Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan for the Concho Water Snake, 48595-48596 [E9-22872]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden:
There are three non-hour cost burdens
to industry. They are as follows:
• § 285.111—$4,000: This section
requires respondents to pay a processing
fee of $4,000 for MMS document or
study preparation when necessary for
MMS processing of applications and
requests.
• § 285.111(b)(3)—$950,000: This
section allows respondents to pay a
contractor instead of MMS for all or part
of any document, study, or other
activity, and provide the results to MMS
to reduce MMS processing costs. We
estimate the non-hour cost burden of
this payment could range from $100,000
to $2,000,000; therefore, we are
estimating the cost at $950,000.
• § 285.417(b)—$950,000: This
section requires respondents to pay for
a site-specific study to evaluate the
cause of harm or damage to natural
resources, and submit a report to MMS.
We estimate the non-hour cost burden
of this study could range from $100,000
to $2,000,000, depending on the nature
of the study; therefore, we are
estimating the cost at $950,000.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Until OMB approves a
collection of information, you are not
obligated to respond.
Comments: Before submitting an ICR
to OMB, PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A)
requires each agency ‘‘* * * to provide
notice * * * and otherwise consult
with members of the public and affected
agencies concerning each proposed
collection of information * * *’’.
Agencies must specifically solicit
comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the agency to perform its
duties, including whether the
information is useful; (b) evaluate the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information; (c) enhance the quality,
usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
minimize the burden on the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Agencies must also estimate the nonhour paperwork cost burdens to
respondents or recordkeepers resulting
from the collection of information.
Therefore, if you have costs to generate,
maintain, and disclose this information,
you should comment and provide your
total capital and startup cost
components or annual operation,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
maintenance, and purchase of service
components. You should describe the
methods you use to estimate major cost
factors, including system and
technology acquisition, expected useful
life of capital equipment, discount
rate(s), and the period over which you
incur costs. Capital and startup costs
include, among other items, computers
and software you purchase to prepare
for collecting information, monitoring,
and record storage facilities. You should
not include estimates for equipment or
services purchased: (i) before October 1,
1995; (ii) to comply with requirements
not associated with the information
collection; (iii) for reasons other than to
provide information or keep records for
the Government; or (iv) as part of
customary and usual business or private
practices.
We will summarize written responses
to this notice and address them in our
submission for OMB approval. As a
result of your comments, we will make
any necessary adjustments to the burden
in our submission to OMB.
Public Comment Procedures: 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.
MMS Information Collection
Clearance Officer: Arlene Bajusz, (202)
208–7744.
Dated: September 16, 2009.
William S. Hauser,
Acting Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory
Programs.
[FR Doc. E9–22834 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R2–ES–2009–N174; 92220–1113–
0000–C6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Draft Post-Delisting
Monitoring Plan for the Concho Water
Snake
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of draft
post-delisting monitoring plan.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48595
availability of our Post-Delisting
Monitoring Plan for the Concho water
snake (Nerodia paucimaculata). The
draft post-delisting monitoring (PDM)
plan describes the methods we propose
to monitor the status of the snake and
its habitat, in cooperation with the State
of Texas and other conservation
partners, for a 15-year period if we
remove this species from the Federal list
of endangered and threatened wildlife
under another pending action. The draft
PDM plan also provides a strategy for
identifying and responding to any future
population declines or habitat
alterations.
DATES: To ensure consideration, please
send your written comments on the
draft PDM plan for Concho water snake
by October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The draft PDM plan is
available for review on the Internet at
https://endangered.fws.gov and https://
www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
AustinTexas/. To request a copy of the
draft PDM plan, write to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological
Services Field Office, 10711 Burnet
Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758;
telephone 512–490–0057; facsimile
512–490–0974. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing the
draft PDM plan is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours, at the above
office. You may submit comments by
mail to the above office address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin
Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES). If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800/877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Concho water snake is a reptile
endemic to central Texas. We listed this
species as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
effective September 3, 1986, because of
threats from habitat modification and
destruction (51 FR 31412). On July 8,
2008, we published a proposed rule to
remove the Concho water snake from
the list of threatened species (73 FR
38956). We based the proposal on our
finding that the best available scientific
and commercial data, including new
information, indicate that the Concho
water snake has recovered because
threats have been eliminated or reduced
to the point that the species no longer
meets the definition of threatened or
endangered under the Act. We are in the
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
48596
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
process of making a final determination
on whether or not to delist the Concho
water snake.
For more background information on
the Concho water snake, refer to our
1986 final listing rule published in the
Federal Register (51 FR 31412), our
2008 proposed delisting rule published
in the Federal Register (73 FR 38956),
Werler and Dixon (2000, pp. 209–216),
Campbell (2003, pp. 1–4), Forstner et al.
(2006, pp. 1–22), Whiting et al. (2008,
pp. 438–445), and the 1993 Concho
Water Snake Recovery Plan (Service
1993, available online at https://
endangered.fws.gov).
Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us
to implement a system, in cooperation
with the States, to effectively monitor
the status of each species we remove
from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants due to
recovery. The monitoring must occur for
at least 5 years. The purpose of postdelisting monitoring (PDM) is to verify
that a species we delist due to recovery
remains secure from risk of extinction
after we remove the protections of the
Act.
To fulfill the PDM requirement, we
drafted a monitoring plan for the
Concho water snake in cooperation with
the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department and the Colorado River
Municipal Water District. Over a 15-year
period, we propose to conduct surveys
to measure the presence and abundance
of snakes 2 times a year at 18 sample
sites across the range of the snake.
Biological monitoring frequency will
occur in three phases, decreasing over
time, resulting in 7 years of surveys over
the 15-year PDM period. Evaluation of
stream conditions will consist of
analysis of hydrologic data collected at
eight existing stream gages from across
the snake’s range. The PDM plan
describes specific monitoring triggers
where certain outcomes of monitoring
will result in specific actions. For
example, if snakes are not captured from
at least 75 percent of sample sites in any
year, sampling effort will be intensified
the following year beyond the minimum
called for in the PDM plan. The
monitoring triggers (both quantitative
and qualitative) are based on the snake’s
distribution, presence, reproduction,
and abundance, as well as evaluation of
instream flow conditions.
The draft PDM plan includes annual
reporting requirements. If PDM results
in concern regarding the status of the
snake or increasing threats, possible
responses may include an extended or
intensified monitoring effort, additional
research (such as modeling
metapopulation dynamics or assessing
the status of the fish prey base),
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
enhancement of riverine or shoreline
habitats, or an increased effort to
improve habitat connectivity by
additional translocation of snakes
between reaches. If future information
collected from the PDM, or any other
reliable source, indicates an increased
likelihood that the species may become
in danger of extinction, we will initiate
a status review of the Concho water
snake and determine if relisting the
species is warranted.
In addition to public review of the
draft PDM plan, we concurrently are
requesting independent expert peer
review from knowledgeable individuals
with scientific expertise that includes
ecology of water snakes and
conservation biology principles. Peer
review of the draft PDM plan is in
accordance with our policy published
on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270).
Viewing Documents
Comments and materials we receive
from the public and peer reviewers, as
well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing the draft PDM Plan,
will be available for public inspection
by appointment, during normal business
hours at the Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see ADDRESSES). Once
approved, the final PDM plan for the
Concho water snake and any future
revisions to the PDM plan will be
available on our Web page (https://
endangered.fws.gov) and the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office Web
page (https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
AustinTexas/). We will announce our
final decision on whether to delist the
snake with a final rule in a future
Federal Register publication, and we
will also make this final decision
available on the above-referenced Web
pages.
Request for Public Comments
We intend for our final PDM plan to
be as accurate and as effective as
possible. Therefore, we request
comments or suggestions on the Concho
water snake draft PDM plan from the
public, concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community,
industry, or any other interested party.
We will take into consideration
substantive comments we receive by the
comment due date (see DATES). These
comments, and any additional
information we receive, may lead us to
adopt a final PDM plan that differs from
this draft PDM plan. Please note that
comments merely stating support or
opposition to the action under
consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted,
will not be considered in making a
determination.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire document—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you may request at the top of
your document that we withhold this
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
References Cited
A complete list of all references we
cited in this notice is available upon
request from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff at the Austin Ecological
Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: August 7, 2009.
Benjamin N. Tuggle,
Regional Director, Region 2, Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–22872 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Walker River Basin Acquisition
Program Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), Nevada
AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,
Interior.
ACTION: Reopening of comment period
for review of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS).
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation is
reopening the comment period for the
DEIS to Monday, October 5, 2009. The
notice of availability of the DEIS was
published in the Federal Register on
July 24, 2009 (74 FR 36737). The public
review period ended on September 14,
2009.
DATES: Written comments on the DEIS
will be accepted on or before October 5,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments on
the DEIS to Mrs. Caryn Huntt DeCarlo,
Bureau of Reclamation, 705 N Plaza,
Room 320, Carson City, NV 89701 or
e-mail to chunttdecarlo@usbr.gov.
Copies of the DEIS may be requested
from Mrs. Caryn Huntt DeCarlo by
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48595-48596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22872]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R2-ES-2009-N174; 92220-1113-0000-C6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Post-
Delisting Monitoring Plan for the Concho Water Snake
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of draft post-delisting monitoring plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan for the Concho water
snake (Nerodia paucimaculata). The draft post-delisting monitoring
(PDM) plan describes the methods we propose to monitor the status of
the snake and its habitat, in cooperation with the State of Texas and
other conservation partners, for a 15-year period if we remove this
species from the Federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife
under another pending action. The draft PDM plan also provides a
strategy for identifying and responding to any future population
declines or habitat alterations.
DATES: To ensure consideration, please send your written comments on
the draft PDM plan for Concho water snake by October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The draft PDM plan is available for review on the Internet
at https://endangered.fws.gov and https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/. To request a copy of the draft PDM plan, write to U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office,
10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; telephone 512-490-0057;
facsimile 512-490-0974. Supporting documentation we used in preparing
the draft PDM plan is available for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours, at the above office. You may submit
comments by mail to the above office address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD),
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800/877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Concho water snake is a reptile endemic to central Texas. We
listed this species as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), effective September 3,
1986, because of threats from habitat modification and destruction (51
FR 31412). On July 8, 2008, we published a proposed rule to remove the
Concho water snake from the list of threatened species (73 FR 38956).
We based the proposal on our finding that the best available scientific
and commercial data, including new information, indicate that the
Concho water snake has recovered because threats have been eliminated
or reduced to the point that the species no longer meets the definition
of threatened or endangered under the Act. We are in the
[[Page 48596]]
process of making a final determination on whether or not to delist the
Concho water snake.
For more background information on the Concho water snake, refer to
our 1986 final listing rule published in the Federal Register (51 FR
31412), our 2008 proposed delisting rule published in the Federal
Register (73 FR 38956), Werler and Dixon (2000, pp. 209-216), Campbell
(2003, pp. 1-4), Forstner et al. (2006, pp. 1-22), Whiting et al.
(2008, pp. 438-445), and the 1993 Concho Water Snake Recovery Plan
(Service 1993, available online at https://endangered.fws.gov).
Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us to implement a system, in
cooperation with the States, to effectively monitor the status of each
species we remove from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants due to recovery. The monitoring must occur for at
least 5 years. The purpose of post-delisting monitoring (PDM) is to
verify that a species we delist due to recovery remains secure from
risk of extinction after we remove the protections of the Act.
To fulfill the PDM requirement, we drafted a monitoring plan for
the Concho water snake in cooperation with the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department and the Colorado River Municipal Water District. Over a 15-
year period, we propose to conduct surveys to measure the presence and
abundance of snakes 2 times a year at 18 sample sites across the range
of the snake. Biological monitoring frequency will occur in three
phases, decreasing over time, resulting in 7 years of surveys over the
15-year PDM period. Evaluation of stream conditions will consist of
analysis of hydrologic data collected at eight existing stream gages
from across the snake's range. The PDM plan describes specific
monitoring triggers where certain outcomes of monitoring will result in
specific actions. For example, if snakes are not captured from at least
75 percent of sample sites in any year, sampling effort will be
intensified the following year beyond the minimum called for in the PDM
plan. The monitoring triggers (both quantitative and qualitative) are
based on the snake's distribution, presence, reproduction, and
abundance, as well as evaluation of instream flow conditions.
The draft PDM plan includes annual reporting requirements. If PDM
results in concern regarding the status of the snake or increasing
threats, possible responses may include an extended or intensified
monitoring effort, additional research (such as modeling metapopulation
dynamics or assessing the status of the fish prey base), enhancement of
riverine or shoreline habitats, or an increased effort to improve
habitat connectivity by additional translocation of snakes between
reaches. If future information collected from the PDM, or any other
reliable source, indicates an increased likelihood that the species may
become in danger of extinction, we will initiate a status review of the
Concho water snake and determine if relisting the species is warranted.
In addition to public review of the draft PDM plan, we concurrently
are requesting independent expert peer review from knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that includes ecology of water
snakes and conservation biology principles. Peer review of the draft
PDM plan is in accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34270).
Viewing Documents
Comments and materials we receive from the public and peer
reviewers, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing the
draft PDM Plan, will be available for public inspection by appointment,
during normal business hours at the Austin Ecological Services Field
Office (see ADDRESSES). Once approved, the final PDM plan for the
Concho water snake and any future revisions to the PDM plan will be
available on our Web page (https://endangered.fws.gov) and the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office Web page (https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/). We will announce our final decision on
whether to delist the snake with a final rule in a future Federal
Register publication, and we will also make this final decision
available on the above-referenced Web pages.
Request for Public Comments
We intend for our final PDM plan to be as accurate and as effective
as possible. Therefore, we request comments or suggestions on the
Concho water snake draft PDM plan from the public, concerned
governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested party. We will take into consideration substantive comments
we receive by the comment due date (see DATES). These comments, and any
additional information we receive, may lead us to adopt a final PDM
plan that differs from this draft PDM plan. Please note that comments
merely stating support or opposition to the action under consideration
without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be
considered in making a determination.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire document--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you may
request at the top of your document that we withhold this information
from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
References Cited
A complete list of all references we cited in this notice is
available upon request from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin
Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authors
The primary authors of this document are staff at the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: August 7, 2009.
Benjamin N. Tuggle,
Regional Director, Region 2, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E9-22872 Filed 9-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P