Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of Status Review for the Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta) in the Lower Colorado River Basin, 9205-9207 [E9-4155]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 3, 2009 / Proposed Rules
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies, such as the Society of
Automotive Engineers. The NTTAA
directs us to provide Congress (through
OMB) with explanations when we
decide not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus
standards. There are no voluntary
consensus standards developed by
voluntary consensus standards bodies
pertaining to this NPRM.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits
and other effects of proposed or final
rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by
State, local or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
more than $100 million annually
(adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). This NPRM would not result in
expenditures by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector in excess of $100 million
annually.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking
action for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency
has determined that implementation of
this action will not have any significant
impact on the quality of the human
environment.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 18, 2001) applies to any
rulemaking that: (1) Is determined to be
economically significant as defined
under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have
a significantly adverse effect on the
supply of, distribution of, or use of
energy; or (2) that is designated by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
significant energy action. This
rulemaking is not subject to E.O. 13211.
Plain Language
Executive Order 12866 and the
President’s memorandum of June 1,
1998, require each agency to write all
rules in plain language. Application of
the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following
questions:
• Have we organized the material to
suit the public’s needs?
• Are the requirements in the rule
clearly stated?
• Does the rule contain technical
language or jargon that isn’t clear?
• Would a different format (grouping
and order of sections, use of headings,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:19 Mar 02, 2009
Jkt 217001
paragraphing) make the rule easier to
understand?
• Would more (but shorter) sections
be better?
• Could we improve clarity by adding
tables, lists, or diagrams?
• What else could we do to make the
rule easier to understand?
If you have any responses to these
questions, please include them in your
comments on this proposal.
Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN contained in
the heading at the beginning of this
document to find this action in the
Unified Agenda.
Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor
vehicles, and Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR part
571 as set forth below.
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.121 is amended by
revising S5.2.3.3(a) to read as follows:
§ 571.121;
systems.
Standard No. 121; Air brake
*
*
*
*
*
S5.2.3.3 Antilock malfunction
indicator.
(a) In addition to the requirements of
S5.2.3.2, each trailer and trailer
converter dolly manufactured on or after
March 1, 1998, and before March 1,
2011, shall be equipped with an
external antilock malfunction indicator
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9205
lamp that meets the requirements of
S5.2.3.3 (b) through (d).
*
*
*
*
*
Issued: February 26, 2009.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E9–4491 Filed 2–27–09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R2–ES–2009–0004; 92210–1111–
0000–B3]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Initiation of Status Review
for the Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta)
in the Lower Colorado River Basin
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice; initiation of status
review and solicitation of new
information.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
initiation of a status review for the
roundtail chub (Gila robusta) in the
lower Colorado River basin. Through
this action, we encourage all interested
parties to provide us information
regarding the status of, and any
potential threats to, the roundtail chub.
We request information on the status of
roundtail chub throughout the range of
the species, in order to evaluate a
petition to list a distinct population
segment (DPS) in the lower Colorado
River basin.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that we
receive information on or before April 2,
2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–
ES–2009–0004; 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 information on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Information Solicited section below for
more information).
E:\FR\FM\03MRP1.SGM
03MRP1
9206
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 3, 2009 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321
West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103,
Phoenix, AZ 85021–4951; telephone
602–242–0210; facsimile 602–242–2513.
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
To ensure that the status review is
complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are soliciting
information concerning the status of the
roundtail chub (Gila robusta).
Information gained during this process
will be used to evaluate whether the
lower Colorado River basin population
of roundtail chub is a distinct
population segment (DPS) as described
in our Policy Regarding the Recognition
of Distinct Vertebrate Population
Segments Under the Endangered
Species Act (DPS Policy; 61 FR 4722,
February 7, 1996), and if listing as
threatened or endangered is warranted
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.). We request information from
the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties on the status of the
roundtail chub throughout its range,
including:
(1) Information from the United States
and Mexico regarding the species’
historical and current population status,
distribution, and trends; taxonomy;
genetics; biology and ecology; and
habitat selection.
(2) Information that supports or
refutes the appropriateness of
considering the lower Colorado River
basin population of roundtail chub to be
discrete, as defined in the DPS Policy,
including, but not limited to:
(a) Information indicating that lower
Colorado River basin roundtail chub are
markedly separated from other
populations of roundtail chub due to
physical, physiological, ecological, or
behavioral factors.
(b) Information indicating whether or
not the lower Colorado River basin
population of roundtail chub is
delimited by international governmental
boundaries within which significant
differences in control of exploitation,
management of habitat, conservation
status, or regulatory mechanisms exist.
(3) Information that supports or
refutes the appropriateness of
considering the lower Colorado River
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:19 Mar 02, 2009
Jkt 217001
basin population of roundtail chub to be
significant, as defined in the DPS
Policy, including, but not limited to:
(a) Information indicating that the
ecological setting, including such
factors as temperature, moisture,
weather patterns, plant communities,
etc., in which the lower Colorado River
basin population of roundtail chub
persists is unusual or unique when
compared to that of roundtail chub
found elsewhere in the United States or
Mexico.
(b) Information indicating that loss of
the lower Colorado River basin
population of roundtail chub would or
would not result in a significant gap in
the range of the taxon.
(c) Information indicating that the
lower Colorado River basin population
of roundtail chub differs markedly from
other populations of roundtail chub in
its genetic characteristics.
(4) Information on the effects of
potential threat factors in the United
States and Mexico that are the basis for
a listing determination under section
4(a) of the Act, which are:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the subspecies’ habitat or
range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, because
section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’ At the
conclusion of the status review, we will
determine whether listing is warranted,
not warranted, or warranted but
precluded by other pending proposals.
You may submit your information
concerning this status review by one of
the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. We will not consider
submissions sent by e-mail or fax or to
an address not listed in the ADDRESSES
section.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this personal
identifying information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee
that we will be able to do so. We will
post all hardcopy submissions on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and materials we receive
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Arizona Ecological Services
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
that we make a finding on whether a
petition to list, delist, or reclassify a
species presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition
and supporting information submitted
with the petition. To the maximum
extent practicable, we are to make this
finding within 90 days of our receipt of
the petition and publish our notice of
the finding promptly in the Federal
Register. Section 4(b)(3)(B) also requires
that, for any petition to revise the Lists
of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife
and Plants that contains substantial
scientific or commercial information
that the action may be warranted, we
make a finding within 12 months of the
date of the receipt of the petition on
whether the petitioned action is: (a) Not
warranted, (b) warranted, or (c)
warranted but precluded by other
pending proposals. Such 12-month
findings are to be published promptly in
the Federal Register.
On April 14, 2003, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity requesting that we list a DPS
of the roundtail chub in the lower
Colorado River basin as endangered or
threatened, that we list the headwater
chub (Gila nigra) as endangered or
threatened, and that we designate
critical habitat concurrently with the
listing for both species. On July 12,
2005, we published our 90-day finding
that the petition presented substantial
scientific information indicating that
listing the headwater chub and a DPS of
the roundtail chub in the lower
Colorado River basin may be warranted
and initiated a 12-month status review
(70 FR 39981).
On May 3, 2006, we published our 12month finding that listing was
warranted for the headwater chub, but
precluded by higher priority listing
actions, and that listing of a DPS of the
E:\FR\FM\03MRP1.SGM
03MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 3, 2009 / Proposed Rules
roundtail chub in the lower Colorado
River basin was not warranted because
populations of roundtail chub in the
lower Colorado River basin did not meet
our definition of a DPS (71 FR 26007).
On September 7, 2006, we received a
complaint from the Center for Biological
Diversity for declaratory and injunctive
relief, challenging our decision not to
list the lower Colorado River basin
population of the roundtail chub as an
endangered species under the Act. On
November 5, 2007, in a stipulated
settlement agreement, we agreed to
commence a new status review of the
lower Colorado basin population of the
roundtail chub and to submit a 12month finding to the Federal Register
by June 30, 2009.
At this time, we are soliciting new
information on the status of and
potential threats to the roundtail chub.
We will base our new determination as
to whether listing of a DPS for roundtail
chub in the lower Colorado River basin
is warranted on a review of the best
scientific and commercial information
available, including all information we
receive as a result of this notice. For
more information on the biology,
habitat, and range of the roundtail chub,
please refer to our previous 90-day
finding published in the Federal
Register on July 12, 2005 (70 FR 39981),
and our previous 12-month finding
published in the Federal Register on
May 3, 2006 (71 FR 26007).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Arizona
Ecological Services Office.
Authority: The authority for this action is
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: February 20, 2009.
Ken Stansell,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–4155 Filed 3–2–09; 8:45 am]
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:19 Mar 02, 2009
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[FWS–R9–MB–2009–0003; 91200–1231–
9BPP]
RIN 1018–AW46
Migratory Bird Hunting; Application for
Approval of Tungsten-IronFluoropolymer Shot as Nontoxic for
Waterfowl Hunting
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of application for
nontoxic shot approval.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce that Tundra
Composites, LLC, of White Bear Lake,
Minnesota, has applied for our approval
of shot composed of alloys of tungsten,
iron, and fluoropolymer as nontoxic for
waterfowl hunting in the United States.
The alloys are 41.5 to 95.2 percent
tungsten, 1.5 to 52.0 percent steel, and
3.5 to 8.0 percent fluoropolymer by
weight. We have initiated review of the
shot under the criteria we have set out
in our nontoxic shot approval
procedures in our regulations.
DATES: Our comprehensive review of the
application information is to conclude
by May 4, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may review the Tundra
Composites application at the Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory
Bird Management, 4501 North Fairfax
Drive, Arlington, VA 22203–1610.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron
Kokel, Wildlife Biologist, Division of
Migratory Bird Management, (703) 358–
1967.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (Act)
(16 U.S.C. 703–712 and 16 U.S.C. 742
a–j) implements migratory bird treaties
between the United States and Great
Britain for Canada (1916 and 1996 as
amended), Mexico (1936 and 1972 as
amended), Japan (1972 and 1974 as
amended), and Russia (then the Soviet
Union, 1978). These treaties protect
certain migratory birds from take, except
as permitted under the Act. The Act
authorizes the Secretary of the Interior
to regulate take of migratory birds in the
United States. Under this authority, we
control the hunting of migratory game
birds through regulations in 50 CFR part
20. We prohibit the use of shot types
other than those listed in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR
20.21(j) for hunting waterfowl and coots
and any species that make up aggregate
bag limits.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9207
Since the mid-1970s, we have sought
to identify types of shot for waterfowl
hunting that are not toxic to migratory
birds or other wildlife when ingested.
We have approved nontoxic shot types
and added them to the migratory bird
hunting regulations in 50 CFR 20.21(j).
We will continue to review all shot
types submitted for approval as
nontoxic.
Tundra Composites has submitted its
application to us with the counsel that
it contained all of the specified
information for a complete Tier 1
submittal, and has requested
unconditional approval pursuant to the
Tier 1 timeframe. Having determined
that the application is complete, we
have initiated a comprehensive review
of the Tier 1 information under 50 CFR
21.134. After review, we will either
publish a notice of review to inform the
public that the Tier 1 test results are
inconclusive, or we will publish a
proposed rule to approve the candidate
shot. If the Tier 1 tests are inconclusive,
the notice of review will indicate what
other tests we will require before we
will again consider approval of the
Tungsten-Iron-Fluoropolymer shot as
nontoxic. If the Tier 1 data review
results in a preliminary determination
that the candidate material does not
pose a significant toxicity hazard to
migratory birds, other wildlife, or their
habitats, the Service will commence
with a rulemaking proposing to approve
the candidate shot and add it to our list
at 50 CFR 20.21(j).
Dated: February 25, 2009.
Jerome Ford,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–4455 Filed 3–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
RIN 0648–AX72
Identification and Certification of
Nations Whose Fishing Vessels Are
Engaged in Illegal, Unreported, or
Unregulated Fishing or Bycatch of
Protected Living Marine Resources
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public hearing; request
for comments.
E:\FR\FM\03MRP1.SGM
03MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 3, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9205-9207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4155]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R2-ES-2009-0004; 92210-1111-0000-B3]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of
Status Review for the Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta) in the Lower
Colorado River Basin
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice; initiation of status review and solicitation of new
information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
initiation of a status review for the roundtail chub (Gila robusta) in
the lower Colorado River basin. Through this action, we encourage all
interested parties to provide us information regarding the status of,
and any potential threats to, the roundtail chub. We request
information on the status of roundtail chub throughout the range of the
species, in order to evaluate a petition to list a distinct population
segment (DPS) in the lower Colorado River basin.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request
that we receive information on or before April 2, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2009-0004; 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 information on
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Information Solicited
section below for more information).
[[Page 9206]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite
103, Phoenix, AZ 85021-4951; telephone 602-242-0210; facsimile 602-242-
2513. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call
the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
To ensure that the status review is complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial information, we are soliciting
information concerning the status of the roundtail chub (Gila robusta).
Information gained during this process will be used to evaluate whether
the lower Colorado River basin population of roundtail chub is a
distinct population segment (DPS) as described in our Policy Regarding
the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments Under the
Endangered Species Act (DPS Policy; 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and
if listing as threatened or endangered is warranted under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). We request information from the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other interested parties on the status of
the roundtail chub throughout its range, including:
(1) Information from the United States and Mexico regarding the
species' historical and current population status, distribution, and
trends; taxonomy; genetics; biology and ecology; and habitat selection.
(2) Information that supports or refutes the appropriateness of
considering the lower Colorado River basin population of roundtail chub
to be discrete, as defined in the DPS Policy, including, but not
limited to:
(a) Information indicating that lower Colorado River basin
roundtail chub are markedly separated from other populations of
roundtail chub due to physical, physiological, ecological, or
behavioral factors.
(b) Information indicating whether or not the lower Colorado River
basin population of roundtail chub is delimited by international
governmental boundaries within which significant differences in control
of exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or
regulatory mechanisms exist.
(3) Information that supports or refutes the appropriateness of
considering the lower Colorado River basin population of roundtail chub
to be significant, as defined in the DPS Policy, including, but not
limited to:
(a) Information indicating that the ecological setting, including
such factors as temperature, moisture, weather patterns, plant
communities, etc., in which the lower Colorado River basin population
of roundtail chub persists is unusual or unique when compared to that
of roundtail chub found elsewhere in the United States or Mexico.
(b) Information indicating that loss of the lower Colorado River
basin population of roundtail chub would or would not result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon.
(c) Information indicating that the lower Colorado River basin
population of roundtail chub differs markedly from other populations of
roundtail chub in its genetic characteristics.
(4) Information on the effects of potential threat factors in the
United States and Mexico that are the basis for a listing determination
under section 4(a) of the Act, which are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the subspecies' habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
Please note that submissions merely stating support or opposition
to the action under consideration without providing supporting
information, although noted, will not be considered in making a
determination, because section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.'' At the conclusion of the status review, we
will determine whether listing is warranted, not warranted, or
warranted but precluded by other pending proposals.
You may submit your information concerning this status review by
one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider submissions sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed
in the ADDRESSES section.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this personal identifying
information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Information and materials we receive will be available for public
inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during
normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona
Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition and supporting information
submitted with the petition. To the maximum extent practicable, we are
to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition and
publish our notice of the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Section 4(b)(3)(B) also requires that, for any petition to revise the
Lists of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife and Plants that contains
substantial scientific or commercial information that the action may be
warranted, we make a finding within 12 months of the date of the
receipt of the petition on whether the petitioned action is: (a) Not
warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) warranted but precluded by other
pending proposals. Such 12-month findings are to be published promptly
in the Federal Register.
On April 14, 2003, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity requesting that we list a DPS of the roundtail
chub in the lower Colorado River basin as endangered or threatened,
that we list the headwater chub (Gila nigra) as endangered or
threatened, and that we designate critical habitat concurrently with
the listing for both species. On July 12, 2005, we published our 90-day
finding that the petition presented substantial scientific information
indicating that listing the headwater chub and a DPS of the roundtail
chub in the lower Colorado River basin may be warranted and initiated a
12-month status review (70 FR 39981).
On May 3, 2006, we published our 12-month finding that listing was
warranted for the headwater chub, but precluded by higher priority
listing actions, and that listing of a DPS of the
[[Page 9207]]
roundtail chub in the lower Colorado River basin was not warranted
because populations of roundtail chub in the lower Colorado River basin
did not meet our definition of a DPS (71 FR 26007).
On September 7, 2006, we received a complaint from the Center for
Biological Diversity for declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging
our decision not to list the lower Colorado River basin population of
the roundtail chub as an endangered species under the Act. On November
5, 2007, in a stipulated settlement agreement, we agreed to commence a
new status review of the lower Colorado basin population of the
roundtail chub and to submit a 12-month finding to the Federal Register
by June 30, 2009.
At this time, we are soliciting new information on the status of
and potential threats to the roundtail chub. We will base our new
determination as to whether listing of a DPS for roundtail chub in the
lower Colorado River basin is warranted on a review of the best
scientific and commercial information available, including all
information we receive as a result of this notice. For more information
on the biology, habitat, and range of the roundtail chub, please refer
to our previous 90-day finding published in the Federal Register on
July 12, 2005 (70 FR 39981), and our previous 12-month finding
published in the Federal Register on May 3, 2006 (71 FR 26007).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Arizona Ecological Services Office.
Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: February 20, 2009.
Ken Stansell,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E9-4155 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
