechanisms and dispersal distance for
B. nevinii; whether seed banks exist for
this species and, if so, for how long and
under what conditions; and whether
such information should be applied to
or considered a primary constituent
element for the species.
(8) Land use designations and current
or planned activities in the mapped
critical habitat subunits and their
possible impact on proposed critical
habitat.
(9) Our proposed exclusion of
Berberis nevinii habitat covered under
the approved Western Riverside County
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Plan (MSHCP) and whether the benefits
of excluding these areas outweigh the
benefits of their inclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act (see 72 FR 5552,
‘‘Relationship of Critical Habitat to
Approved Habitat Conservation Plans
(HCPs)—Exclusion Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section for details on
the Western Riverside County MSHCP).
If the Secretary determines the benefits
of including these lands outweigh the
benefits of excluding them, they will not
be excluded from final critical habitat.
(10) Additional information regarding
management plans covering lands
managed by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) on Oak Mountain
and by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS)
on the CNF, and whether these plans
provide specific management for
Berberis nevinii such that consideration
of exclusion of these lands under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act would be
appropriate.
(11) Whether the benefits of exclusion
of any particular area outweigh the
benefits of inclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act.
(12) Information on the extent to
which any State and local
environmental protection measures
referred to in the draft economic
analysis may have been adopted largely
as a result of the listing of Berberis
nevinii.
(13) Information on whether the draft
economic analysis identifies all State
and local costs attributable to the
proposed critical habitat designation,
and information on any costs that have
been inadvertently overlooked.
(14) Information on whether the draft
economic analysis makes appropriate
assumptions regarding current practices
and likely regulatory changes imposed
as a result of the designation of critical
habitat.
(15) Information on whether the draft
economic analysis correctly assesses the
effect on regional costs associated with
any land use controls that may derive
from the designation of critical habitat.
(16) Information on whether there are
any quantifiable economic benefits that
could result from the designation of
critical habitat.
(17) Information on areas that could
potentially be disproportionately
impacted by designation of critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii.
(18) Any foreseeable economic,
national security, or other potential
impacts resulting from the proposed
designation, and, in particular, any
impacts on small entities, and the
benefits of including or excluding areas
that exhibit these impacts.
(19) Information on whether the draft
economic analysis appropriately
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
identifies all costs that could result from
the designation.
(20) Economic data on the
incremental effects that would result
from designating any particular area as
critical habitat, since it is our intent to
include the incremental costs attributed
to the revised critical habitat
designation in the final economic
analysis.
(21) Information on whether our
approach to critical habitat designation
could be improved or modified in any
way to provide for greater public
participation and understanding, or to
assist us in accommodating public
concern and comments.
Pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act,
an area may be excluded from critical
habitat if it is determined that the
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the
benefits of including a particular area as
critical habitat, unless the failure to
designate such area as critical habitat
will result in the extinction of the
species. We may exclude an area from
designated critical habitat based on
economic impacts, national security, or
any other relevant impact.
All previous comments and
information submitted during the initial
comment period from February 6, 2007,
to April 9, 2007, on the proposed rule
(72 FR 5552) need not be resubmitted as
they will be incorporated into the public
record as part of this comment period
and will be fully considered in
preparation of the final rule. If you wish
to comment, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning
proposed rule, draft economic analysis,
or the amended Required
Determinations provided in this
document by any one of several
methods (see ADDRESSES). Our final
designation of critical habitat will take
into consideration all written comments
and any additional information we have
received during both comment periods.
On the basis of public comment on this
analysis, the revised critical habitat
proposal, and the final economic
analysis, we may, during the
development of our final determination,
find that areas proposed are not
essential, are appropriate for exclusion
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, or are
not appropriate for exclusion.
You may submit your comments and
material concerning the above actions
by any one of several methods (see
ADDRESSES). If you use e-mail to submit
your comments, please include ‘‘Attn:
Nevin’s barberry’’ in your e-mail subject
header, preferably with your name and
return address in the body of your
message. If you do not receive a
confirmation from the system that we
have received your e-mail, contact us
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
directly by calling our Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office at (760) 431–9440.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
You may obtain copies of the
proposed rule and draft economic
analysis by mail from the Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) or
by visiting our website at https://
www.fws.gov/carlsbad/.
Background
On August 10, 2004, the Center for
Biological Diversity and California
Native Plant Society challenged our
failure to designate critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii and four other plant
species (Center for Biological Diversity
et al. v. Gale Norton, Secretary of the
Department of the Interior et al., C–04–
3240 JL, N. D. Cal.). In a court approved
settlement agreement, the Service
agreed to propose critical habitat for B.
nevinii, if prudent, on or before January
30, 2007, and finalize the designation on
or before January 30, 2008. On February
6, 2007, we published a proposed rule
to withdraw our previous not prudent
finding and designate critical habitat for
B. nevinii (72 FR 5552), identifying
approximately 417 acres (ac) (169
hectares (ha)) in Riverside County,
California, that met the definition of
critical habitat for this species. Of this,
we proposed to exclude 385 ac (156 ha)
of non-Federal land from the final
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act because these lands are protected by
an approved Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP) (see 72 FR 5552, ‘‘Relationship of
Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat
Conservation Plans—Exclusion Under
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section for
details), leaving a proposed final
designation of 32 ac (13 ha) of Federal
land.
We are now proposing revisions to
three of the proposed critical habitat
subunits: 1B, 1D, and 1E (see ‘‘Revisions
to Proposed Critical Habitat’’ section);
accordingly, approximately 361 ac (146
ha) in Riverside County, California,
meets the definition of critical habitat
for this species, a reduction of 56 ac (23
ha). Of this, we propose to exclude
approximately 344 ac (139 ha) of nonFederal land protected by an approved
HCP from the final designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. These 344 ac
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58795
(139 ha) are a subset of the 385 ac (156
ha) proposed for exclusion in the
proposed rule. Other than these
changes, the proposed rule of February
6, 2007, remains intact.
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as the specific areas within
the geographical area occupied by a
species, at the time it is listed in
accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species and that may require special
management considerations or
protection, and specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by a
species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species. If the proposed rule as revised
herein is made final, section 7 of the Act
will prohibit destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat by any
activity funded, authorized, or carried
out by any Federal agency. Federal
agencies proposing actions affecting
areas designated as critical habitat must
consult with us on the effects of their
proposed actions, pursuant to section
7(a)(2) of the Act.
Draft Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that
we designate or revise critical habitat
based upon the best scientific and
commercial data available, after taking
into consideration the economic impact,
impact on national security, or any
other relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. We
have prepared a draft economic analysis
of the proposed critical habitat
designation based on the February 6,
2007, proposed rule to designate critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii (72 FR 5552)
and subsequent revisions to the
proposed rule described herein (see
Revisions to Proposed Critical Habitat).
The draft economic analysis is
intended to quantify the economic
impacts of all potential conservation
efforts for Berberis nevinii; some of
these costs will likely be incurred
regardless of whether critical habitat is
designated. Potential economic impacts
in areas proposed as critical habitat are
estimated over a 20-year period,
whereas estimated economic impacts in
areas proposed for exclusion from
critical habitat follow various
timeframes, depending on the activity
(e.g., a 5-year period for economic
impacts related to administration, a 20year period for economic impacts
related to development, and a 40-year
period for economic impacts related to
management of Vail Lake). The draft
economic analysis estimates potential
costs to be approximately $169,000 to
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
58796
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
$172,000 in undiscounted dollars over a
20-year period in areas proposed as
critical habitat and approximately $1.7
to $433.5 million in undiscounted
dollars over a 20-year period (or 40-year
period for impacts related to
management of Vail Lake) in areas
proposed for exclusion from critical
habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
These impacts would only occur if the
area proposed for exclusion is instead
designated as critical habitat. The cost
estimates are based on revisions to the
proposed designation of critical habitat
described in this notice and include
costs coextensive with listing and
recovery.
Discounted future costs in areas
proposed as critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $136,000
to $139,000 ($10,000 annualized) at a 3
percent discount rate or approximately
$107,000 to $110,000 ($11,000
annualized) at a 7 percent discount rate.
Discounted future costs in areas
proposed for exclusion from critical
habitat are estimated to be
approximately $1.2 to $232.5 million at
a 3 percent discount rate ($82,000 to
$10.1 million annualized) or
approximately $0.9 to $118.1 million at
a 7 percent discount rate ($81,000 to
$8.9 million annualized). For areas
proposed for exclusion, the economic
analysis provides an analysis of
potential economic impacts related to
residential/urban development,
management of Vail Lake, and
administration, with the timeframe for
analysis varying based on the activity
(1–5 years, 6–20 years, and 21–40
years). Estimated discounted future
costs (3 percent discount rate)
associated with management of Vail
Lake range from zero to $12.2 million
for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe,
from zero to $117.4 million for the 2013
through 2027 timeframe, and from zero
to $99.7 million for the 2028 through
2047 timeframe. Similarly, estimated
discounted future costs (3 percent
discount rate) associated with
development range from $333,000 to
$967,000 for the 2008 through 2012
timeframe and from $873,000 to $2.3
million for the 2013 through 2027
timeframe in areas proposed for
exclusion from critical habitat. Lastly,
the discounted future cost (3 percent
discount rate) associated with
administration is estimated at $19,000
for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe in
these same subunits.
The draft economic analysis considers
the potential economic effects of actions
relating to the conservation of Berberis
nevinii, including costs associated with
sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act, and
including those attributable to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
designation of critical habitat. It further
considers the economic effects of
protective measures taken as a result of
other Federal, State, and local laws that
aid habitat conservation for B. nevinii in
areas containing features essential to the
conservation of the species. The draft
analysis considers both economic
efficiency and distributional effects. In
the case of habitat conservation,
efficiency effects generally reflect the
‘‘opportunity costs’’ associated with the
commitment of resources to comply
with habitat protection measures (such
as lost economic opportunities
associated with restrictions on land
use).
This analysis also addresses how
potential economic impacts are likely to
be distributed, including an assessment
of any local or regional impacts of
habitat conservation and the potential
effects of conservation activities on
government agencies, private
businesses, and individuals. The
analysis measures lost economic
efficiency associated with residential
and commercial development and
public projects and activities, such as
economic impacts on water
management and transportation
projects, Federal lands, small entities,
and the energy industry. This
information can be used by decisionmakers to assess whether the effects of
the designation might unduly burden a
particular group or economic sector.
Finally, this draft analysis looks
retrospectively at costs that have been
incurred since the date Berberis nevinii
was listed as endangered (October 13,
1998; 63 FR 54956), and considers those
costs that may occur in the years
following the designation of critical
habitat, with the timeframes for this
analysis varying by activity. Because the
draft economic analysis considers the
potential economic effects of all actions
relating to the conservation of B. nevinii,
including costs associated with sections
4, 7, and 10 of the Act and those
attributable to designating critical
habitat, this may result in an
overestimate of the potential economic
impacts of the designation.
As stated earlier, we are soliciting
data and comments from the public on
this draft economic analysis, as well as
on all aspects of the proposal. We may
revise the proposal or its supporting
documents to incorporate or address
new information received during the
comment period. In particular, we may
exclude an area from critical habitat if
we determine that the benefits of
excluding the area outweigh the benefits
of including the area as critical habitat,
provided such exclusion will not result
in the extinction of the species.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Changes to the Proposed Rule
By this notice, we are also advising
the public of revisions to three of the
subunits described in the February 6,
2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552):
Subunit 1B (Agua Tibia Mountain
Foothills), Subunit 1D (North of Vail
Lake), and Subunit 1E (South of Vail
Lake/Peninsula).
During the first comment period for
the proposed rule, we were informed by
Cleveland National Forest (CNF) that
proposed Subunit 1B (Agua Tibia
Mountain Foothills), which we had
identified as including approximately
17 ac (7 ha) of USFS land and
approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of adjacent
private land, was inaccurately mapped
because it was based on inexact location
information for the Berberis nevinii
occurrence on CNF lands. Hence, we are
revising the location and boundaries of
proposed critical habitat Subunit 1B to
reflect new location information
provided by the CNF, and we are now
proposing to designate less than 3 ac (1
ha) of Federal (CNF) land in Subunit 1B,
rather than the approximately 22 ac (9
ha) of Federal and private land
identified in the proposed rule. We
delineated critical habitat based on the
criteria outlined in the February 6, 2007,
proposed rule, which resulted in this
subunit no longer including any private
land. Revised Subunit 1B was occupied
at the time of listing and contains the
primary constituent elements (PCEs),
those physical or biological features
essential to conservation of the species.
We also reevaluated proposed critical
habitat subunits bordering Vail Lake
based on updated aerial photographs
and Vail Lake storage/volume data
provided by Rancho California Water
District (RCWD) for the economic
analysis. We removed areas along the
shoreline from subunits 1D (North of
Vail Lake) and 1E (South of Vail Lake/
Peninsula) that do not contain the PCEs
required by Berberis nevinii and are not
occupied by the species due to lakelevel fluctuations and recurrent,
episodic inundation, sometimes for
relatively long periods of time. We
removed approximately 1 ac (1 ha) from
proposed Subunit 1D and
approximately 34 ac (14 ha) from
proposed Subunit 1E, leaving
approximately 21 ac (8 ha) and
approximately 217 ac (88 ha) in
proposed subunits 1D and 1E,
respectively.
When delineating proposed critical
habitat (72 FR 5552), we tried to exclude
areas from proposed subunits near Vail
Lake that were identified as being under
water, and therefore did not contain the
PCEs. We based subunit delineations in
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the proposed rule on USGS 1-meter
resolution color-balanced, color infrared
aerial photography acquired in May/
June 2002 for the Vail Lake area,
western Riverside County. Based on
information provided by RCWD for the
draft economic analysis, the lake was
storing between approximately 19,750
acre-feet (May 1, 2002) and 19,180 acrefeet (June 30, 2002) of water during this
time period. However, water levels at
Vail Lake can fluctuate greatly,
depending on the amount of local runoff
reaching the lake, both within any given
year and annually, frequently exceeding
the 2002 water levels for relatively long
periods of time. The RCWD, the entity
that owns and operates/manages Vail
Dam and Vail Lake, has a surface water
storage permit in the lake for up to
40,000 acre-feet from November 1 to
April 30, annually. Thus, we revised
proposed critical habitat boundaries for
subunits bordering Vail Lake based on
lake levels at RCWD’s permitted storage
capacity, resulting in boundary changes
to proposed subunits 1D and 1E.
Water volume in Vail Lake has been
known to exceed 40,000 acre-feet, even
filling and surpassing lake storage
capacity (50,000 acre-feet) with water
flowing over the spillway. The creation
of Vail Lake in 1948 may have resulted
in the loss of some Berberis nevinii
individuals; however, the occurrences
that are now located closest to Vail Lake
have not been inundated or affected by
rising water levels and fluctuations in
the recent past (Boyd 2007). Thus, the
revisions to proposed critical habitat
58797
subunits 1D and 1E are not likely to
result in B. nevinii individuals in this
area falling outside the revised subunit
boundaries. These revisions will, on the
other hand, more accurately represent B.
nevinii habitat in subunits 1D and 1E.
Table 1 contains the corrected area
values based on revisions to proposed
critical habitat subunits 1B, 1D, and 1E.
The revisions to these three proposed
subunits change the legal description
published in the February 6, 2007,
proposed rule. This notice republishes
the legal descriptions for subunits 1B,
1D, and 1E based on the revisions
described herein, along with a map
depicting the revised location of
proposed critical habitat for Berberis
nevinii.
TABLE 1.—AREAS PROPOSED AS CRITICAL HABITAT FOR BERBERIS NEVINII AND AREAS BEING CONSIDERED FOR
EXCLUSION FROM THE FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION UNDER SECTION 4(B)(2) OF THE ACT
[Area is displayed in acres (ac) (hectares (ha)).]
Land ownership
Area proposed as critical
habitat
Area proposed for
exclusion from final critical
habitat
1A. Big Oak Mountain
Summit.
1B. Agua Tibia Mountain
Foothills.
1C. South Flank Big Oak
Mountain.
1D. North of Vail Lake .......
1E. South of Vail Lake/Peninsula.
1F. Temecula Creek East
BLM ...................................
14.8 ac (6.0 ha) ................
0 ac (0 ha) ........................
14.8 ac (6.0 ha).
USFS .................................
2.5 ac (1.0 ha) ..................
0 ac (0 ha) ........................
2.5 ac (1.0 ha).
Private ...............................
86.5 ac (35.0 ha) ..............
86.5 ac (35.0 ha) ..............
0 ac (0 ha).
Private 1 .............................
Private 1 .............................
20.8 ac (8.4 ha) ................
216.7 ac (87.7 ha) ............
20.8 ac (8.4 ha) ................
216.7 ac (87.7 ha) ............
0 ac (0 ha).
0 ac (0 ha).
Private ...............................
19.8 ac (8.0 ha) ................
19.8 ac (8.0 ha) ................
0 ac (0 ha).
Total ...........................
...........................................
361.1 ac (146.1 ha) ..........
343.8 ac (139.1 ha) ..........
17.3 ac (7.0 ha).
Critical habitat unit
Area proposed as final
critical habitat
1. Agua Tibia/Vail Lake
1 Private
lands in Subunits 1D and 1E include a total of 2.8 ac (1.1 ha) owned by the Rancho California Water District.
Below, we present brief descriptions
of the revised proposed subunits and
reasons why they meet the definition of
critical habitat for Berberis nevinii.
These revised subunit descriptions
replace those provided in the February
6, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Unit Descriptions
Subunit 1B: Agua Tibia Mountain
Foothills
Subunit 1B consists of approximately
3 ac (1 ha) of federally-owned land
managed by the USFS on the CNF near
the Agua Tibia Wilderness Area in
southern Riverside County, California.
Five Berberis nevinii individuals are
known from this area and are located at
the edge of a stream channel (PCE 1)
growing in association with coast live
oak and riparian woodland species (PCE
3). Nearby chaparral includes such
species as Quercus berberidifolia,
Adenostoma fasciculatum, and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:22 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
Haplopappus squarrosus, and nearby
desert species include Yucca schidigera
(CNDDB 2006). These B. nevinii plants
are growing under a canopy of Quercus
agrifolia and Platanus racemosa with
the following species: Heteromeles
arbutifolia, Q. berberidifolia, Elymus
condensatus, Mimulus aurantiacus,
Lonicera subspicata, Pterostegia
drymarioides, and Epilobium canum.
Soils in this area are classified as rough
broken land and Visalia gravelly sandy
loam, with 5 to 9 percent slopes (PCE
2) (Service GIS data 2007).
We are proposing this subunit as
critical habitat because it contains
features essential to conservation of
Berberis nevinii and it contains a
relatively large natural occurrence of the
species. Additionally, Service personnel
visited this site in June 2006 while B.
nevinii was in fruit and found that
several of the fruits had three to four
seeds, which may be significant for a
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
species that appears to rarely set seed.
Berberis nevinii occupied this subunit at
the time of listing, as identified in the
final listing rule (63 FR 54956, October
13, 1998).
The Berberis nevinii occurrence on
the CNF is not as well protected as the
occurrence on the Angeles National
Forest (USFS 2005, p. 238). The primary
threats to B. nevinii habitat in this area
are human recreation (off-highway
vehicle use, shooting); wildland fire,
including an increased risk of fire
ignition due to the proximity of State
Highway 79 (USFS 2005, pp. 232, 237);
fuels and fire management activities
(USFS 2005, p. 237); and invasive,
nonnative plants, including potential
short-term adverse effects associated
with control efforts (USFS 2005, p. 234).
The CNF occurrence burned in 1996
followed by vigorous resprouting (USFS
2005, p. 237), and this location has also
shown signs of disturbance from road
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
58798
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
activities, with unauthorized use of offhighway vehicles occurring close to but
not within the area occupied by the
species (USFS 2005, p. 235).
Nonetheless, the magnitude of impacts
associated with roads and recreational
activity in this area appears to be low
(USFS 2005, p. 238). Also, the USFS
does not anticipate substantial camping
and hiking-related impacts to B. nevinii
habitat, and these impacts will be
avoided or mitigated by use of Forest
Plan standards (USFS 2005, p. 234).
The February 6, 2007, proposed rule
(72 FR 5552) identified the proximity of
Highway 79 as a potential threat to the
Berberis nevinii occurrence and habitat
on the CNF, in part due to proposed
highway widening and realignment
activities. However, we no longer
anticipate that these activities, if or
when they occur, will affect Subunit 1B
as the revised subunit is now more than
one-tenth mile (160 meters) south of the
highway. Invasive, nonnative plants and
their management may also impact the
B. nevinii occurrence and habitat at this
site. Based on the weed management
strategy in the USFS’ Revised Land
Management Plan for the four Southern
California National Forests (USFS 2005),
the CNF anticipates an eradication effort
of the nonnative Arundo and other
invasive grasses present in this subunit.
One of the greatest threats to occupied
habitat and the PCEs contained therein
on the CNF is from wildland fire and
the management of fire and fuels (i.e.,
fire suppression and prevention
activities). The Wildland-Urban
Interface (WUI) Defense Zone overlaps
about 43 percent of occupied habitat on
the CNF (USFS 2005, p. 237; Service
2005, p. 127). Some plants or habitat
within the WUI Defense Zone could be
removed or degraded under the Revised
Land and Resource Management Plan
due to fuel removal for fire protection or
overly frequent fuel treatments (Service
2005, p. 127). Special management
considerations or protection of the PCEs
may be required to minimize
disturbance to the vegetation and soils
within this subunit; control invasive,
nonnative plants; and maintain the
natural fire regime of the area.
Subunit 1B is included in the Western
Riverside County Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan’s (MSHCP)
Conservation Area as existing Public/
Quasi-Public (PQP) Conserved Lands.
Since the CNF is not a signatory to the
MSHCP and is not required to comply
with the MSHCP’s conservation
measures, we are not proposing lands
within this subunit for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see 72 FR
5552, ‘‘Exclusions under Section 4(b)(2)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
of the Act for Berberis nevinii’’ section
for a detailed discussion).
During the first comment period for
the proposed rule, we were informed
that the Species Management Guide for
Mahonia [Berberis] nevinii (Gray) Fedde
(Mistretta and Brown 1989) developed
for the Angeles National Forest was
subsequently adopted by the CNF (Fege
1992, p. 1; Holtrop 2007, p. 2).
Additionally, the CNF informed us that
the species account for Berberis nevinii
developed to support the environmental
analysis for the USFS Land Management
Plans for four southern California
National Forests (USFS 2005) is meant
to provide guidance for conservation
and management of B. nevinii on USFS
lands (Young 2007). However, these
documents provide general guidance
only and do not direct decisions
regarding USFS site-specific project
proposals. Additionally, these
documents do not provide specific
recommendations for the B. nevinii
occurrence on the CNF. Therefore, as
stated in the February 6, 2007, proposed
rule (72 FR 5552), we are not proposing
USFS lands within this subunit for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act based on these plans.
Subunit 1D: North of Vail Lake
Subunit 1D consists of approximately
21 ac (8 ha) of private land located
immediately north of Vail Lake in
southern Riverside County, California.
The Berberis nevinii occurrence at this
location is mapped along a canyon just
above the high water line of Vail Lake,
and consists of seven plants based on a
1989 survey (CNNDB 2006). Berberis
nevinii individuals in this area are
found in sandy and gravelly soils in a
drainage bottom (PCE 1 and 2). The
vegetation community is classified as
coastal scrub and valley foothill riparian
(PCE 3) (Service GIS data 2006). At this
site, B. nevinii is associated with
Adenostoma fasciculatum,
Arctostaphylos glauca, Rhus
integrifolia, Juniperus californica, and
Rhamnus crocea; to the north is a large
grove of Prosopis glandulosa (CNDDB
2006). Soils in this area are classified as
badland (PCE 2) (Service GIS data 2006).
We are proposing this subunit as
critical habitat because it contains the
features essential to conservation of
Berberis nevinii, and it contains a
relatively large natural occurrence of the
species (CNDDB 2006). This subunit is
important for conserving B. nevinii as it
is one of several relatively large
occurrences in the Vail Lake area and
thus has a greater potential for
regeneration by seed. Berberis nevinii
occupied this subunit at the time of
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
listing, as identified in the final listing
rule (63 FR 54956, October 13, 1998).
The primary threat to Berberis nevinii
habitat in this area that may require
special management considerations or
protection of the PCEs is urban/
residential development. This subunit,
as well as subunits 1C, 1E, and 1F,
consists entirely of private land that
may be developed, excluding flood
easement lands held by the RCWD. This
and the other subunits just mentioned
fall within the Criteria Area of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP and
are targeted, in whole or in part, for
acquisition and inclusion in the MSHCP
Conservation Area as Additional
Reserve Lands. Regardless, indirect
effects of urban development could
threaten B. nevinii habitat in this area,
including human recreation activities;
erosion; incursion or spread of invasive,
nonnative plants; and changes to the
natural fire regime (i.e., increased
ignitions and fire frequency and
shortened fire return intervals) that can
lead to type conversion of shrublands to
annual grasslands. Rising lake levels
may also pose a threat, though the
occurrences closest to Vail Lake have
not been inundated or affected by rising
water levels and fluctuations in the
recent past (Boyd 2007).
We are proposing to exclude the
private lands within this subunit from
the final designation of critical habitat
for Berberis nevinii based on
conservation measures for the species in
the MSHCP (see 72 FR 5552,
‘‘Relationship of Critical Habitat to
Approved Habitat Conservation Plans
(HCPs)—Exclusion Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act—Western Riverside
County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan’’ section for a
detailed discussion).
Subunit 1E: South of Vail Lake/
Peninsula
Subunit 1E consists of approximately
217 ac (88 ha) of private land located on
the south and southwest side of Vail
Lake in southern Riverside County,
California. This site has the largest
known natural occurrence of Berberis
nevinii, collectively consisting of 134
plants based on a 1987 survey (Boyd
1987, pp. 7, 61–72; CNDDB 2006). These
plants are located in several stands
along both sides of the southwest arm of
Vail Lake, the south shore and
peninsula, and part of the west shore of
the southeast arm of Vail Lake. Berberis
nevinii individuals in this area are
found in canyons, in a wash of 15
percent slope, and on north-facing
ridges and slopes between 35 and 70
percent slope (PCE 1) (Boyd 1987, p.
61–72; CNDDB 2006), primarily in
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
association with coastal scrub, mixed
chaparral, and valley foothill riparian
communities (PCE 3) (Service GIS data
2006). Associated species include, but
are not limited to: Artemisia californica,
Adenostoma fasciculatum, Eriogonum
fasciculatum, Salvia mellifera,
Rhamnus crocea, Rhus ovata, Encelia
farinosa, Baccharis glutinosa, and
Yucca sp. (Boyd 1987, p. 61–72). Soils
in this area are classified as sandy loams
(Arlington and Greenfield fine sandy
loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded;
Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 15 to 50
percent slopes, eroded; Hanford coarse
sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes,
eroded; Lodi rocky loam, 25 to 50
percent slopes, eroded; Monserate sandy
loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded;
Monserate sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes, severely eroded; Pachappa fine
sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes,
eroded), gullied land, riverwash, and
rough broken land (PCE 2) (Service GIS
data 2006).
We are proposing this subunit as
critical habitat because it contains
features essential to conservation of
Berberis nevinii, and it contains the
largest known natural occurrence of the
species (CNDDB 2006). This location
also contains the bulk of known
individuals in the Vail Lake/Oak
Mountain area. Additionally, we
interpret that reproduction has occurred
at this site in the past based on the
presence of several size (age) classes
during Nishida’s 1987 survey of the area
(Boyd 1987, p. 62). Berberis nevinii
occupied this subunit at the time of
listing, as identified in the final listing
rule (63 FR 54956, October 13, 1998).
The primary threat to Berberis nevinii
habitat in this area that may require
special management considerations or
protection of the PCEs is urban/
residential development. This subunit,
as well as subunits 1C, 1D, and 1F,
consists entirely of private land that
may be developed, excluding areas held
as flood easement by the RCWD. This
and the other subunits just mentioned
fall within the Criteria Area of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP and
are targeted, in whole or in part, for
acquisition and inclusion in the MSHCP
Conservation Area as Additional
Reserve Lands. Regardless, indirect
effects of urban development—
including human recreation activities;
erosion; incursion or spread of invasive,
nonnative plants (including annual
grasses, Tamarix sp., Nicotiana glauca,
and others); and changes to the natural
fire regime (i.e., increased ignitions and
fire frequency and shortened fire return
intervals) that can lead to type
conversion of shrublands to annual
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
grasslands—could threaten B. nevinii
habitat in this area.
This Berberis nevinii occurrence has
burned in the past, and regeneration by
stump sprouting has been observed
(CNDDB 2006). Part of this area is fairly
inaccessible, except by boat; however,
other parts are in close proximity to
roads, equestrian trails, and the boat
launch area (Boyd 1987, pp. 61–72;
CNDDB 2006), and thus may be more
heavily impacted by recreational
activities. Rising lake levels were also
identified as a potential threat to this
occurrence by Nishida (Boyd 1987, pp.
61–72; CNNDB 2006), though the
occurrences closest to Vail Lake have
not been inundated or affected by rising
water levels and fluctuations in the
recent past (Boyd 2007).
We are proposing to exclude the
private lands within this subunit from
the final designation of critical habitat
for Berberis nevinii based on
conservation measures for the species in
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
(see 72 FR 5552, ‘‘Relationship of
Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat
Conservation Plans (HCPs)—Exclusion
Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act—
Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan’’
section for a detailed discussion).
Required Determinations—Amended
In our February 6, 2007, proposed
rule (72 FR 5552), we indicated that we
would defer our determination of
compliance with several statutes and
Executive Orders until the information
concerning potential economic impacts
of the designation and potential effects
on landowners and stakeholders was
available in the draft economic analysis.
Those data are now available for our use
in making these determinations. In this
notice we are affirming the information
contained in the proposed rule
concerning Executive Order (E.O.)
13132, E.O. 12988, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, and the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951). Based on
the information made available to us in
the draft economic analysis, we are
amending our Required Determinations,
as provided below, concerning E.O.
12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, E.O. 13211, E.O. 12630, and the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with E.O. 12866, this
document is a significant rule because it
may raise novel legal and policy issues.
Based on our draft economic analysis of
the proposed designation of critical
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58799
habitat for Berberis nevinii, costs related
to conservation activities for B. nevinii
pursuant to sections 4, 7, and 10 of the
Act are estimated to be approximately
$169,000 to $172,000 in undiscounted
dollars over a 20-year period in areas
proposed as critical habitat and
approximately $1.7 to $433.5 million in
undiscounted dollars over a 20-year
period (or 40-year period for impacts
related to management of Vail Lake) in
areas proposed for exclusion from
critical habitat. These impacts would
only occur if the area proposed for
exclusion is instead designated as
critical habitat. These cost estimates are
based on revisions to the proposed
designation of critical habitat described
in this notice and includes costs
coextensive with listing and recovery.
Discounted future costs in areas
proposed as critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $136,000
to $139,000 ($10,000 annualized) at a 3
percent discount rate or approximately
$107,000 to $110,000 ($11,000
annualized) at a 7 percent discount rate.
Discounted future costs in areas
proposed for exclusion from critical
habitat are estimated to be
approximately $1.2 to $232.5 million at
a 3 percent discount rate ($82,000 to
$10.1 million annualized) or
approximately $0.9 to $118.1 million at
a 7 percent discount rate ($81,000 to
$8.9 million annualized). For areas
proposed for exclusion, estimated
discounted future costs (3 percent
discount rate) associated with
management of Vail Lake range from
zero to $12.2 million for the 2008
through 2012 timeframe, from zero to
$117.4 million for the 2013 through
2027 timeframe, and from zero to $99.7
million for the 2028 through 2047
timeframe. Similarly, estimated
discounted future costs (3 percent
discount rate) associated with
development range from $333,000 to
$967,000 for the 2008 through 2012
timeframe and from $873,000 to $2.3
million for the 2013 through 2027
timeframe in areas proposed for
exclusion from critical habitat. Lastly,
the discounted future cost (3 percent
discount rate) associated with
administration is estimated at $19,000
for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe in
these same subunits.
Therefore, based on our draft
economic analysis, we have determined
that the proposed designation of critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii would not
result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
affect the economy in a material way.
Due to the necessary timeline for
publication in the Federal Register, the
Office of Management and Budget
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
58800
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
(OMB) has not formally reviewed the
proposed rule or accompanying
economic analysis.
Further, E.O. 12866 directs Federal
agencies promulgating regulations to
evaluate regulatory alternatives (Office
of Management and Budget, Circular A–
4, September 17, 2003). Pursuant to
Circular A–4, once it has been
determined that the Federal regulatory
action is appropriate, the agency will
then need to consider alternative
regulatory approaches. Since the
designation of critical habitat is a
statutory requirement pursuant to the
Act, we must then evaluate alternative
regulatory approaches, where feasible,
when promulgating a designation of
critical habitat.
In developing our designations of
critical habitat, we consider economic
impacts, impacts to national security,
and other relevant impacts pursuant to
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Based on the
discretion allowable under this
provision, we may exclude any
particular area from the designation of
critical habitat providing that the
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the
benefits of specifying the area as critical
habitat and that such exclusion would
not result in the extinction of the
species. As such, we believe that the
evaluation of the inclusion or exclusion
of particular areas, or combination
thereof, in a designation constitutes our
regulatory alternative analysis.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C.
802(2)) (SBREFA), whenever an agency
is required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available
for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small entities (i.e.,
small businesses, small organizations,
and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required if the head of an
agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Based upon our draft economic analysis
of the proposed designation, we provide
our analysis for determining whether
the proposed rule would result in a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Based on comments received, this
determination is subject to revision as
part of the final rulemaking.
According to the Small Business
Administration (SBA), small entities
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
include small organizations, such as
independent nonprofit organizations;
small governmental jurisdictions,
including school boards and city and
town governments that serve fewer than
50,000 residents; and small businesses
(13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining
concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities
with fewer than 100 employees, retail
and service businesses with less than $5
million in annual sales, general and
heavy construction businesses with less
than $27.5 million in annual business,
special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and
agricultural businesses with annual
sales less than $750,000. To determine
if potential economic impacts to these
small entities are significant, we
considered the types of activities that
might trigger regulatory impacts under
this designation as well as types of
project modifications that may result. In
general, the term significant economic
impact is meant to apply to a typical
small business firm’s business
operations.
To determine if the proposed
designation of critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii would affect a
substantial number of small entities, we
considered the number of small entities
affected within particular types of
economic activities, such as residential
and commercial development. We
considered each industry or category
individually to determine if certification
is appropriate. In estimating the
numbers of small entities potentially
affected, we also considered whether
their activities have any Federal
involvement; some kinds of activities
are unlikely to have any Federal
involvement and thus will not be
affected by the designation of critical
habitat. Designation of critical habitat
only affects activities conducted,
funded, permitted, or authorized by
Federal agencies; non-Federal activities
are not affected by the designation.
If this proposed critical habitat
designation is made final, Federal
agencies must consult with us under
section 7 of the Act if their activities
may affect designated critical habitat.
Consultations to avoid the destruction
or adverse modification of critical
habitat would be incorporated into the
existing consultation process.
In our draft economic analysis of the
proposed critical habitat designation,
we evaluated the potential economic
effects on small business entities
resulting from conservation actions
related to the listing of Berberis nevinii
and proposed designation of its critical
habitat.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Impacts of conservation activities are
not anticipated to affect small entities in
the following categories: Fire
management on Federal lands; invasive,
nonnative plant species management on
Federal lands; recreation management
on Federal lands; and surveying,
monitoring, and other activities on
Federal lands. As described in Chapters
4 through 6 of the draft economic
analysis, the cost associated with
modifications to activities on Federal
lands will be borne by the USFS and
BLM. The Federal Government is not
considered a small entity by the SBA.
As described in Chapter 3 of the draft
economic analysis, potential impacts
related to management of Vail Lake will
be borne entirely by the RCWD and
account for the majority of the total
anticipated upper-bound future impacts
in areas proposed for exclusion from the
final designation of critical habitat (up
to $429.1 million over the next 40 years
in undiscounted dollars). The RCWD is
not considered a small entity/
governmental jurisdiction by the SBA
because it services a population
exceeding the criteria for a ‘‘small
entity.’’ Additionally, transportation
projects that are reasonably foreseeable
within the 20-year analysis period are
not anticipated to impact areas
proposed as critical habitat. Only
impacts to land development activities
(Chapter 2) are expected to be borne by
small entities. Accordingly, the small
business analysis (Appendix B of the
economic analysis) focuses on the
economic impacts of land development
activities on private lands.
Seventy percent of the developmentrelated impacts are expected to be borne
by private landowners ($2.3 million),
with the remainder borne by local
government (25 percent or $810,000)
and State and Federal government (5
percent or $180,000). Three private
landowners in Riverside County will be
directly impacted by the proposed
regulation, with one landowner owning
the majority (approximately 85 percent
or 291 ac (118 ha)) of the 341 ac (138
ha) of private (non-RCWD) lands
proposed as critical habitat. Chapter 2 of
the draft economic analysis concludes
that some residential/commercial
development is likely in or adjacent to
proposed critical habitat on private
lands near Vail Lake. Current zoning
laws limit the type of development that
may take place on these private lands to
one single-family home per 10 ac (4 ha)
or 20 ac (8 ha), depending on specific
zoning. Also, RCWD’s flood easement
for Vail Lake precludes development
from approximately 34 ac (14 ha) of
private land within proposed critical
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
habitat adjacent to Vail Lake. Lastly, the
topography (steepness) of much of this
area makes it unlikely that the land will
be used for dense development in the
future. Still, the likelihood and eventual
density of houses in or near proposed
critical habitat, and whether such
development will pose a threat to
Berberis nevinii habitat is unknown.
The private land proposed as critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii is located
within the Criteria Area of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP and is
targeted, in whole or in part, for
acquisition and inclusion in the MSHCP
Conservation Area as Additional
Reserve Lands. Based on the MSHCP,
the economic analysis assumes 90
percent or approximately 277 ac (112
ha) of the privately-owned land within
potential critical habitat and outside
RCWD’s flood easement (which is
approximately 307 of 341 ac (or 124 of
138 ha) of private land) will be targeted
for acquisition as Additional Reserve
Lands, with compensation to the private
landowners. The economic analysis
considers the cost of land acquisition,
reserve management (including fire,
invasive species, and recreation
management), biological monitoring,
adaptive management, and program
administration for preserving these 277
ac (112 ha) of private land with longterm conservation value for B. nevinii as
the total economic impact of the
proposed critical habitat designation as
it relates to development. The total
economic impact for these activities
over the next 20 years is estimated to
range from $1.6 to $4.4 million in
undiscounted dollars, or $1.2 to $3.3
million per year and $0.8 to $2.3 million
per year at the 3 percent and 7 percent
discount rate, respectively.
Every small land subdivision and
construction business in the MSHCP
Plan Area is expected to be indirectly
affected by conservation efforts for
Berberis nevinii due to mitigation and
density bonus fees that will be required
for all new development. The economic
analysis estimates that there are 3,146
small land subdivision and building
construction businesses in Riverside
County, but it is unknown how many of
these are within the MSHCP Plan Area,
which encompasses only the western
part of the County. However, it is
expected that these small entities would
pass any additional costs associated
with conservation measures to the
consumer (i.e., the purchaser of the
finished building), and thus we do not
anticipate that this proposed regulation
will result in a significant impact to a
substantial number of small business
entities. Please refer to our draft
economic analysis of the proposed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
critical habitat designation for a more
detailed discussion of potential
economic impacts.
In summary, we have considered
whether this proposed rule would result
in a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities. For
the above reasons and based on
currently available information, we
certify that the rule will not, if
promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required.
Executive Order 13211—Energy Supply,
Distribution, and Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
E.O. 13211 on regulations that
significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. E.O. 13211
requires agencies to prepare Statements
of Energy Effects when undertaking
certain actions. This proposed
designation of critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii is considered a
significant regulatory action under E.O.
12866 due to its potentially raising
novel legal and policy issues. OMB has
provided guidance for implementing
this Executive Order that outlines nine
outcomes that may constitute ‘‘a
significant adverse effect’’ when
compared without the regulatory action
under consideration. The draft
economic analysis finds that none of
these criteria are relevant to this
analysis. Thus, based on information in
the draft economic analysis, energyrelated impacts associated with B.
nevinii conservation activities within
proposed critical habitat are not
expected. As such, the proposed
designation of critical habitat is not
expected to significantly affect energy
supplies, distribution, or use, and a
Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501),
the Service makes the following
findings:
(a) This rule will not produce a
Federal mandate. In general, a Federal
mandate is a provision in legislation,
statute, or regulation that would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or
Tribal governments, or the private
sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal
intergovernmental mandates’’ and
‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C.
658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental
mandate’’ includes a regulation that
‘‘would impose an enforceable duty
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58801
upon State, local, or tribal
governments,’’ with two exceptions. It
excludes ‘‘a condition of federal
assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty
arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,’’ unless the regulation
‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or
more is provided annually to State,
local, and Tribal governments under
entitlement authority,’’ if the provision
would ‘‘increase the stringency of
conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps
upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government’s responsibility to provide
funding’’ and the State, local, or tribal
governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust
accordingly. (At the time of enactment,
these entitlement programs were:
Medicaid; Aid to Families with
Dependent Children work programs;
Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social
Services Block Grants; Vocational
Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care,
Adoption Assistance, and Independent
Living; Family Support Welfare
Services; and Child Support
Enforcement.) ‘‘Federal private sector
mandate’’ includes a regulation that
‘‘would impose an enforceable duty
upon the private sector, except (i) a
condition of Federal assistance; or (ii) a
duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.’’
The designation of critical habitat
does not impose a legally binding duty
on non-Federal government entities or
private parties. Under the Act, the only
regulatory effect is that Federal agencies
must ensure that their actions do not
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. Non-Federal
entities that receive Federal funding,
assistance, permits, or otherwise require
approval or authorization from a Federal
agency for an action may be indirectly
impacted by the designation of critical
habitat. However, the legally binding
duty to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat rests
squarely on the Federal agency.
Furthermore, to the extent that nonFederal entities are indirectly impacted
because they receive Federal assistance
or participate in a voluntary Federal aid
program, the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act would not apply, nor would
critical habitat shift the costs of the large
entitlement programs listed above on to
State governments.
(b) We do not believe that this rule
will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. As discussed in the
draft economic analysis, anticipated
future impacts in areas proposed for
final designation as critical habitat will
be borne by the Federal Government; in
areas proposed for exclusion from the
final designation, the majority of the
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
58802
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
total anticipated upper-bound future
impacts will be borne by the RCWD,
with private landowners, local
government, and Federal and State
governments bearing the rest. The
Federal government is not considered a
small governmental jurisdiction or
entity by the SBA, and neither is the
RCWD because it services a population
exceeding the criteria for a ‘‘small
entity.’’ Consequently, we do not
believe that critical habitat designation
would significantly or uniquely affect
small government entities. As such, a
Small Government Agency Plan is not
required.
Executive Order 12630—Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630
(‘‘Government Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Private
Property Rights’’), we have analyzed the
potential takings implications of
proposing critical habitat for Berberis
nevinii in a takings implications
assessment. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this proposed
designation of critical habitat for B.
nevinii does not pose significant takings
implications.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this rulemaking is available upon
request from the Field Supervisor,
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES).
Authors
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff of the Nevada Fish and Wildlife
Office and the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further
amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as proposed to be amended
at 72 FR 5552, February 6, 2007, as set
forth below:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–
625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Critical habitat for Berberis nevinii
(Nevin’s barberry) in § 17.96(a), which
was proposed to be added on February
6, 2007, at 72 FR 5552, is proposed to
be amended by revising paragraphs
(5)(ii), (5)(iv), and (5)(v), and by revising
Map 1 in paragraph (5)(vii), as follows:
§ 17.96
Critical habitat—plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
*
*
*
*
*
Family Berberidaceae: Berberis
nevinii (Nevin’s barberry)
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Unit 1. Agua Tibia/Vail Lake,
Riverside County, California.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Subunit 1B for Berberis nevinii,
Agua Tibia Mountain Foothills Subunit,
Riverside County, California. From
USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Vail Lake,
lands bounded by the following UTM
NAD27 coordinates (E, N): 504200,
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3702900; 504300, 3702900; 504300,
3702800; 504200, 3702800; thence
returning to 504200, 3702900.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) Subunit 1D for Berberis nevinii,
North of Vail Lake Subunit, Riverside
County, California. From USGS 1:24,000
quadrangles Sage and Vail Lake, lands
bounded by the following UTM NAD27
coordinates (E, N): 502600, 3706600;
502900, 3706600; 502900, 3706300;
502626, 3706300; thence follow the
1,461 foot Vail lake contour to 502600,
3706368; thence returning to 502600,
3706600.
(v) Subunit 1E for Berberis nevinii,
South of Vail Lake/Peninsula Subunit,
Riverside County, California. From
USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Vail Lake,
lands bounded by the following UTM
NAD27 coordinates (E, N): 503300,
3704300; 503600, 3704300; 503600,
3704100; 503500, 3704100; 503500,
3703900; 503200, 3703900; 503200,
3704100; 503100, 3704100; 503100,
3704600; 502700, 3704600; 502700,
3704700; 502300, 3704700; 502300,
3704500; 502200, 3704500; 502200,
3704200; 502000, 3704200; 502000,
3704000; 501600, 3704000; 501600,
3704290; thence follow the 1,461 foot
Vail lake contour to 503300, 3704595;
thence returning to 503300, 3704300.
Continuing to lands bounded by the
following UTM NAD27 coordinates (E,
N): 501700, 3705100; 501812.94,
3705100; thence follow the 1,461 foot
Vail lake contour to 501700, 370444.25;
thence returning to 501700, 3705100.
*
*
*
*
*
(vii) Map of Subunits 1A through 1F
(Map 1) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
*
*
*
*
58803
Dated: October 5, 2007.
David M. Verhey,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 07–5063 Filed 10–16–07; 8:45 am]
*
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
EP17OC07.015
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 17, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58793-58803]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5063]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AU84
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Berberis nevinii (Nevin's barberry)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period, revisions to
proposed critical habitat, notice of availability of draft economic
analysis, and amended Required Determinations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on the proposed designation of critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii (Nevin's barberry) under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are also using this comment
period to announce revisions to proposed critical habitat subunits 1B,
1D, and 1E as described in the proposed rule published in the Federal
Register on February 6, 2007, and announce the availability of the
draft economic analysis for the proposed critical habitat designation
and an amended Required Determinations section of the proposal. The
draft economic analysis estimates potential costs to be approximately
$169,000 to $172,000 in undiscounted dollars over a 20-year period in
areas proposed as critical habitat and approximately $1.7 to $433.5
million in undiscounted dollars over a 20-year period (or 40-year
period for impacts related to management of Vail Lake) in areas
proposed for exclusion from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of
[[Page 58794]]
the Act. We are reopening the comment period to allow all interested
parties to comment simultaneously on the proposed rule, our revisions
to the proposed rule, the associated draft economic analysis, and the
amended Required Determinations section. Comments previously submitted
need not be resubmitted as they will be incorporated into the public
record as part of this comment period and will be fully considered in
preparation of the final rule.
DATES: We will accept public comments until November 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments and materials to us by any
one of the following methods:
(1) E-mail: Please submit electronic comments to
fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov. Include ``Nevin's barberry'' in the subject
line. For more information, please see the Public Comments Solicited
section under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
(2) Facsimile: You may fax your comments to 760/431-5901.
(3) U.S. mail or hand-delivery: You may submit written comments and
information to Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, CA 92011.
(4) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad
Fish and Wildlife Office, at the address listed in the ADDRESSES
section (telephone: 760/431-9440). Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments Solicited
We will accept written comments and information during this
reopened comment period on the proposed critical habitat designation
for Berberis nevinii published in the Federal Register on February 6,
2007 (72 FR 5552), the revisions to proposed critical habitat described
herein (see Revisions to Proposed Critical Habitat section), and the
draft economic analysis of the revised proposed designation. We will
consider information and recommendations from all interested parties.
We are particularly interested in comments concerning:
(1) Critical Habitat Subunits 1B, 1D, and 1E as revised in this
notice (see Revisions to Proposed Critical Habitat section).
(2) The reasons why habitat should or should not be designated as
critical habitat under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
including whether the benefit of designation would outweigh threats to
the species caused by the designation such that the designation of
critical habitat is prudent.
(3) Specific information on the amount and distribution of Berberis
nevinii habitat; what habitat or habitat features are essential to the
conservation of this species and why; which areas occupied at the time
of listing containing these features should be included in the critical
habitat designation and why; and which areas not occupied at the time
of listing but currently occupied should be included in the final
designation and why.
(4) The geographical extent, number of plants, and/or reproductive
status of native Berberis nevinii occurrences, particularly those in
the Loma Linda Hills area (vicinity of San Timoteo Canyon and Scott
Canyon) in San Bernardino County and those in western Riverside County
(including in the vicinity of Vail Lake, the Agua Tibia Mountain
foothills on the Cleveland National Forest (CNF), in the Soboba
Badlands east of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, the Jurupa Hills area,
and near the City of Temecula).
(5) Specific information on three historical Berberis nevinii
records from Los Angeles County--two from the Arroyo Seco near the City
of Pasadena (California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) element
occurrences 8 and 9) and one from the Big Tujunga Wash near San
Fernando (CNDDB element occurrence 10)--such as whether the species
still exists in these areas and where.
(6) Whether any areas not currently known to be occupied by
Berberis nevinii, but essential to the conservation of the species,
should be included in the designation.
(7) Information that demonstrates a species-specific pollinator-
plant relationship for Berberis nevinii; information on seed dispersal
mechanisms and dispersal distance for B. nevinii; whether seed banks
exist for this species and, if so, for how long and under what
conditions; and whether such information should be applied to or
considered a primary constituent element for the species.
(8) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
mapped critical habitat subunits and their possible impact on proposed
critical habitat.
(9) Our proposed exclusion of Berberis nevinii habitat covered
under the approved Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and whether the benefits of excluding these
areas outweigh the benefits of their inclusion under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act (see 72 FR 5552, ``Relationship of Critical Habitat to Approved
Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs)--Exclusion Under Section 4(b)(2) of
the Act'' section for details on the Western Riverside County MSHCP).
If the Secretary determines the benefits of including these lands
outweigh the benefits of excluding them, they will not be excluded from
final critical habitat.
(10) Additional information regarding management plans covering
lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on Oak Mountain
and by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) on the CNF, and whether these
plans provide specific management for Berberis nevinii such that
consideration of exclusion of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act would be appropriate.
(11) Whether the benefits of exclusion of any particular area
outweigh the benefits of inclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(12) Information on the extent to which any State and local
environmental protection measures referred to in the draft economic
analysis may have been adopted largely as a result of the listing of
Berberis nevinii.
(13) Information on whether the draft economic analysis identifies
all State and local costs attributable to the proposed critical habitat
designation, and information on any costs that have been inadvertently
overlooked.
(14) Information on whether the draft economic analysis makes
appropriate assumptions regarding current practices and likely
regulatory changes imposed as a result of the designation of critical
habitat.
(15) Information on whether the draft economic analysis correctly
assesses the effect on regional costs associated with any land use
controls that may derive from the designation of critical habitat.
(16) Information on whether there are any quantifiable economic
benefits that could result from the designation of critical habitat.
(17) Information on areas that could potentially be
disproportionately impacted by designation of critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii.
(18) Any foreseeable economic, national security, or other
potential impacts resulting from the proposed designation, and, in
particular, any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of
including or excluding areas that exhibit these impacts.
(19) Information on whether the draft economic analysis
appropriately
[[Page 58795]]
identifies all costs that could result from the designation.
(20) Economic data on the incremental effects that would result
from designating any particular area as critical habitat, since it is
our intent to include the incremental costs attributed to the revised
critical habitat designation in the final economic analysis.
(21) Information on whether our approach to critical habitat
designation could be improved or modified in any way to provide for
greater public participation and understanding, or to assist us in
accommodating public concern and comments.
Pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act, an area may be excluded
from critical habitat if it is determined that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of including a particular area as
critical habitat, unless the failure to designate such area as critical
habitat will result in the extinction of the species. We may exclude an
area from designated critical habitat based on economic impacts,
national security, or any other relevant impact.
All previous comments and information submitted during the initial
comment period from February 6, 2007, to April 9, 2007, on the proposed
rule (72 FR 5552) need not be resubmitted as they will be incorporated
into the public record as part of this comment period and will be fully
considered in preparation of the final rule. If you wish to comment,
you may submit your comments and materials concerning proposed rule,
draft economic analysis, or the amended Required Determinations
provided in this document by any one of several methods (see
ADDRESSES). Our final designation of critical habitat will take into
consideration all written comments and any additional information we
have received during both comment periods. On the basis of public
comment on this analysis, the revised critical habitat proposal, and
the final economic analysis, we may, during the development of our
final determination, find that areas proposed are not essential, are
appropriate for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, or are not
appropriate for exclusion.
You may submit your comments and material concerning the above
actions by any one of several methods (see ADDRESSES). If you use e-
mail to submit your comments, please include ``Attn: Nevin's barberry''
in your e-mail subject header, preferably with your name and return
address in the body of your message. If you do not receive a
confirmation from the system that we have received your e-mail, contact
us directly by calling our Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at (760)
431-9440.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
You may obtain copies of the proposed rule and draft economic
analysis by mail from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES) or by visiting our website at https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/.
Background
On August 10, 2004, the Center for Biological Diversity and
California Native Plant Society challenged our failure to designate
critical habitat for Berberis nevinii and four other plant species
(Center for Biological Diversity et al. v. Gale Norton, Secretary of
the Department of the Interior et al., C-04-3240 JL, N. D. Cal.). In a
court approved settlement agreement, the Service agreed to propose
critical habitat for B. nevinii, if prudent, on or before January 30,
2007, and finalize the designation on or before January 30, 2008. On
February 6, 2007, we published a proposed rule to withdraw our previous
not prudent finding and designate critical habitat for B. nevinii (72
FR 5552), identifying approximately 417 acres (ac) (169 hectares (ha))
in Riverside County, California, that met the definition of critical
habitat for this species. Of this, we proposed to exclude 385 ac (156
ha) of non-Federal land from the final designation under section
4(b)(2) of the Act because these lands are protected by an approved
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) (see 72 FR 5552, ``Relationship of
Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat Conservation Plans--Exclusion
Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act'' section for details), leaving a
proposed final designation of 32 ac (13 ha) of Federal land.
We are now proposing revisions to three of the proposed critical
habitat subunits: 1B, 1D, and 1E (see ``Revisions to Proposed Critical
Habitat'' section); accordingly, approximately 361 ac (146 ha) in
Riverside County, California, meets the definition of critical habitat
for this species, a reduction of 56 ac (23 ha). Of this, we propose to
exclude approximately 344 ac (139 ha) of non-Federal land protected by
an approved HCP from the final designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act. These 344 ac (139 ha) are a subset of the 385 ac (156 ha) proposed
for exclusion in the proposed rule. Other than these changes, the
proposed rule of February 6, 2007, remains intact.
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time
it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species and that may require special management considerations or
protection, and specific areas outside the geographical area occupied
by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such
areas are essential for the conservation of the species. If the
proposed rule as revised herein is made final, section 7 of the Act
will prohibit destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat
by any activity funded, authorized, or carried out by any Federal
agency. Federal agencies proposing actions affecting areas designated
as critical habitat must consult with us on the effects of their
proposed actions, pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
Draft Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate or revise
critical habitat based upon the best scientific and commercial data
available, after taking into consideration the economic impact, impact
on national security, or any other relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. We have prepared a draft economic
analysis of the proposed critical habitat designation based on the
February 6, 2007, proposed rule to designate critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii (72 FR 5552) and subsequent revisions to the proposed
rule described herein (see Revisions to Proposed Critical Habitat).
The draft economic analysis is intended to quantify the economic
impacts of all potential conservation efforts for Berberis nevinii;
some of these costs will likely be incurred regardless of whether
critical habitat is designated. Potential economic impacts in areas
proposed as critical habitat are estimated over a 20-year period,
whereas estimated economic impacts in areas proposed for exclusion from
critical habitat follow various timeframes, depending on the activity
(e.g., a 5-year period for economic impacts related to administration,
a 20-year period for economic impacts related to development, and a 40-
year period for economic impacts related to management of Vail Lake).
The draft economic analysis estimates potential costs to be
approximately $169,000 to
[[Page 58796]]
$172,000 in undiscounted dollars over a 20-year period in areas
proposed as critical habitat and approximately $1.7 to $433.5 million
in undiscounted dollars over a 20-year period (or 40-year period for
impacts related to management of Vail Lake) in areas proposed for
exclusion from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. These
impacts would only occur if the area proposed for exclusion is instead
designated as critical habitat. The cost estimates are based on
revisions to the proposed designation of critical habitat described in
this notice and include costs coextensive with listing and recovery.
Discounted future costs in areas proposed as critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $136,000 to $139,000 ($10,000 annualized)
at a 3 percent discount rate or approximately $107,000 to $110,000
($11,000 annualized) at a 7 percent discount rate. Discounted future
costs in areas proposed for exclusion from critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $1.2 to $232.5 million at a 3 percent
discount rate ($82,000 to $10.1 million annualized) or approximately
$0.9 to $118.1 million at a 7 percent discount rate ($81,000 to $8.9
million annualized). For areas proposed for exclusion, the economic
analysis provides an analysis of potential economic impacts related to
residential/urban development, management of Vail Lake, and
administration, with the timeframe for analysis varying based on the
activity (1-5 years, 6-20 years, and 21-40 years). Estimated discounted
future costs (3 percent discount rate) associated with management of
Vail Lake range from zero to $12.2 million for the 2008 through 2012
timeframe, from zero to $117.4 million for the 2013 through 2027
timeframe, and from zero to $99.7 million for the 2028 through 2047
timeframe. Similarly, estimated discounted future costs (3 percent
discount rate) associated with development range from $333,000 to
$967,000 for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe and from $873,000 to $2.3
million for the 2013 through 2027 timeframe in areas proposed for
exclusion from critical habitat. Lastly, the discounted future cost (3
percent discount rate) associated with administration is estimated at
$19,000 for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe in these same subunits.
The draft economic analysis considers the potential economic
effects of actions relating to the conservation of Berberis nevinii,
including costs associated with sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act, and
including those attributable to the designation of critical habitat. It
further considers the economic effects of protective measures taken as
a result of other Federal, State, and local laws that aid habitat
conservation for B. nevinii in areas containing features essential to
the conservation of the species. The draft analysis considers both
economic efficiency and distributional effects. In the case of habitat
conservation, efficiency effects generally reflect the ``opportunity
costs'' associated with the commitment of resources to comply with
habitat protection measures (such as lost economic opportunities
associated with restrictions on land use).
This analysis also addresses how potential economic impacts are
likely to be distributed, including an assessment of any local or
regional impacts of habitat conservation and the potential effects of
conservation activities on government agencies, private businesses, and
individuals. The analysis measures lost economic efficiency associated
with residential and commercial development and public projects and
activities, such as economic impacts on water management and
transportation projects, Federal lands, small entities, and the energy
industry. This information can be used by decision-makers to assess
whether the effects of the designation might unduly burden a particular
group or economic sector. Finally, this draft analysis looks
retrospectively at costs that have been incurred since the date
Berberis nevinii was listed as endangered (October 13, 1998; 63 FR
54956), and considers those costs that may occur in the years following
the designation of critical habitat, with the timeframes for this
analysis varying by activity. Because the draft economic analysis
considers the potential economic effects of all actions relating to the
conservation of B. nevinii, including costs associated with sections 4,
7, and 10 of the Act and those attributable to designating critical
habitat, this may result in an overestimate of the potential economic
impacts of the designation.
As stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the
public on this draft economic analysis, as well as on all aspects of
the proposal. We may revise the proposal or its supporting documents to
incorporate or address new information received during the comment
period. In particular, we may exclude an area from critical habitat if
we determine that the benefits of excluding the area outweigh the
benefits of including the area as critical habitat, provided such
exclusion will not result in the extinction of the species.
Changes to the Proposed Rule
By this notice, we are also advising the public of revisions to
three of the subunits described in the February 6, 2007, proposed rule
(72 FR 5552): Subunit 1B (Agua Tibia Mountain Foothills), Subunit 1D
(North of Vail Lake), and Subunit 1E (South of Vail Lake/Peninsula).
During the first comment period for the proposed rule, we were
informed by Cleveland National Forest (CNF) that proposed Subunit 1B
(Agua Tibia Mountain Foothills), which we had identified as including
approximately 17 ac (7 ha) of USFS land and approximately 5 ac (2 ha)
of adjacent private land, was inaccurately mapped because it was based
on inexact location information for the Berberis nevinii occurrence on
CNF lands. Hence, we are revising the location and boundaries of
proposed critical habitat Subunit 1B to reflect new location
information provided by the CNF, and we are now proposing to designate
less than 3 ac (1 ha) of Federal (CNF) land in Subunit 1B, rather than
the approximately 22 ac (9 ha) of Federal and private land identified
in the proposed rule. We delineated critical habitat based on the
criteria outlined in the February 6, 2007, proposed rule, which
resulted in this subunit no longer including any private land. Revised
Subunit 1B was occupied at the time of listing and contains the primary
constituent elements (PCEs), those physical or biological features
essential to conservation of the species.
We also reevaluated proposed critical habitat subunits bordering
Vail Lake based on updated aerial photographs and Vail Lake storage/
volume data provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD) for the
economic analysis. We removed areas along the shoreline from subunits
1D (North of Vail Lake) and 1E (South of Vail Lake/Peninsula) that do
not contain the PCEs required by Berberis nevinii and are not occupied
by the species due to lake-level fluctuations and recurrent, episodic
inundation, sometimes for relatively long periods of time. We removed
approximately 1 ac (1 ha) from proposed Subunit 1D and approximately 34
ac (14 ha) from proposed Subunit 1E, leaving approximately 21 ac (8 ha)
and approximately 217 ac (88 ha) in proposed subunits 1D and 1E,
respectively.
When delineating proposed critical habitat (72 FR 5552), we tried
to exclude areas from proposed subunits near Vail Lake that were
identified as being under water, and therefore did not contain the
PCEs. We based subunit delineations in
[[Page 58797]]
the proposed rule on USGS 1-meter resolution color-balanced, color
infrared aerial photography acquired in May/June 2002 for the Vail Lake
area, western Riverside County. Based on information provided by RCWD
for the draft economic analysis, the lake was storing between
approximately 19,750 acre-feet (May 1, 2002) and 19,180 acre-feet (June
30, 2002) of water during this time period. However, water levels at
Vail Lake can fluctuate greatly, depending on the amount of local
runoff reaching the lake, both within any given year and annually,
frequently exceeding the 2002 water levels for relatively long periods
of time. The RCWD, the entity that owns and operates/manages Vail Dam
and Vail Lake, has a surface water storage permit in the lake for up to
40,000 acre-feet from November 1 to April 30, annually. Thus, we
revised proposed critical habitat boundaries for subunits bordering
Vail Lake based on lake levels at RCWD's permitted storage capacity,
resulting in boundary changes to proposed subunits 1D and 1E.
Water volume in Vail Lake has been known to exceed 40,000 acre-
feet, even filling and surpassing lake storage capacity (50,000 acre-
feet) with water flowing over the spillway. The creation of Vail Lake
in 1948 may have resulted in the loss of some Berberis nevinii
individuals; however, the occurrences that are now located closest to
Vail Lake have not been inundated or affected by rising water levels
and fluctuations in the recent past (Boyd 2007). Thus, the revisions to
proposed critical habitat subunits 1D and 1E are not likely to result
in B. nevinii individuals in this area falling outside the revised
subunit boundaries. These revisions will, on the other hand, more
accurately represent B. nevinii habitat in subunits 1D and 1E.
Table 1 contains the corrected area values based on revisions to
proposed critical habitat subunits 1B, 1D, and 1E. The revisions to
these three proposed subunits change the legal description published in
the February 6, 2007, proposed rule. This notice republishes the legal
descriptions for subunits 1B, 1D, and 1E based on the revisions
described herein, along with a map depicting the revised location of
proposed critical habitat for Berberis nevinii.
Table 1.--Areas Proposed as Critical Habitat for Berberis nevinii and Areas Being Considered for Exclusion From
the Final Critical Habitat Designation Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
[Area is displayed in acres (ac) (hectares (ha)).]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area proposed for
Area proposed as exclusion from Area proposed as
Critical habitat unit Land ownership critical habitat final critical final critical
habitat habitat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Agua Tibia/Vail Lake
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A. Big Oak Mountain Summit..... BLM............... 14.8 ac (6.0 ha).. 0 ac (0 ha)....... 14.8 ac (6.0 ha).
1B. Agua Tibia Mountain USFS.............. 2.5 ac (1.0 ha)... 0 ac (0 ha)....... 2.5 ac (1.0 ha).
Foothills.
1C. South Flank Big Oak Mountain Private........... 86.5 ac (35.0 ha). 86.5 ac (35.0 ha). 0 ac (0 ha).
1D. North of Vail Lake.......... Private \1\....... 20.8 ac (8.4 ha).. 20.8 ac (8.4 ha).. 0 ac (0 ha).
1E. South of Vail Lake/Peninsula Private \1\....... 216.7 ac (87.7 ha) 216.7 ac (87.7 ha) 0 ac (0 ha).
1F. Temecula Creek East......... Private........... 19.8 ac (8.0 ha).. 19.8 ac (8.0 ha).. 0 ac (0 ha).
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... .................. 361.1 ac (146.1 343.8 ac (139.1 17.3 ac (7.0 ha).
ha). ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Private lands in Subunits 1D and 1E include a total of 2.8 ac (1.1 ha) owned by the Rancho California Water
District.
Below, we present brief descriptions of the revised proposed
subunits and reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat
for Berberis nevinii. These revised subunit descriptions replace those
provided in the February 6, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552).
Unit Descriptions
Subunit 1B: Agua Tibia Mountain Foothills
Subunit 1B consists of approximately 3 ac (1 ha) of federally-owned
land managed by the USFS on the CNF near the Agua Tibia Wilderness Area
in southern Riverside County, California. Five Berberis nevinii
individuals are known from this area and are located at the edge of a
stream channel (PCE 1) growing in association with coast live oak and
riparian woodland species (PCE 3). Nearby chaparral includes such
species as Quercus berberidifolia, Adenostoma fasciculatum, and
Haplopappus squarrosus, and nearby desert species include Yucca
schidigera (CNDDB 2006). These B. nevinii plants are growing under a
canopy of Quercus agrifolia and Platanus racemosa with the following
species: Heteromeles arbutifolia, Q. berberidifolia, Elymus
condensatus, Mimulus aurantiacus, Lonicera subspicata, Pterostegia
drymarioides, and Epilobium canum. Soils in this area are classified as
rough broken land and Visalia gravelly sandy loam, with 5 to 9 percent
slopes (PCE 2) (Service GIS data 2007).
We are proposing this subunit as critical habitat because it
contains features essential to conservation of Berberis nevinii and it
contains a relatively large natural occurrence of the species.
Additionally, Service personnel visited this site in June 2006 while B.
nevinii was in fruit and found that several of the fruits had three to
four seeds, which may be significant for a species that appears to
rarely set seed. Berberis nevinii occupied this subunit at the time of
listing, as identified in the final listing rule (63 FR 54956, October
13, 1998).
The Berberis nevinii occurrence on the CNF is not as well protected
as the occurrence on the Angeles National Forest (USFS 2005, p. 238).
The primary threats to B. nevinii habitat in this area are human
recreation (off-highway vehicle use, shooting); wildland fire,
including an increased risk of fire ignition due to the proximity of
State Highway 79 (USFS 2005, pp. 232, 237); fuels and fire management
activities (USFS 2005, p. 237); and invasive, nonnative plants,
including potential short-term adverse effects associated with control
efforts (USFS 2005, p. 234). The CNF occurrence burned in 1996 followed
by vigorous resprouting (USFS 2005, p. 237), and this location has also
shown signs of disturbance from road
[[Page 58798]]
activities, with unauthorized use of off-highway vehicles occurring
close to but not within the area occupied by the species (USFS 2005, p.
235). Nonetheless, the magnitude of impacts associated with roads and
recreational activity in this area appears to be low (USFS 2005, p.
238). Also, the USFS does not anticipate substantial camping and
hiking-related impacts to B. nevinii habitat, and these impacts will be
avoided or mitigated by use of Forest Plan standards (USFS 2005, p.
234).
The February 6, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552) identified the
proximity of Highway 79 as a potential threat to the Berberis nevinii
occurrence and habitat on the CNF, in part due to proposed highway
widening and realignment activities. However, we no longer anticipate
that these activities, if or when they occur, will affect Subunit 1B as
the revised subunit is now more than one-tenth mile (160 meters) south
of the highway. Invasive, nonnative plants and their management may
also impact the B. nevinii occurrence and habitat at this site. Based
on the weed management strategy in the USFS' Revised Land Management
Plan for the four Southern California National Forests (USFS 2005), the
CNF anticipates an eradication effort of the nonnative Arundo and other
invasive grasses present in this subunit.
One of the greatest threats to occupied habitat and the PCEs
contained therein on the CNF is from wildland fire and the management
of fire and fuels (i.e., fire suppression and prevention activities).
The Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Defense Zone overlaps about 43
percent of occupied habitat on the CNF (USFS 2005, p. 237; Service
2005, p. 127). Some plants or habitat within the WUI Defense Zone could
be removed or degraded under the Revised Land and Resource Management
Plan due to fuel removal for fire protection or overly frequent fuel
treatments (Service 2005, p. 127). Special management considerations or
protection of the PCEs may be required to minimize disturbance to the
vegetation and soils within this subunit; control invasive, nonnative
plants; and maintain the natural fire regime of the area.
Subunit 1B is included in the Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan's (MSHCP) Conservation Area as
existing Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) Conserved Lands. Since the CNF is
not a signatory to the MSHCP and is not required to comply with the
MSHCP's conservation measures, we are not proposing lands within this
subunit for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see 72 FR 5552,
``Exclusions under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act for Berberis nevinii''
section for a detailed discussion).
During the first comment period for the proposed rule, we were
informed that the Species Management Guide for Mahonia [Berberis]
nevinii (Gray) Fedde (Mistretta and Brown 1989) developed for the
Angeles National Forest was subsequently adopted by the CNF (Fege 1992,
p. 1; Holtrop 2007, p. 2). Additionally, the CNF informed us that the
species account for Berberis nevinii developed to support the
environmental analysis for the USFS Land Management Plans for four
southern California National Forests (USFS 2005) is meant to provide
guidance for conservation and management of B. nevinii on USFS lands
(Young 2007). However, these documents provide general guidance only
and do not direct decisions regarding USFS site-specific project
proposals. Additionally, these documents do not provide specific
recommendations for the B. nevinii occurrence on the CNF. Therefore, as
stated in the February 6, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552), we are not
proposing USFS lands within this subunit for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act based on these plans.
Subunit 1D: North of Vail Lake
Subunit 1D consists of approximately 21 ac (8 ha) of private land
located immediately north of Vail Lake in southern Riverside County,
California. The Berberis nevinii occurrence at this location is mapped
along a canyon just above the high water line of Vail Lake, and
consists of seven plants based on a 1989 survey (CNNDB 2006). Berberis
nevinii individuals in this area are found in sandy and gravelly soils
in a drainage bottom (PCE 1 and 2). The vegetation community is
classified as coastal scrub and valley foothill riparian (PCE 3)
(Service GIS data 2006). At this site, B. nevinii is associated with
Adenostoma fasciculatum, Arctostaphylos glauca, Rhus integrifolia,
Juniperus californica, and Rhamnus crocea; to the north is a large
grove of Prosopis glandulosa (CNDDB 2006). Soils in this area are
classified as badland (PCE 2) (Service GIS data 2006).
We are proposing this subunit as critical habitat because it
contains the features essential to conservation of Berberis nevinii,
and it contains a relatively large natural occurrence of the species
(CNDDB 2006). This subunit is important for conserving B. nevinii as it
is one of several relatively large occurrences in the Vail Lake area
and thus has a greater potential for regeneration by seed. Berberis
nevinii occupied this subunit at the time of listing, as identified in
the final listing rule (63 FR 54956, October 13, 1998).
The primary threat to Berberis nevinii habitat in this area that
may require special management considerations or protection of the PCEs
is urban/residential development. This subunit, as well as subunits 1C,
1E, and 1F, consists entirely of private land that may be developed,
excluding flood easement lands held by the RCWD. This and the other
subunits just mentioned fall within the Criteria Area of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP and are targeted, in whole or in part, for
acquisition and inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area as Additional
Reserve Lands. Regardless, indirect effects of urban development could
threaten B. nevinii habitat in this area, including human recreation
activities; erosion; incursion or spread of invasive, nonnative plants;
and changes to the natural fire regime (i.e., increased ignitions and
fire frequency and shortened fire return intervals) that can lead to
type conversion of shrublands to annual grasslands. Rising lake levels
may also pose a threat, though the occurrences closest to Vail Lake
have not been inundated or affected by rising water levels and
fluctuations in the recent past (Boyd 2007).
We are proposing to exclude the private lands within this subunit
from the final designation of critical habitat for Berberis nevinii
based on conservation measures for the species in the MSHCP (see 72 FR
5552, ``Relationship of Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat
Conservation Plans (HCPs)--Exclusion Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act--
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan''
section for a detailed discussion).
Subunit 1E: South of Vail Lake/Peninsula
Subunit 1E consists of approximately 217 ac (88 ha) of private land
located on the south and southwest side of Vail Lake in southern
Riverside County, California. This site has the largest known natural
occurrence of Berberis nevinii, collectively consisting of 134 plants
based on a 1987 survey (Boyd 1987, pp. 7, 61-72; CNDDB 2006). These
plants are located in several stands along both sides of the southwest
arm of Vail Lake, the south shore and peninsula, and part of the west
shore of the southeast arm of Vail Lake. Berberis nevinii individuals
in this area are found in canyons, in a wash of 15 percent slope, and
on north-facing ridges and slopes between 35 and 70 percent slope (PCE
1) (Boyd 1987, p. 61-72; CNDDB 2006), primarily in
[[Page 58799]]
association with coastal scrub, mixed chaparral, and valley foothill
riparian communities (PCE 3) (Service GIS data 2006). Associated
species include, but are not limited to: Artemisia californica,
Adenostoma fasciculatum, Eriogonum fasciculatum, Salvia mellifera,
Rhamnus crocea, Rhus ovata, Encelia farinosa, Baccharis glutinosa, and
Yucca sp. (Boyd 1987, p. 61-72). Soils in this area are classified as
sandy loams (Arlington and Greenfield fine sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent
slopes, eroded; Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 15 to 50 percent slopes,
eroded; Hanford coarse sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded; Lodi
rocky loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes, eroded; Monserate sandy loam, 8 to
15 percent slopes, eroded; Monserate sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes, severely eroded; Pachappa fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent
slopes, eroded), gullied land, riverwash, and rough broken land (PCE 2)
(Service GIS data 2006).
We are proposing this subunit as critical habitat because it
contains features essential to conservation of Berberis nevinii, and it
contains the largest known natural occurrence of the species (CNDDB
2006). This location also contains the bulk of known individuals in the
Vail Lake/Oak Mountain area. Additionally, we interpret that
reproduction has occurred at this site in the past based on the
presence of several size (age) classes during Nishida's 1987 survey of
the area (Boyd 1987, p. 62). Berberis nevinii occupied this subunit at
the time of listing, as identified in the final listing rule (63 FR
54956, October 13, 1998).
The primary threat to Berberis nevinii habitat in this area that
may require special management considerations or protection of the PCEs
is urban/residential development. This subunit, as well as subunits 1C,
1D, and 1F, consists entirely of private land that may be developed,
excluding areas held as flood easement by the RCWD. This and the other
subunits just mentioned fall within the Criteria Area of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP and are targeted, in whole or in part, for
acquisition and inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area as Additional
Reserve Lands. Regardless, indirect effects of urban development--
including human recreation activities; erosion; incursion or spread of
invasive, nonnative plants (including annual grasses, Tamarix sp.,
Nicotiana glauca, and others); and changes to the natural fire regime
(i.e., increased ignitions and fire frequency and shortened fire return
intervals) that can lead to type conversion of shrublands to annual
grasslands--could threaten B. nevinii habitat in this area.
This Berberis nevinii occurrence has burned in the past, and
regeneration by stump sprouting has been observed (CNDDB 2006). Part of
this area is fairly inaccessible, except by boat; however, other parts
are in close proximity to roads, equestrian trails, and the boat launch
area (Boyd 1987, pp. 61-72; CNDDB 2006), and thus may be more heavily
impacted by recreational activities. Rising lake levels were also
identified as a potential threat to this occurrence by Nishida (Boyd
1987, pp. 61-72; CNNDB 2006), though the occurrences closest to Vail
Lake have not been inundated or affected by rising water levels and
fluctuations in the recent past (Boyd 2007).
We are proposing to exclude the private lands within this subunit
from the final designation of critical habitat for Berberis nevinii
based on conservation measures for the species in the Western Riverside
County MSHCP (see 72 FR 5552, ``Relationship of Critical Habitat to
Approved Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs)--Exclusion Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act--Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan'' section for a detailed discussion).
Required Determinations--Amended
In our February 6, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 5552), we indicated
that we would defer our determination of compliance with several
statutes and Executive Orders until the information concerning
potential economic impacts of the designation and potential effects on
landowners and stakeholders was available in the draft economic
analysis. Those data are now available for our use in making these
determinations. In this notice we are affirming the information
contained in the proposed rule concerning Executive Order (E.O.) 13132,
E.O. 12988, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the President's memorandum
of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government Relations with Native
American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951). Based on the information
made available to us in the draft economic analysis, we are amending
our Required Determinations, as provided below, concerning E.O. 12866
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, E.O. 13211, E.O. 12630, and the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with E.O. 12866, this document is a significant rule
because it may raise novel legal and policy issues. Based on our draft
economic analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii, costs related to conservation activities for B.
nevinii pursuant to sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act are estimated to
be approximately $169,000 to $172,000 in undiscounted dollars over a
20-year period in areas proposed as critical habitat and approximately
$1.7 to $433.5 million in undiscounted dollars over a 20-year period
(or 40-year period for impacts related to management of Vail Lake) in
areas proposed for exclusion from critical habitat. These impacts would
only occur if the area proposed for exclusion is instead designated as
critical habitat. These cost estimates are based on revisions to the
proposed designation of critical habitat described in this notice and
includes costs coextensive with listing and recovery.
Discounted future costs in areas proposed as critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $136,000 to $139,000 ($10,000 annualized)
at a 3 percent discount rate or approximately $107,000 to $110,000
($11,000 annualized) at a 7 percent discount rate. Discounted future
costs in areas proposed for exclusion from critical habitat are
estimated to be approximately $1.2 to $232.5 million at a 3 percent
discount rate ($82,000 to $10.1 million annualized) or approximately
$0.9 to $118.1 million at a 7 percent discount rate ($81,000 to $8.9
million annualized). For areas proposed for exclusion, estimated
discounted future costs (3 percent discount rate) associated with
management of Vail Lake range from zero to $12.2 million for the 2008
through 2012 timeframe, from zero to $117.4 million for the 2013
through 2027 timeframe, and from zero to $99.7 million for the 2028
through 2047 timeframe. Similarly, estimated discounted future costs (3
percent discount rate) associated with development range from $333,000
to $967,000 for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe and from $873,000 to
$2.3 million for the 2013 through 2027 timeframe in areas proposed for
exclusion from critical habitat. Lastly, the discounted future cost (3
percent discount rate) associated with administration is estimated at
$19,000 for the 2008 through 2012 timeframe in these same subunits.
Therefore, based on our draft economic analysis, we have determined
that the proposed designation of critical habitat for Berberis nevinii
would not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more or affect the economy in a material way. Due to the necessary
timeline for publication in the Federal Register, the Office of
Management and Budget
[[Page 58800]]
(OMB) has not formally reviewed the proposed rule or accompanying
economic analysis.
Further, E.O. 12866 directs Federal agencies promulgating
regulations to evaluate regulatory alternatives (Office of Management
and Budget, Circular A-4, September 17, 2003). Pursuant to Circular A-
4, once it has been determined that the Federal regulatory action is
appropriate, the agency will then need to consider alternative
regulatory approaches. Since the designation of critical habitat is a
statutory requirement pursuant to the Act, we must then evaluate
alternative regulatory approaches, where feasible, when promulgating a
designation of critical habitat.
In developing our designations of critical habitat, we consider
economic impacts, impacts to national security, and other relevant
impacts pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Based on the discretion
allowable under this provision, we may exclude any particular area from
the designation of critical habitat providing that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying the area as critical
habitat and that such exclusion would not result in the extinction of
the species. As such, we believe that the evaluation of the inclusion
or exclusion of particular areas, or combination thereof, in a
designation constitutes our regulatory alternative analysis.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5
U.S.C. 802(2)) (SBREFA), whenever an agency is required to publish a
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based upon our draft
economic analysis of the proposed designation, we provide our analysis
for determining whether the proposed rule would result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on
comments received, this determination is subject to revision as part of
the final rulemaking.
According to the Small Business Administration (SBA), small
entities include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees,
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic
impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the
types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this
designation as well as types of project modifications that may result.
In general, the term significant economic impact is meant to apply to a
typical small business firm's business operations.
To determine if the proposed designation of critical habitat for
Berberis nevinii would affect a substantial number of small entities,
we considered the number of small entities affected within particular
types of economic activities, such as residential and commercial
development. We considered each industry or category individually to
determine if certification is appropriate. In estimating the numbers of
small entities potentially affected, we also considered whether their
activities have any Federal involvement; some kinds of activities are
unlikely to have any Federal involvement and thus will not be affected
by the designation of critical habitat. Designation of critical habitat
only affects activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by
Federal agencies; non-Federal activities are not affected by the
designation.
If this proposed critical habitat designation is made final,
Federal agencies must consult with us under section 7 of the Act if
their activities may affect designated critical habitat. Consultations
to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat
would be incorporated into the existing consultation process.
In our draft economic analysis of the proposed critical habitat
designation, we evaluated the potential economic effects on small
business entities resulting from conservation actions related to the
listing of Berberis nevinii and proposed designation of its critical
habitat.
Impacts of conservation activities are not anticipated to affect
small entities in the following categories: Fire management on Federal
lands; invasive, nonnative plant species management on Federal lands;
recreation management on Federal lands; and surveying, monitoring, and
other activities on Federal lands. As described in Chapters 4 through 6
of the draft economic analysis, the cost associated with modifications
to activities on Federal lands will be borne by the USFS and BLM. The
Federal Government is not considered a small entity by the SBA. As
described in Chapter 3 of the draft economic analysis, potential
impacts related to management of Vail Lake will be borne entirely by
the RCWD and account for the majority of the total anticipated upper-
bound future impacts in areas proposed for exclusion from the final
designation of critical habitat (up to $429.1 million over the next 40
years in undiscounted dollars). The RCWD is not considered a small
entity/governmental jurisdiction by the SBA because it services a
population exceeding the criteria for a ``small entity.'' Additionally,
transportation projects that are reasonably foreseeable within the 20-
year analysis period are not anticipated to impact areas proposed as
critical habitat. Only impacts to land development activities (Chapter
2) are expected to be borne by small entities. Accordingly, the small
business analysis (Appendix B of the economic analysis) focuses on the
economic impacts of land development activities on private lands.
Seventy percent of the development-related impacts are expected to
be borne by private landowners ($2.3 million), with the remainder borne
by local government (25 percent or $810,000) and State and Federal
government (5 percent or $180,000). Three private landowners in
Riverside County will be directly impacted by the proposed regulation,
with one landowner owning the majority (approximately 85 percent or 291
ac (118 ha)) of the 341 ac (138 ha) of private (non-RCWD) lands
proposed as critical habitat. Chapter 2 of the draft economic analysis
concludes that some residential/commercial development is likely in or
adjacent to proposed critical habitat on private lands near Vail Lake.
Current zoning laws limit the type of development that may take place
on these private lands to one single-family home per 10 ac (4 ha) or 20
ac (8 ha), depending on specific zoning. Also, RCWD's flood easement
for Vail Lake precludes development from approximately 34 ac (14 ha) of
private land within proposed critical
[[Page 58801]]
habitat adjacent to Vail Lake. Lastly, the topography (steepness) of
much of this area makes it unlikely that the land will be used for
dense development in the future. Still, the likelihood and eventual
density of houses in or near proposed critical habitat, and whether
such development will pose a threat to Berberis nevinii habitat is
unknown.
The private land proposed as critical habitat for Berberis nevinii
is located within the Criteria Area of the Western Riverside County
MSHCP and is targeted, in whole or in part, for acquisition and
inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area as Additional Reserve Lands.
Based on the MSHCP, the economic analysis assumes 90 percent or
approximately 277 ac (112 ha) of the privately-owned land within
potential critical habitat and outside RCWD's flood easement (which is
approximately 307 of 341 ac (or 124 of 138 ha) of private land) will be
targeted for acquisition as Additional Reserve Lands, with compensation
to the private landowners. The economic analysis considers the cost of
land acquisition, reserve management (including fire, invasive species,
and recreation management), biological monitoring, adaptive management,
and program administration for preserving these 277 ac (112 ha) of
private land with long-term conservation value for B. nevinii as the
total economic impact of the proposed critical habitat designation as
it relates to development. The total economic impact for these
activities over the next 20 years is estimated to range from $1.6 to
$4.4 million in undiscounted dollars, or $1.2 to $3.3 million per year
and $0.8 to $2.3 million per year at the 3 percent and 7 percent
discount rate, respectively.
Every small land subdivision and construction business in the MSHCP
Plan Area is expected to be indirectly affected by conservation efforts
for Berberis nevinii due to mitigation and density bonus fees that will
be required for all new development. The economic analysis estimates
that there are 3,146 small land subdivision and building construction
businesses in Riverside County, but it is unknown how many of these are
within the MSHCP Plan Area, which encompasses only the western part of
the County. However, it is expected that these small entities would
pass any additional costs associated with conservation measures to the
consumer (i.e., the purchaser of the finished building), and thus we do
not anticipate that this proposed regulation will result in a
significant impact to a substantial number of small business entities.
Please refer to our draft economic analysis of the proposed critical
habitat designation for a more detailed discussion of potential
economic impacts.
In summary, we have considered whether this proposed rule would
result in a significant economic effect on a substantial number of
small entities. For the above reasons and based on currently available
information, we certify that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Executive Order 13211--Energy Supply, Distribution, and Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued E.O. 13211 on regulations
that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. E.O.
13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when
undertaking certain actions. This proposed designation of critical
habitat for Berberis nevinii is considered a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866 due to its potentially raising novel legal and
policy issues. OMB has provided guidance for implementing this
Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute ``a
significant adverse effect'' when compared without the regulatory
action under consideration. The draft economic analysis finds that none
of these criteria are relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on
information in the draft economic analysis, energy-related impacts
associated with B. nevinii conservation activities within proposed
critical habitat are not expected. As such, the proposed designation of
critical habitat is not expected to significantly affect energy
supplies, distribution, or use, and a Statement of Energy Effects is
not required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C.
1501), the Service makes the following findings:
(a) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments,'' with
two exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of federal assistance.'' It
also excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing
Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually
to State, local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority,''
if the provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of
assistance'' or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government's responsibility to provide funding'' and the State, local,
or tribal governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. (At the
time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to
Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food
Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State
Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living;
Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement.)
``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would
impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a
condition of Federal assistance; or (ii) a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. Non-Federal entities that receive Federal
funding, assistance, permits, or otherwise require approval or
authorization from a Federal agency for an action may be indirectly
impacted by the designation of critical habitat. However, the legally
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid
program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would
critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs
listed above on to State governments.
(b) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. As discussed in the draft economic analysis,
anticipated future impacts in areas proposed for final designation as
critical habitat will be borne by the Federal Government; in areas
proposed for exclusion from the final designation, the majority of the
[[Page 58802]]
total anticipated upper-bound future impacts will be borne by the RCWD,
with private landowners, local government, and Federal and State
governments bearing the rest. The Federal government is not considered
a small governmental jurisdiction or entity by the SBA, and neither is
the RCWD because it services a population exceeding the criteria for a
``small entity.'' Consequently, we do not believe that critical habitat
designation would significantly or uniquely affect small government
entities. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.
Executive Order 12630--Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of
proposing critical habitat for Berberis nevinii in a takings
implications assessment. The takings implications assessment concludes
that this proposed designation of critical habitat for B. nevinii does
not pose significant takings implications.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rulemaking is
available upon request from the Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff of the Nevada Fish
and Wildlife Office and the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to
be amended at 72 FR 5552, February 6, 2007, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Critical habitat for Berberis nevinii (Nevin's barberry) in
Sec. 17.96(a), which was proposed to be added on February 6, 2007, at
72 FR 5552, is proposed to be amended by revising paragraphs (5)(ii),
(5)(iv), and (5)(v), and by revising Map 1 in paragraph (5)(vii), as
follows:
Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Berberidaceae: Berberis nevinii (Nevin's barberry)
* * * * *
(5) Unit 1. Agua Tibia/Vail Lake, Riverside County, California.
* * * * *
(ii) Subunit 1B for Berberis nevinii, Agua Tibia Mountain Foothills
Subunit, Riverside County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Vail Lake, lands bounded by the following UTM NAD27 coordinates (E, N):
504200, 3702900; 504300, 3702900; 504300, 3702800; 504200, 3702800;
thence returning to 504200, 3702900.
* * * * *
(iv) Subunit 1D for Berberis nevinii, North of Vail Lake Subunit,
Riverside County, Cal