Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Plant Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot Peppergrass) as Endangered, 54345-54346 [E8-21987]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 183 / Friday, September 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
voluntary participation and successful
´ ´
performance in the Mentor-Protege Program,
in accordance with NFS 1819.7209.
(c) Mentor participation in the Program,
described in NFS 1819.72, means providing
technical, managerial and financial
´ ´
assistance to aid proteges in developing
requisite high-tech expertise and business
systems to compete for and successfully
perform NASA contracts and subcontracts.
(d) Contractors interested in participating
in the program are encouraged to contact the
NASA OSBP, Washington, DC 20546, (202)
358–2088, for further information.
(End of clause)
1852.219–79
evaluation.
Mentor requirements and
As prescribed in 1819.7215, insert the
following clause:
MENTOR REQUIREMENTS AND
EVALUATION
(End of clause)
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
(XX/XX)
(a) The purpose of the NASA Mentor´ ´
Protege Program is for a NASA prime
contractor to provide developmental
assistance to certain subcontractors
´ ´
´ ´
qualifying as proteges. Eligible proteges
include certified small disadvantaged
business concerns, women-owned small
business concerns, veteran-owned or servicedisabled veteran-owned small business
concerns, HUBZone small business concerns,
Historically Black Colleges and Universities,
minority institutions of higher education,
and active NASA SBIR Phase II companies
meeting the qualifications specified in
defined in FAR Part 2, Definitions of Parts
and Terms.
(b) NASA will evaluate the contractor’s
performance on the following factors. If this
contract includes an award fee incentive, this
assessment will be accomplished as part of
the fee evaluation process.
(1) Specific actions taken by the contractor,
during the evaluation period, to increase the
´ ´
participation of proteges as subcontractors
and suppliers;
(2) Specific actions taken by the contractor
during this evaluation period to develop the
technical and corporate administrative
´ ´
expertise of a protege as defined in the
agreement;
´ ´
(3) To what extent the mentor and protege
have met the developmental milestones
outlined in the agreement; and
(4) To what extent the entities participation
´ ´
in the Mentor-Protege Program resulted in
´ ´
the protege receiving competitive contract(s)
and subcontract(s) from private firms and
agencies other than the mentor.
(c) Semiannual reports shall be submitted
´ ´
by the mentor and the protege to the
cognizant NASA center and NASA
Headquarters Office of Small Business
Programs (OSBP), following the semiannual
report template found on the Web site at
https://www.osbp.nasa.gov.
(d) The mentor will notify the cognizant
NASA center and NASA OSBP in writing, at
least 30 days in advance of the mentor’s
intent to voluntarily withdraw from the
´ ´
program or upon receipt of a protege’s notice
to withdraw from the Program;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
(e) At the end of each year in the Mentor´ ´
´ ´
Protege Program, the mentor and protege, as
appropriate, will formally brief the NASA
´ ´
Mentor-Protege program manager, the
technical program manager, and the
contracting officer during a formal program
review regarding Program accomplishments,
as it pertains to the approved agreement.
´ ´
(f) NASA may terminate mentor-protege
agreements for good cause, thereby excluding
´ ´
mentors or proteges from participating in the
´ ´
NASA Mentor-Protege program. These
actions shall be approved by the NASA
OSBP. NASA shall terminate an agreement
by delivering to the contractor a letter
specifying the reason for termination and the
effective date. Termination of an agreement
does not constitute a termination of the
subcontract between the mentor and the
´ ´
protege. A plan for accomplishing the
subcontract effort should the agreement be
terminated shall be submitted with the
agreement as required in NFS 1819.7211.
15:21 Sep 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
54345
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will also post any
personal information included with
your comments (see the Public
Comments section below for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffery L. Foss, Field Supervisor, Snake
River Fish and Wildlife Office, 1387 S.
Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise, ID 83709
(telephone 208–378–5243; facsimile
208–378–5262). If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), you may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action
resulting from the proposal will be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
BILLING CODE 7510–01–P
Therefore, we are seeking comments or
suggestions from the public, other
concerned governmental agencies, the
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
scientific community, industry, or any
Fish and Wildlife Service
other interested party concerning the
proposed rule. We particularly seek
50 CFR Part 17
comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or
[FWS–R1–ES–2008–0096; MO 9221050083–
other relevant data concerning any
B2]
threat (or lack thereof) to Lepidium
RIN 1018–AW34
papilliferum;
(2) Additional information concerning
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
the range, distribution, and population
and Plants; Listing the Plant Lepidium
size of this species; and
papilliferum (Slickspot Peppergrass)
(3) Current or planned activities in the
as Endangered
subject area and their possible impact
on this species.
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
You may submit your comments and
Interior.
materials concerning the proposed rule
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
by one of the methods listed in the
comment period.
ADDRESSES section. We will not accept
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an
Wildlife Service (Service), notify the
address not listed in the ADDRESSES
public of the reinstatement of our July
section.
15, 2002, proposed rule to list Lepidium
We will post your entire comment—
papilliferum (slickspot peppergrass) as
including your personal identifying
endangered under the Endangered
information—on https://
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
www.regulations.gov. If you provide
We announce the reopening of the
personal identifying information in your
public comment period on that
comment, you may request at the top of
proposed listing.
your document that we withhold this
DATES: We will accept comments
information from public review.
received on or before October 20, 2008.
However, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
In making a final decision on the
by one of the following methods:
• Via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: proposal, we will take into
consideration the comments and any
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
additional information we receive. Such
instructions for submitting comments.
• By U.S. mail or hand-delivery to:
communications may lead to a final rule
Public Comments Processing, Attn: RIN that differs from the proposal.
1018–AW34, Division of Policy and
Comments and materials we receive,
Directives Management, U.S. Fish and
as well as supporting documentation we
Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
used in preparing the proposed rule,
Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203.
will be available for public inspection
[FR Doc. E8–21984 Filed 9–18–08; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM
19SEP1
54346
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 183 / Friday, September 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the Snake River Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
On July 15, 2002, we published a
proposed rule (67 FR 46441) to list
Lepidium papilliferum as endangered
under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
For a description of Federal actions
regarding Lepidium papilliferum prior
to that proposed listing rule, please refer
to that proposal. Here we provide a
summary of the Federal actions
concerning L. papilliferum from the
2002 proposed listing rule to this action.
We accepted public comments on the
July 15, 2002, proposed rule for 60 days,
until September 13, 2002. We held a
public hearing on August 29, 2002. On
September 25, 2002 (67 FR 60206), and
again on July 18, 2003 (68 FR 42666),
we reopened the public comment period
on the proposed listing. On October 30,
2003, we made a Candidate
Conservation Agreement (CCA) and a
document compiled by the Service
entitled ‘‘Best Available Information for
Slickspot Peppergrass’’ available for
public review and comment (68 FR
61821). On January 22, 2004, we
published a withdrawal of our proposed
rule to list Lepidium papilliferum as
endangered (69 FR 3094). Our
withdrawal was based on our
conclusion that evidence of a negative
population trend was lacking and that
the formalized conservation plans (e.g.,
the CCA and Integrated Natural
Resource Management Plans) had
sufficient certainty that they would be
implemented and effective such that the
risk to the species was reduced to a
level below the statutory definition of
endangered or threatened.
On April 5, 2004, the Western
Watersheds Project filed a complaint
challenging our decision to withdraw
the proposed rule to list Lepidium
papilliferum as endangered (Western
Watersheds Project v. Jeffery Foss, et al.,
Case No. CV 04–168–S–EJL). On August
19, 2005, the U.S. District Court for the
District of Idaho reversed our decision
to withdraw the proposed rule,
effectively reinstating our July 15, 2002,
proposed rule (67 FR 46441). The Court
remanded the case to the Secretary of
the Department of the Interior for
reconsideration of ‘‘whether a proposed
rule listing the slickspot peppergrass as
either threatened or endangered should
be adopted.’’
Following the August 19, 2005,
remand order, we notified Federal,
State, and local agencies, county
governments, elected officials, and other
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
interested parties of the District Court’s
decision in a letter dated October 13,
2005. We requested new scientific data,
information, and comments about
Lepidium papilliferum by November 14,
2005. We also stated that scientific
information received from the public
would be utilized in an updated
document entitled ‘‘Draft Best Available
Biological Information for Slickspot
Peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum)’’
(BAI), which would combine all existing
and new information regarding the
species and its habitat. We accepted
information through December 14, 2005,
and received 13 comment letters in
response to our request for additional
information. From February 27, 2006,
through March 30, 2006, we accepted
information from peer reviewers and
others on the draft BAI and on
conservation efforts for the species. We
received an additional 36 comments. On
October 23, 2006, we opened an
additional 22-day comment period
through November 13, 2006 (71 FR
62078) to allow the opportunity for
public comment on a variety of
documents, including peer review
comments on the draft BAI and results
of an expert panel workshop. We
received 20 comments in response to
this request for comments.
On January 12, 2007, we withdrew
our proposed rule to list Lepidium
papilliferum as endangered under the
Act (72 FR 1621). This withdrawal was
based on our determination that the best
available information indicated that, in
regard to Lepidium papilliferum, ‘‘* * *
while its sagebrush-steppe matrix
habitat is degraded, there is little
evidence of negative impacts on the
abundance of Lepidium papilliferum,
which inhabits slickspot microsites
within this system.’’ The withdrawal
further concluded that annual
abundance of the plant is strongly
correlated with spring precipitation;
therefore, a high degree of variability in
annual plant abundance is to be
expected. Furthermore, evidence
regarding the plant’s overall population
trend was inconsistent.
Subsequently, on April 16, 2007, the
Western Watersheds Project filed
another complaint challenging our
January 2007 decision to withdraw the
proposed rule to list Lepidium
papilliferum as endangered (Western
Watersheds Project v. Jeffery Foss et al.,
Case No. 07–161–E–MHW).
On June 4, 2008, the U.S. District
Court for the District of Idaho vacated
the Service’s January 2007 withdrawal
of the proposed listing of Lepidium
papilliferum, and remanded the
decision to the Service for further
consideration consistent with the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Court’s opinion. The Court’s action
effectively reinstates the July 15, 2002,
proposed rule to list L. papilliferum as
endangered (67 FR 46441). The Service
will complete its review of the best
available scientific and commercial
data, including information and
comments submitted during this
comment period, as part of the remand
process. We will then complete a new
listing determination.
Author
The primary authors of this document
are the staff at the Snake River Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 10, 2008.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8–21987 Filed 9–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 680
[Docket No. 080416577–81187–02]
RIN 0648–AW73
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization
Program
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to
implement Amendment 27 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Bering
Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner
Crabs (FMP). These proposed
regulations would amend the Crab
Rationalization Program to: implement
the statutory requirements of section
122(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act that specifically
directs NMFS to modify how individual
processing quota (IPQ) use caps apply to
a person who is custom processing
Chionoecetes opilio crab in the North
Region, clarify that for other crab
fisheries, IPQ crab that is processed at
a facility through contractual
E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM
19SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 183 (Friday, September 19, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54345-54346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21987]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R1-ES-2008-0096; MO 9221050083-B2]
RIN 1018-AW34
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Plant
Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot Peppergrass) as Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), notify the
public of the reinstatement of our July 15, 2002, proposed rule to list
Lepidium papilliferum (slickspot peppergrass) as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We announce the
reopening of the public comment period on that proposed listing.
DATES: We will accept comments received on or before October 20, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
By U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: RIN 1018-AW34, Division of Policy and Directives
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will also post
any personal information included with your comments (see the Public
Comments section below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffery L. Foss, Field Supervisor,
Snake River Fish and Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Room 368,
Boise, ID 83709 (telephone 208-378-5243; facsimile 208-378-5262). If
you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from the proposal will be
as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we are seeking
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning the proposed rule. We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threat (or lack thereof) to Lepidium papilliferum;
(2) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and
population size of this species; and
(3) Current or planned activities in the subject area and their
possible impact on this species.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning the proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section.
We will post your entire comment--including your personal
identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. If you provide
personal identifying information in your comment, you may request at
the top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
In making a final decision on the proposal, we will take into
consideration the comments and any additional information we receive.
Such communications may lead to a final rule that differs from the
proposal.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing the proposed rule, will be available
for public inspection
[[Page 54346]]
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal
business hours, at the Snake River Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
On July 15, 2002, we published a proposed rule (67 FR 46441) to
list Lepidium papilliferum as endangered under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.). For a description of Federal actions regarding Lepidium
papilliferum prior to that proposed listing rule, please refer to that
proposal. Here we provide a summary of the Federal actions concerning
L. papilliferum from the 2002 proposed listing rule to this action.
We accepted public comments on the July 15, 2002, proposed rule for
60 days, until September 13, 2002. We held a public hearing on August
29, 2002. On September 25, 2002 (67 FR 60206), and again on July 18,
2003 (68 FR 42666), we reopened the public comment period on the
proposed listing. On October 30, 2003, we made a Candidate Conservation
Agreement (CCA) and a document compiled by the Service entitled ``Best
Available Information for Slickspot Peppergrass'' available for public
review and comment (68 FR 61821). On January 22, 2004, we published a
withdrawal of our proposed rule to list Lepidium papilliferum as
endangered (69 FR 3094). Our withdrawal was based on our conclusion
that evidence of a negative population trend was lacking and that the
formalized conservation plans (e.g., the CCA and Integrated Natural
Resource Management Plans) had sufficient certainty that they would be
implemented and effective such that the risk to the species was reduced
to a level below the statutory definition of endangered or threatened.
On April 5, 2004, the Western Watersheds Project filed a complaint
challenging our decision to withdraw the proposed rule to list Lepidium
papilliferum as endangered (Western Watersheds Project v. Jeffery Foss,
et al., Case No. CV 04-168-S-EJL). On August 19, 2005, the U.S.
District Court for the District of Idaho reversed our decision to
withdraw the proposed rule, effectively reinstating our July 15, 2002,
proposed rule (67 FR 46441). The Court remanded the case to the
Secretary of the Department of the Interior for reconsideration of
``whether a proposed rule listing the slickspot peppergrass as either
threatened or endangered should be adopted.''
Following the August 19, 2005, remand order, we notified Federal,
State, and local agencies, county governments, elected officials, and
other interested parties of the District Court's decision in a letter
dated October 13, 2005. We requested new scientific data, information,
and comments about Lepidium papilliferum by November 14, 2005. We also
stated that scientific information received from the public would be
utilized in an updated document entitled ``Draft Best Available
Biological Information for Slickspot Peppergrass (Lepidium
papilliferum)'' (BAI), which would combine all existing and new
information regarding the species and its habitat. We accepted
information through December 14, 2005, and received 13 comment letters
in response to our request for additional information. From February
27, 2006, through March 30, 2006, we accepted information from peer
reviewers and others on the draft BAI and on conservation efforts for
the species. We received an additional 36 comments. On October 23,
2006, we opened an additional 22-day comment period through November
13, 2006 (71 FR 62078) to allow the opportunity for public comment on a
variety of documents, including peer review comments on the draft BAI
and results of an expert panel workshop. We received 20 comments in
response to this request for comments.
On January 12, 2007, we withdrew our proposed rule to list Lepidium
papilliferum as endangered under the Act (72 FR 1621). This withdrawal
was based on our determination that the best available information
indicated that, in regard to Lepidium papilliferum, ``* * * while its
sagebrush-steppe matrix habitat is degraded, there is little evidence
of negative impacts on the abundance of Lepidium papilliferum, which
inhabits slickspot microsites within this system.'' The withdrawal
further concluded that annual abundance of the plant is strongly
correlated with spring precipitation; therefore, a high degree of
variability in annual plant abundance is to be expected. Furthermore,
evidence regarding the plant's overall population trend was
inconsistent.
Subsequently, on April 16, 2007, the Western Watersheds Project
filed another complaint challenging our January 2007 decision to
withdraw the proposed rule to list Lepidium papilliferum as endangered
(Western Watersheds Project v. Jeffery Foss et al., Case No. 07-161-E-
MHW).
On June 4, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho
vacated the Service's January 2007 withdrawal of the proposed listing
of Lepidium papilliferum, and remanded the decision to the Service for
further consideration consistent with the Court's opinion. The Court's
action effectively reinstates the July 15, 2002, proposed rule to list
L. papilliferum as endangered (67 FR 46441). The Service will complete
its review of the best available scientific and commercial data,
including information and comments submitted during this comment
period, as part of the remand process. We will then complete a new
listing determination.
Author
The primary authors of this document are the staff at the Snake
River Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 10, 2008.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8-21987 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P