Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat and Taxonomic Revision for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover, 2243-2254 [2012-521]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules will not send a copy of this Report and Order pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because this proceeding is terminated without the adoption of any rules. This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to this proceeding. Although the Public Notice accepted two separate petitions for rule making as counterproposals in this proceeding, the Report and Order finds that these related proposals should not be considered as counterproposals because they are not mutually exclusive with the Needles allotment proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding. See Public Notice, Report No. 2883, March 10, 2009. Instead we will consider these proposals filed by Rocket Radio, Inc. (RM–11517) and Univision Radio License Corporation (RM–11518), which are mutually exclusive with each other, in a separate FM rule making proceeding in MB Docket No. 11–207. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio. Federal Communications Commission. Nazifa Sawez, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. 2012–717 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070; MO92210–0–0009] RIN 1018–AX10 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat and Taxonomic Revision for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 Proposed rule; reopening of comment period. ACTION: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the reopening of the public comment period on the March 22, 2011, proposed revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast population of the western snowy plover (Pacific Coast WSP) (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are also recognizing the recent change to the taxonomy of the currently threatened taxon in which the species was split into two distinct species. We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis (DEA) of the proposed revised designation of critical habitat for Pacific Coast WSP and an amended required determinations section of the proposal and reopening of the comment period to allow all interested parties an opportunity to comment simultaneously on the revised proposed rule, the associated DEA, and the amended required determinations section. We are also seeking comment on additional proposed revisions to Unit CA 46 in Orange County, California. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully considered in preparation of the final rule. SUMMARY: We will consider comments received on or before February 16, 2012. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R8–ES–2010– 0070; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on https:// www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor or Jim Watkins, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2243 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone (707) 822–7201; facsimile (707) 822–8411. 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 We will accept written comments and information during this reopened comment period on our proposed revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP that was published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046), our DEA of the proposed revised designation, and the amended required determinations provided in this document. We will consider information and recommendations from all interested parties. We are particularly interested in comments concerning: (1) The reasons why we should or should not revise the designation of ‘‘critical habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether there are threats to the species from human activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit of designation such that the designation of critical habitat is not prudent. (2) Specific information on: (a) Areas that provide habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP that we did not discuss in the proposed revised critical habitat rule, and (b) Areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing that contain elements of the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species which may require special management considerations or protection and that we should include in the designation, and reason(s) why. (3) Specific information on our proposed revised designation of backdune systems and other habitats in an attempt to offset the anticipated effects of sea-level rise associated with climate change. (4) Specific information on the Pacific Coast WSP, habitat conditions, and the presence of physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species at any of the critical habitat units proposed in this revised rule (see Critical Habitat Units section and previous rules (64 FR 68508, December 7, 1999; 70 FR 56970, September 29, 2005; 76 FR 16046, March 22, 2011)). (5) How the proposed revised critical habitat boundaries could be refined to more closely circumscribe the areas E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 2244 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules identified as containing the features essential to the species’ conservation or how we mapped the water’s edge and whether any alternative methods could be used to better determine the critical habitat boundaries. (6) Any foreseeable economic, national security, or other relevant impacts that may result from designating any area that may be included in the final designation. We are particularly interested in any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of including or excluding areas from the proposed revised designation that are subject to these impacts. (7) Any information regarding the areas exempted from the proposed revised rule or whether any specific areas being proposed as revised critical habitat should be excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding any particular area outweigh the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, including Tribal lands, within the proposed revised designation. (8) Information on any quantifiable economic costs or benefits of the proposed revised designation of critical habitat. (9) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed revised critical habitat. (10) Whether our approach to designating critical habitat could be improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating public concerns and comments. (11) Information on the extent to which the description of economic impacts in the DEA is complete and accurate. (12) The likelihood of adverse social reactions to the designation of critical habitat, as discussed in the DEA, and how the consequences of such reactions, if likely to occur, would relate to the conservation and regulatory benefits of the proposed revised critical habitat designation. If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rule (76 FR 16046) during the initial comment period from March 22, 2011, to May 23, 2011, please do not resubmit them. We have incorporated them into the public record, and we will fully consider them in the preparation of our final determination. Our final determination concerning revised critical habitat will take into consideration all written comments and any additional information we receive during both comment periods. On the basis of public VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 comments, 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 materials concerning the proposed rule or DEA by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We request that you send comments only by the methods described in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit a comment via https:// www.regulations.gov, your entire comment—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. We will post all hardcopy comments on https:// www.regulations.gov as well. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, 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. Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing the proposed rule and DEA, will be available for public inspection on https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain copies of the proposed rule and the DEA on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070, or by mail from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). Background It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to the taxonomic name change and designation of critical habitat for Pacific Coast WSP in this document. For more background information concerning the Pacific Coast WSP, refer to the proposed revised designation of critical habitat published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046). For more information on the Pacific Coast WSP or its habitat, refer to the final listing rule published in the Federal Register on March 5, 1993 (58 FR 12864), which is available online at https://www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070) or the Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast WSP (Service 2007), which is online at https://ecos.fws.gov or from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Previous Federal Actions On March 22, 2011, we published a proposed rule to revise the designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP (76 FR 16046). We proposed to designate approximately 28,261 acres (ac) (11,436 hectares (ha)) in 68 units located in Washington, Oregon, and California as critical habitat. That proposal opened a 60-day comment period, ending May 23, 2011. In this document we are proposing to revise the boundaries to Unit CA 46 based on new information (see Changes to Proposed Revised Critical Habitat below). We will submit for publication in the Federal Register a final critical habitat designation for the Pacific Coast WSP on or before June 12, 2012. Taxonomic and Nomenclatural Changes Affecting Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus We are making a technical correction to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h) to reflect our acceptance of a taxonomic and nomenclatural change of western snowy plover to Charadrius nivosus nivosus from C. alexandrinus nivosus. We listed the Pacific Coast WSP as threatened under the then-recognized name of Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (58 FR 12864; March 5, 1993), which is a subspecies of the Eurasian Kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus (Linnaeus 1758)). We accepted this taxonomy and have used this name in all Service documents up to and including our proposed revision to the critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011). ¨ In 2009, Clemens Kupper (Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University ´ ´ of Bath, Bath, UK); Tamas Szekely (Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Bath, UK); and Terry Burke (Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK), submitted a proposal to the American Ornithologist’s Union (AOU)—the recognized body on ornithological naming and scientific nomenclature (AOU 2010A, pp. 145–146). The proposal presented information to split the Kentish plover from the snowy plover and adopt Kentish plover for Palaearctic populations (zoogeographical region consisting of Europe, Africa north of the Sahara, and most of Asia north of the Himalayas) and change the scientific name of the snowy plover in Central and North America to Charadrius nivosus (Cassin 1858) with three subspecies: C. nivosus nivosus (currently C. alexandrinus E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS nivosus) (range to include all of the continental United States and portions of Mexico), C. nivosus tenuirostris (currently C. alexandrinus nivosus) (range to include Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and the Yucatan Peninsula) and C. nivosus occidentalis (currently C. alexandrinus occidentalis) (range to include South America). The proposal cited genetic, morphological, and behavioral differences between C. alexandrinus and C. nivosus (Funk et al. ¨ 2007; Kupper et al. 2009). The proposal was adopted by the AOU (AOU 2010B, pp. 1–5; Chesser et al. 2011, pp. 603– 604). We are within this proposed rule accepting the taxonomic change for the Pacific Coast WSP and recognize the listed entity as C. nivosus nivosus and will make changes to the Code of Federal Regulations in the final designation (see Proposed Regulation Promulgation section). We also make the necessary changes to the historical range of C. nivosus nivosus at 50 CFR 17.11(h) to include the entire continental United States. These technical corrections do not affect the description, distribution, or listing status of the Pacific Coast WSP. However, the complete range of C. nivosus nivosus now includes the Florida occurrences of the subspecies. Critical Habitat Section 3 of the Act defines critical habitat 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 by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. If the proposed revised rule 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 funding, authorizing, permitting, or proposing actions affecting critical habitat must consult with us on the effects of their actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that the Secretary shall designate and revise critical habitat based upon the best scientific data available, after taking into consideration the economic impact, the impact on national security, and any VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 other relevant impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary of the Interior may exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines 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. When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of actions with a Federal nexus (activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal agencies), the educational benefits of mapping areas containing essential features that aid in the recovery of the listed species, and any benefits that may result from designation due to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat. When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of partnerships; or implementation of a management plan. In the case of the Pacific Coast WSP, the benefits of critical habitat include public awareness of the presence of the Pacific Coast WSP and the importance of habitat protection, and, where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for Pacific Coast WSP due to protection from adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat. In practice, situations with a Federal nexus exist primarily on Federal lands or for projects undertaken, authorized, or otherwise permitted by Federal agencies. The final decision on whether to exclude any areas will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available at the time of the final designation, including information obtained during the comment period and information about the economic impact of designation. Accordingly, we have prepared a DEA concerning the proposed revised critical habitat designation, which is available for review and comment (see ADDRESSES section). Draft Economic Analysis The purpose of the DEA is to identify and analyze the potential economic impacts associated with the proposed revised critical habitat designation for the Pacific Coast WSP. The DEA separates conservation measures into two distinct categories according to ‘‘without critical habitat’’ and ‘‘with critical habitat’’ scenarios. The ‘‘without PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2245 critical habitat’’ scenario represents the baseline for the analysis, considering protections otherwise afforded to the Pacific Coast WSP (e.g., under the Federal listing and other Federal, State, and local regulations). The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ scenario describes the incremental impacts specifically due to designation of critical habitat for the species. In other words, these incremental conservation measures and associated economic impacts would not occur but for the designation. Conservation measures implemented under the baseline (without critical habitat) scenario are described qualitatively within the DEA, but economic impacts associated with these measures are not quantified. Economic impacts are only quantified for conservation measures implemented specifically due to the designation of critical habitat (i.e., incremental impacts). In other words, the incremental costs are those attributable solely to the designation of critical habitat, above and beyond the baseline costs; these are the costs we may consider in the final designation of critical habitat when weighing the benefits of inclusion and exclusion of particular areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. For a further description of the methodology of the analysis, see Chapter 2, ‘‘Framework for the Analysis,’’ of the DEA (Industrial Economics Incorporated (IEc) 2011). The DEA evaluates the potential economic impacts associated with the proposed revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP. The analysis focuses on reasonably foreseeable incremental impacts of the critical habitat designation, or those impacts not expected to occur absent critical habitat designation. Forecasted impacts are based on the planning periods for potentially affected projects and look out over a 20-year time horizon (through 2031). The DEA considers economic impacts of Pacific Coast WSP conservation efforts on the following activities: (1) Recreation; (2) development; (3) gravel mining; (4) military activities; and (5) habitat and species management. Due to strong existing protections (include symbolic fencing, nest exclosures, signage, driving restrictions, and mechanized beach cleaning restrictions) for the Pacific Coast WSP, the direct incremental impacts quantified in the DEA are limited to the administrative cost of considering adverse modification during section 7 consultation with the Service as well as the additional effort necessary to include analysis of critical habitat in three future Habitat Conservation Plans E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 2246 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules and one Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) for Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB). These incremental impacts of the proposed revised critical habitat designation over the 20-year timeframe (2012 through 2031) are estimated to be $261,000 ($24,700 on an annualized basis), assuming a seven percent discount rate. Impacts to military activities represent the greatest percentage of these overall cost estimates—approximately 72 percent. Impacts to development activities represent approximately 17 percent, habitat and species management 6 percent, and mining 4 percent of the overall impacts (percentages do not sum due to rounding). Incremental impacts to recreational activities are not expected due to lack of a Federal nexus compelling section 7 consultation with the Service and significant protection already provided by existing regulations and programs (IEc 2011, pp. 4–9–4–12). The analysis also identifies three activities that may experience indirect incremental impacts of the proposed revised critical habitat designation: Recreation at Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area (SVRA) (Unit CA 31), development of the Sterling/ McDonald site (Unit CA 22), and development of the Security National Guaranty (SNG) site (Unit CA 22). Indirect impacts resulting from future litigation or increased scrutiny from State agencies may include prohibiting off-highway-vehicle use at Oceano Dunes SVRA and denial of development permits for the Sterling/McDonald and SNG sites. Due to uncertainty surrounding the likelihood and extent of such indirect impacts, the data necessary to quantify these impacts are unavailable. Therefore, these indirect incremental impacts are discussed qualitatively in the DEA (IEc 2011, p. 4–2). WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Vandenberg Air Force Base INRMP In the March 22, 2011, proposed revised designation of critical habitat (76 FR 16046), we did not consider Vandenberg Air Force Base for exemption under section 4(a)(3) of the Act because they had not yet completed a Service-approved INRMP. On April 14, 2011, VAFB completed and we approved the INRMP for VAFB as part of the requirements of the Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) (for a full discussion of the Sikes Act, see the Exemptions section of the March 22, 2011, proposed revision to critical habitat (76 FR 16046)). The VAFB INRMP provides for the conservation, management, and VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 stewardship of the natural resources found on the base. The INRMP includes: (1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation, including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species; (2) A statement of goals and priorities; (3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented to provide for these ecological needs; and (4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan. Because the INRMP was not finalized and approved prior to the March 22, 2011, proposed revised critical habitat designation for the Pacific Coast WSP (76 FR 16046), we did not exempt these areas prior to their proposal. We will review the INRMP and will determine in our final designation of critical habitat if the plan provides a benefit to the Pacific Coast WSP in those areas covered by the INRMP that we had determined to be essential to and for the conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. If it does, we will exempt those areas covered by the INRMP from the final designation under the requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108–136) and section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. As we stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the public on the DEA, as well as all aspects of the proposed revised designation, the changes contained in this NOA, and our amended required determinations. We may revise the proposed revised designation or supporting documents to incorporate or address information we receive during the public 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, provided the exclusion will not result in the extinction of this species. Changes to Proposed Revised Critical Habitat In this document, we are making revisions to the proposed revised critical habitat as identified and described in the proposed rule that we published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046) and are seeking comment on the revisions. The changes occur in what was proposed as subunits CA 46A–D (Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve) and subunit CA 46E (Bolsa Chica State Beach) of Unit CA 46. We are also adding one subunit (subunit CA 46F) to Unit CA 46. During the public comment period for the March 22, 2011, proposed revised critical habitat (76 FR 16046), we received comments from a species expert PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 indicating that we should reevaluate the proposed boundaries at the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve because certain areas included in Unit CA 46 are not utilized for nesting or foraging by the Pacific Coast WSP, whereas other areas that were not included in proposed revised critical habitat within Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve are used for nesting and foraging (P. Knapp, pers. comm. 2011). We also received comments and new information from California State Parks and a species expert indicating that we should reevaluate the proposed boundaries of subunit CA 46E at Bolsa Chica State Beach because the area no longer contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and is no longer being used for wintering by the Pacific Coast WSP and has not been used in the last 4 years (D. Prior, California State Parks, pers. comm. 2011; P. Knapp, pers. comm. 2011). The information provided indicated that areas north of the proposal in subunit CA 46E at Bolsa Chica State Beach are being used by the Pacific Coast WSP as a wintering habitat and that we should reevaluate the proposed boundaries of beach areas in Unit CA 46 (Prior, pers. comm. 2011; Knapp, pers. comm. 2011). We have reviewed the new information and have determined it appropriate to adjust our proposed revised designation of Unit CA 46. The purpose of the revisions described below is to better delineate the areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP and to ensure that all areas proposed are consistent with the criteria outlined in the proposed revised rule (see ‘‘Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat’’ section in the proposed revised critical habitat designation (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011)). The areas added to the proposed unit are within the geographical area that was occupied by the species at the time it was listed and contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. A revised map is included in the Proposed Regulation Promulgation section of this document. Below, we briefly describe the changes made to Unit CA 46. As a result of these revisions, the naming convention for the subunits CA 46A–E will change and an additional subunit (CA 46F) will be added. Also as a result of these revisions, the total area proposed for designation as critical habitat in Unit CA 46 is 568 ac (230 ha), an increase of 50 ac (20 ha). The change increases the total amount of proposed revised critical habitat to 30,497 ac (12,342 ha) (see Table 3 below). E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules Changes to Critical Habitat Unit Descriptions WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Unit CA 46: Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve Through this notice, we propose to exchange the naming conventions between subunits CA 46A and 46E so that the Bolsa Chica State Beach will now be part of subunit CA 46A and the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve will include subunits CA 46B–F. As revised here, the subunits in Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve are located east of the Pacific Coast Highway, in Orange County, California. As a result of this revision, the total area proposed for designation as critical habitat at Bolsa Chica State Beach (now designated as subunit CA 46A) is 93 ac (38 ha); and the total area for the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve subunits (now designated as subunits CA 46B–46F) is 475 ac (192 ha). These subunits are entirely owned by the State of California. Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve contains significant nesting and foraging areas. This location supported 47 breeding adult Pacific Coast WSP in 2009 (Knapp and Peterson 2009, p. 8). All subunits at Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve were occupied at the time of listing and are currently occupied and annually support one of the largest breeding populations of Pacific Coast WSP in the region. The Recovery Plan for Pacific Coast WSP states that this location contributes to the conservation goal for the region by providing a management potential of 70 breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix B). This location also supported an average wintering flock of 14 Pacific Coast WSP from 2003 through 2010 (Service unpublished data). In the proposed revised rule, we incorrectly stated that this reserve is an abandoned oil field. This reserve is in fact an active oil field that underwent significant reconstruction and restoration between 2004 and 2006, including the addition of three new nest sites and a new ocean inlet that allows the water level to rise and fall resembling the irregular semidiurnal tidal range of southern California’s ocean waters (Knapp and Peterson 2009, p. 1). Including these occupied areas for breeding, foraging, and dispersal is consistent with our criteria used to identify critical habitat, as outlined in the proposed rule (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011). No changes were made to subunits CA 46B or CA 46D. Please see the proposed revised critical habitat for a description of these subunits (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011). VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica State Beach Through this notice, the proposed revised designation’s subunit CA 46E is renamed as subunit CA 46A. After further analysis and review of comments received on the proposed revised designation, we have adjusted the boundary of the 8 ac (3 ha) of beach that was included in the proposed rule because the area no longer contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and has not supported Pacific Coast WSP for the past 4 years (Prior, pers. comm. 2011). The subunit as revised here consists of sandy beach habitat north of the critical habitat unit proposed in March 2011, and extends to just south of the Sunset Beach area near Warner Avenue adjacent to the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. As a result of the revision reflected here, the area proposed for designation as critical habitat in subunit CA 46A is 93 ac (38 ha), an increase of 85 ac (35 ha) from what was proposed for Bolsa Chica State Beach in the proposed revised designation. This subunit is owned entirely by the State of California. The revised subunit CA 46A was occupied at the time of listing and is currently occupied and contains the physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species, including a wide sandy beach with occasional surf-cast wrack supporting small invertebrates for foraging, and because it supports an average wintering flock of 27 Pacific Coast WSP (Service unpublished data 2003–2010) in a location with high-quality breeding habitat. Subunit CA 46A may require special management considerations or protection to address threats from recreational disturbance and beach raking as discussed for this subunit in the March 2011 proposed revised rule. Additionally, adding occupied areas for wintering, foraging, and dispersal is consistent with our criteria used to identify critical habitat, as outlined in the proposed revised rule (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011). Unit CA46: Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve; Subunits CA 46C, 46E, 46F Subunit CA 46C We revised subunit CA 46C to include additional areas containing the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species for breeding, foraging, and dispersal that were not captured in the proposed revised rule. This addition is based on information received during the public comment period that indicates that these areas include year-round foraging habitat in PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2247 extensive mudflats and additional nesting areas for Pacific Coast WSP to expand into. This unit was occupied at the time of listing. This location contains the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species, including tidally influenced estuarine mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast WSP. As a result of this revision, the area proposed for designation as critical habitat in subunit CA 46C is 222 ac (90 ha), an increase of 201 ac (81 ha) from the proposed rule. This location contains tidally influenced estuarine mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds and nesting islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats from vegetation encroachment in nesting and foraging areas and predation of chicks and eggs. Subunit CA 46E Here, we rename the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve areas that were proposed as subunit CA 46A in the proposed revised rule to subunit CA 46E and remove the areas that do not contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. This area was occupied at the time of listing. This revised subunit CA 46E is reduced in size to more accurately represent the nesting and foraging areas used by Pacific Coast WSP. We removed almost all of the Muted Tidal Basin area from subunit 46E because this area does not contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Pacific Coast WSP. We have adjusted the boundary in the Future Full Tidal Basin to represent areas used for nesting and foraging. As a result of this revision, the area proposed for designation as critical habitat in subunit CA 46E is 247 ac (100 ha), a decrease of 237 ac (96 ha) from what was proposed as subunit CA 46A in the proposed rule. This revised location contains tidally influenced estuarine mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds and nesting islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats from vegetation encroachment in nesting and E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 2248 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules foraging areas and predation of chicks and eggs. Subunit 46F We add one subunit (CA 46F) to represent the single nesting and foraging area utilized by Pacific Coast WSP in the Muted Tidal Basin (Nest Site 2). This area was occupied at the time of listing and contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. This location contains tidally influenced estuarine mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds and nesting islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats from vegetation encroachment in nesting and foraging areas and predation of chicks and eggs. As a result of this addition, the area proposed for designation as critical habitat in subunit CA 46F is 2 ac (1 ha). In addition to the unit changes outlined above, we are also correcting land ownership acreage numbers identified in Table 3 of the March 22, 2011, proposed revised rule (76 FR 16046). The corrected Table 3 with changes to Unit CA–46 is below. Also, in the proposed revised rule we incorrectly stated that no Department of Defense lands were within the proposed revised designation. Approximately 1,084 ac (439 ha) have been identified on VAFB in units CA–32 and CA–33. On April 14, 2011, we approved the INRMP for VAFB and have determined that the plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation. We have now reviewed and approved the VAFB INRMP and will recommend that the Secretary exempt the areas determined to be essential to and for the conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP from the final designation under the requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108–136) and section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. TABLE 3—PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP SHOWING FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL, AND OTHER (PRIVATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT) LAND OWNERSHIP Total Unit number Federal Tribal State Other Unit name ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha Washington: WA 1 .................................. WA 2 .................................. WA 3A ................................ WA 3B * .............................. Copalis Spit ............................... Damon Point ............................. Midway Beach ........................... Shoalwater/Graveyard ............... 407 673 697 1,121 165 272 282 454 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 336 0 0 0 136 407 648 697 505 165 262 282 204 0 25 0 280 0 10 0 113 Unit WA–3 Totals ........ .................................................... 1,818 736 0 0 336 136 1,202 486 280 113 WA 4A ................................ WA 4B ................................ Leadbetter Spit .......................... Gunpowder Sands Island .......... 2,463 904 997 366 2,026 904 820 366 0 0 0 0 437 0 177 0 0 0 0 0 Unit WA–4 Totals ........ .................................................... 3,367 1,363 2,930 1,186 0 0 437 177 0 0 WASHINGTON .................................................... STATE TOTALS. 6,265 2,535 2,930 1,186 336 136 2,694 1,090 305 123 Oregon: OR 1 ................................... OR 2 ................................... OR 3 ................................... OR 4 ................................... OR 5 ................................... OR 6 ................................... OR 7 ................................... OR 8A ................................ OR 8B ................................ OR 8C ................................ 169 211 299 367 541 200 372 15 241 716 68 85 121 149 219 81 151 6 98 290 169 0 0 279 0 0 372 15 241 716 68 0 0 113 0 0 151 6 98 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 161 299 0 541 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 121 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 88 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 36 0 81 0 0 0 0 OR 8D ................................ Unit OR–8 Totals ........ Columbia River Spit .................. Necanicum River Spit ............... Nehalem River Spit ................... Bayocean Spit ........................... Netarts Spit ............................... Sand Lake South ...................... Sutton/Baker Beaches .............. Siltcoos Breach ......................... Siltcoos River Spit ..................... Dunes Overlook Tahkenitch Creek Spit. North Umpqua River Spit .......... .................................................... 236 1,208 96 489 151 1,123 61 454 0 0 0 0 85 85 34 34 0 0 0 0 OR OR OR OR OR Tenmile Creek Spit ................... Coos Bay North Spit ................. Bandon to New River ................ Elk River Spit ............................ Euchre Creek ............................ 244 308 1,016 167 116 99 125 411 68 47 244 308 459 0 0 99 125 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 290 167 116 0 0 117 68 47 .................................................... 5,218 2,112 2,954 1,195 0 0 1,353 548 911 369 Lake Earl ................................... Gold Bluffs Beach ..................... Humboldt Lagoons—Stone Lagoon. Humboldt Lagoons—Big Lagoon. 74 235 55 30 95 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 235 55 9 95 22 52 0 0 21 0 0 271 110 0 0 0 0 270 109 <1 <1 Unit CA–3 Totals ........ .................................................... 326 132 0 0 0 0 325 132 0 0 CA 4A ................................. CA 4B ................................. Clam Beach/Little River ............ Mad River .................................. 340 456 138 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 226 149 91 60 114 307 46 124 Unit CA–4 Totals ........ .................................................... 796 322 0 0 0 0 375 152 421 170 9 ................................... 10 ................................. 11 ................................. 12 * ............................... 13 ................................. WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS OREGON STATE TOTALS. California: CA 1 ................................... CA 2 ................................... CA 3A ................................. CA 3B ................................. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 2249 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules TABLE 3—PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP SHOWING FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL, AND OTHER (PRIVATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT) LAND OWNERSHIP—Continued Total Unit number Federal Tribal State Other Unit name ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha CA 5A ................................. CA 5B ................................. CA 5C ................................ Humboldt Bay South Spit .......... Eel River North Spit/Beach ....... Eel River South Spit/Beach ...... 577 467 340 234 189 138 20 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 541 460 176 219 186 71 16 7 164 6 3 66 Unit CA–5 Totals ........ .................................................... 1,384 560 20 8 0 0 1,177 476 187 76 6 ................................... 7 ................................... 8 ................................... 9 ................................... 10A ............................... 10B ............................... Eel River Gravel Bars ............... MacKerricher Beach .................. Manchester Beach .................... Dillon Beach .............................. Pt Reyes .................................... Limantour .................................. 2,699 1,176 482 39 460 156 1,092 476 195 16 186 63 0 0 68 0 460 156 0 0 28 0 186 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 591 1,102 402 0 0 0 239 446 163 0 0 0 2,108 74 12 39 0 0 853 30 5 16 0 0 Unit CA–10 Totals ...... .................................................... 616 249 616 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 ................................. 12 ................................. 13A ............................... 13B ............................... 13C .............................. Napa .......................................... Hayward .................................... Eden Landing ............................ Eden Landing ............................ Eden Landing ............................ 618 1 237 171 609 250 0 96 69 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 618 0 228 171 602 250 0 92 69 244 0 1 8 0 7 0 0 3 0 3 Unit CA–13 Totals ...... .................................................... 1,017 412 0 0 0 0 1,001 405 15 6 CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 89 169 36 25 23 15 400 281 971 72 24 28 24 20 34 214 36 68 15 10 9 6 162 114 393 29 10 11 10 8 14 87 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 424 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 19 15 15 370 281 286 38 18 18 24 20 11 65 0 0 15 8 6 6 150 114 116 15 7 7 10 8 4 26 89 0 0 7 8 0 30 0 261 34 3 10 0 0 23 149 36 0 0 3 3 0 12 0 106 14 1 4 0 0 9 60 CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA 30 ................................. 31 ................................. 32 ................................. 33 ................................. 34 ................................. 35 ................................. 36 ................................. 37 ................................. 38 ................................. 39 ................................. 43 ................................. 44 ................................. 45A ............................... 45B ............................... 45C .............................. 45D .............................. Ravenswood .............................. Warm Springs ........................... Half Moon Bay .......................... Waddell Creek Beach ............... Scott Creek Beach .................... Wilder Creek Beach .................. Jetty Road to Aptos .................. Elkhorn Slough Mudflats ........... Monterey to Moss Landing ....... Point Sur Beach ........................ San Carpoforo Creek ................ Arroyo Laguna Creek ................ San Simeon State Beach .......... Villa Creek Beach ..................... Toro Creek ................................ Atascadero Beach/Morro Strand SB. Morro Bay Beach ...................... Pismo Beach/Nipomo Dunes .... Vandenberg North ..................... Vandenberg South .................... Devereaux Beach ...................... Santa Barbara Beaches ............ Santa Rosa Island Beaches ..... San Buenaventura Beach ......... Mandalay to Santa Clara River Ormond Beach .......................... Zuma Beach .............................. Malibu Beach ............................ Santa Monica Beach ................. Dockweiler North ....................... Dockweiler South ...................... Hermosa State Beach ............... 1,078 1,655 711 424 52 65 586 69 671 319 73 13 48 34 65 27 436 670 288 172 21 26 237 28 272 129 30 5 19 14 26 11 0 242 711 374 0 0 586 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 288 151 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 949 553 0 0 43 30 0 69 458 159 1 13 29 34 54 8 384 224 0 0 17 12 0 28 185 64 0 5 12 14 22 3 129 860 0 50 9 35 0 0 213 160 72 0 19 0 11 19 52 348 0 20 4 14 0 0 86 65 29 0 8 0 4 8 Unit CA–45 Totals ...... .................................................... 174 70 0 0 0 0 125 51 49 20 CA CA CA CA CA CA 46A 46B 46C 46D 46E 46F Bolsa Bolsa Bolsa Bolsa Bolsa Bolsa State Beach .......... Reserve ................ Reserve ................ Reserve ................ Reserve ................ Reserve ................ 93 2 222 2 247 2 38 1 90 1 100 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 2 222 2 247 2 38 1 90 1 100 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit CA–46 Totals ...... .................................................... 568 230 0 0 0 0 568 230 0 0 CA CA CA CA CA 47 ................................. 48 ................................. 50A ............................... 50B ............................... 50C .............................. Santa Ana River Mouth ............. Balboa Beach ............................ Batiquitos Lagoon ..................... Batiquitos Lagoon ..................... Batiquitos Lagoon ..................... 19 25 24 23 19 8 10 10 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 18 15 0 7 0 7 6 0 1 25 6 8 19 0 10 2 3 8 Unit CA–50 Totals ...... .................................................... 66 27 0 0 0 0 33 13 33 13 CA 51A ............................... San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve. San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve. 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 2 CA CA CA CA CA CA WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS CA CA CA CA CA ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ................................. ............................... ............................... .............................. .............................. ............................... ............................... CA 51B ............................... VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Chica Chica Chica Chica Chica Chica Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 2250 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules TABLE 3—PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP SHOWING FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL, AND OTHER (PRIVATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT) LAND OWNERSHIP—Continued Total Unit number ac CA 51C .............................. Federal Tribal State Other Unit name ha San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve. 7 ac 3 ha 0 ac 0 ha 0 ac ha 0 7 ac 3 ha 0 0 Unit CA–51 Totals ...... .................................................... 15 6 0 0 0 0 11 4 4 2 CA 52A ............................... CA 52B ............................... CA 52C .............................. San Dieguito Lagoon ................ San Dieguito Lagoon ................ San Dieguito Lagoon ................ 4 3 4 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 4 3 0 2 1 0 Unit CA–52 Totals ...... .................................................... 11 4 0 0 0 0 4 2 7 3 53 ................................. 54A ............................... 54B ............................... 54C .............................. 54D .............................. Los Penasquitos Lagoon .......... Fiesta Island .............................. Mariner’s Point .......................... South Mission Beach ................ San Diego River Channel ......... 32 2 7 38 51 13 1 3 15 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 1 1 8 38 13 0 0 3 15 1 1 6 30 13 0 0 2 12 5 Unit CA–54 Totals ...... .................................................... 98 40 0 0 0 0 48 19 50 20 CA 55B ............................... CA 55E ............................... Coronado Beach ....................... Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and D Street Fill. Silver Strand State Beach ......... Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve .... San Diego National Wildlife Refuge, South Bay Unit. Tijuana Estuary and Beach ....... 74 132 30 53 0 77 0 31 0 0 0 0 74 1 30 0 0 54 0 22 82 10 5 33 4 2 74 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 10 0 3 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 150 61 71 29 0 0 58 23 21 8 Unit CA–55 Totals (does not include exempt sub-units). .................................................... 453 183 222 90 0 0 151 61 80 32 CALIFORNIA TOTALS. .................................................... 19,014 7,695 3,436 1,390 0 0 10,279 4,160 5,301 2,145 WASHINGTON, OREGON, CALIFORNIA GRAND TOTALS. .................................................... 30,497 12,342 9,320 3,772 336 136 14,326 5,798 6,517 2,637 CA CA CA CA CA CA 55F ............................... CA 55G .............................. CA 55I ................................ CA 55J ............................... Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Required Determinations—Amended In our March 22, 2011, proposed rule (76 FR 16046), 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 became available in the DEA. We have now made use of the DEA data to make these determinations. In this document, we affirm the information in our proposed revised rule concerning Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 12630 (Takings), E.O. 13132 (Federalism), E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), E.O. 13211 (Energy, Supply, Distribution, and Use), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the President’s memorandum of April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-to-Government VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 Relations with Native American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 22951). However, based on the DEA data, we are amending our required determination concerning the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 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 of 1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on our DEA of the proposed revised designation, we provide our analysis for determining whether the proposed revised designation would result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on comments we receive, we may revise this determination as part of our final rulemaking. According to the Small Business Administration, 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 E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 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 revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP would affect a substantial number of small entities, we considered the number of small entities affected within particular types of economic activities, such as development, recreation, habitat management or restoration activities (IEc 2011, p. A–5). In order to determine whether it is appropriate for our agency to certify that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, we considered each industry or category individually. In estimating the numbers of small entities potentially affected, we also considered whether their activities have any Federal involvement. Critical habitat designation will not affect activities that do not have any Federal involvement; designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal agencies. In areas where the Pacific Coast WSP is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult with us under section 7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or implement that may affect the species. If we finalize this proposed revised critical habitat designation, consultations to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat would be incorporated into the existing consultation process. In the DEA, we evaluated the potential economic effects on small entities resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the proposed revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP. The Service and the action agency are the only entities with direct compliance costs associated with this proposed revised critical habitat designation, although small entities may participate in section 7 consultation as a third party. It is, therefore, possible that the small entities may spend additional VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 time considering critical habitat during section 7 consultation for the Pacific Coast WSP. The DEA indicates that the incremental impacts potentially incurred by small entities are limited to two private developers working through the Sand City Redevelopment Agency at the Sterling-McDonald site (Unit CA 22) and Security National Guaranty (SNG) (Unit CA 22). The indirect incremental impacts resulting from development of the Sterling-McDonald and the Security National Guaranty (SNG) site (Unit CA 22) result from potential denial of development permits for the SterlingMcDonald and SNG sites by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). Both projects have been in planning for numerous years, and previous applications for development permits from the CCC have been denied due to being in noncompliance with the California Coastal Act of 1976. The projects have been subsequently modified to decrease impacts to coastal resources, and proponents are again seeking CCC approval. Because the project modifications have not yet been reviewed by the CCC, there is still some uncertainty as to whether the projects will be allowed to move forward at this time and thus result in the potential incremental impacts identified in the DEA. The Sterling-McDonald site plan calls for a 342 unit coastal resort. The project has been in planning since the 1990s and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is currently under development on the project’s current design. Project proponents expect the EIR to be completed in 2012. The 39-ac (16-ha) SNG site is also planned for a mixed-use resort and will include up to 341 units. The proposed project has completed an EIR under CEQA and as part of local and State permitting processes, SNG has prepared a detailed habitat protection plan (HPP) for the site. The HPP evaluates and proposes mitigation for potential impacts to biological resources, including the Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat. Two other federally listed species occur at the project site including the endangered Smith’s blue butterfly (Euphilotes enoptes smithi) (with proposed critical habitat: 42 FR 7972; February 8, 1977) and threatened Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens) with final critical habitat (73 FR 1525; January 9, 2008). The HPP also includes proposed mitigation for these two species. The HPP has been reviewed by the local jurisdictions and has been subject to public review as part of the CCC hearing PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2251 process in December 2009. Project proponents anticipate that the CCC will conditionally approve the final resort design on adoption and implementation of the HPP. Final approval of the HPP by CCC is anticipated prior to the issuance of the final revised critical habitat designation for the Pacific Coast WSP. The process for the CCC to issue permits for coastal development projects involves the development of Local Coastal Programs (LCPs) by cities and counties. LCPs are basic planning tools used by local governments to guide development in the coastal zone, in partnership with the CCC. After an LCP has been certified by the CCC to be in compliance with the Coastal Act requirements, the coastal permitting authority over most new development is transferred to the local government. As of 2008, approximately 72 percent of the LCPs have been certified by the CCC, representing close to 90 percent of the geographic area of the coastal zone. Unit CA–22 for the Pacific Coast WSP falls within the City of Sand City LCP which includes the coastal areas near the City of Sand City south to Bay Avenue in Monterey County, California. Since 2004, when the City of Sand City LCP was approved by the CCC, the City of Sand City issued a total of 107 permits for development projects or other construction activity affecting coastal resources within the LCP (CCC 2010, pp. Part 3 16–17). The two small businesses represent less than 2 percent of the total number of actions permitted regionally by the City of Sand City and certified by the CCC. Due to the uncertainty of the status of the two projects, the extent of their indirect impacts, and the unavailability of data necessary to quantify impacts, the DEA does not quantify, but qualitatively discusses, these potential indirect impacts (IEc 2011, p. A–5). Please refer to the DEA of the proposed revised critical habitat designation for a more detailed discussion of potential economic impacts. Our analysis constitutes an evaluation of not only potentially directly affected parties, but those also potentially indirectly affected. Under the RFA and following recent case law, we are only required to evaluate the direct effects of a regulation to determine compliance. Because the regulatory effect of critical habitat is through section 7 of the Act which applies only to Federal agencies, we have determined that only Federal agencies are directly affected by this rulemaking. Other entities, such as small businesses, are only indirectly affected. However, to better understand the potential effects of a designation of E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 2252 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules critical habitat, we frequently evaluate the potential impact to those entities that may be indirectly affected, as was the case for this rulemaking. In doing so, we focus on the specific areas being designated as critical habitat and compare the number of small business entities potentially affected in that area with other small business entities in the regional area, versus comparing the entities in the area of designation with entities nationally—which is more commonly done. This results in an estimation of a higher proportion of small businesses potentially affected. In this rulemaking, we calculate that the proportion of small businesses potentially affected is less than 2 percent of those regionally. If we were to calculate that value based on the proportion nationally, then our estimate would be significantly lower than 1 percent. Following our evaluation of potential effects to small business entities from this rulemaking, we do not believe that the two small businesses or less than 2 percent of the small businesses in the affected sector represents a substantial number. However, we recognize that the potential effects to these small businesses may be significant due to not quantifying the potential economic impacts. We will further evaluate the potential effects to these small businesses as we develop our final rulemaking. In summary, we have considered whether the proposed revised designation would result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Information for this analysis was gathered from the Small Business Administration, stakeholders, and the Service. We have identified two small entities that may be impacted by the proposed revised critical habitat designation. For the above reasons and based on currently available information, we certify that, if promulgated, the proposed revised critical habitat designation would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. Authors The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Region 8, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Species * BIRDS * Plover, western snowy. * * U.S.A. (AZ, CA, CO, KS, NM, NV, OK, OR, TX, UT, WA), Mexico. * WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. * * * * * (b) Birds. * * * * * Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus)—Pacific Coast Population. * * * * * (82) Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica State Beach, Orange County, California. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 * U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA), Mexico (within 50 miles of Pacific coast). 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. In § 17.11(h), revise the entry for ‘‘Plover, western snowy’’ under ‘‘BIRDS’’ in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to read as follows: § 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife. * * Frm 00019 * * (h) * * * Fmt 4702 When listed * Critical habitat Special rules * * 493 * Sfmt 4702 * * * T (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica State Beach, Orange County, California] (ii) Note: Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica Beach, Orange County, California, is depicted on the map in paragraph (87)(ii) of this entry. (83) Subunit CA 46B: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California. (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46B: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California] (ii) Note: Subunit CA 46B: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California, is depicted on the map in paragraph (87)(ii) of this entry. (84) Subunit CA 46C: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California. PO 00000 PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS * * 3. Amend § 17.95(b), in the entry for ‘‘Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus)—Pacific Coast Population’’ by redesignating paragraphs (87) through (108) as paragraphs (88) through (109) and revising paragraphs (82) through (86) and adding a new paragraph (87) to read as set forth below: 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 76 FR 16046, March 22, 2011, as follows: Status * * Charadrius nivosus nivosus. Proposed Regulation Promulgation * Scientific name * Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation. Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened Historic range Common name List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 * 17.95(b) * NA * (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46C: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California] (ii) Note: Subunit CA 46C: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California, is depicted on the map in paragraph (87)(ii) of this entry. (85) Subunit CA 46D: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California. (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46D: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California] (ii) Note: Subunit CA 46D: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California, is depicted on the map in paragraph (87)(ii) of this entry. (86) Subunit CA 46E: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California. E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 depicted on the map in paragraph (87)(ii) of this entry. (87) Subunit CA 46F: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California. (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46F: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California] PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 (ii) Note: Map of Subunits CA 46A– 46F: Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California, follows: BILLING CODE 4310–55–P E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1 EP17JA12.000</GPH> WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS (i) [Reserved for textual description of Subunit CA 46D: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California] (ii) Note: Subunit CA 46E: Bolsa Chica Reserve, Orange County, California, is 2253 2254 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules Fish and Wildlife Service which is FWS–R4–ES–2010–0024. Then, click on the search button. Please ensure that you have found the correct rulemaking before submitting your comment. • U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0024; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. 50 CFR Part 17 Public Informational Session and Public Hearing * * * * * Dated: January 4, 2012. Eileen Sobek, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2012–521 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–C DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0024; 4500030114] RIN 1018–AW89 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Mississippi Gopher Frog Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Revised proposed rule; reopening of comment period and announcement of public hearing. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the reopening of the public comment period on our September 27, 2011, revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog (Rana sevosa) [=Rana capito sevosa] under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are reopening the comment period to announce changes in methodology from the revised proposed rule and to allow all interested parties another opportunity to comment on the revised proposed rule. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted and will be fully considered in preparation of the final rule. We will also hold a public informational session and hearing (see DATES and ADDRESSES sections). SUMMARY: Written Comments: We will consider comments received on or before March 2, 2012. Comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. Public informational session and public hearing: We will hold a public informational session from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m., followed by a public hearing from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., on January 31, 2012, in Gulfport, Mississippi. ADDRESSES: Written Comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. In the box that reads ’’Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the Docket number for this proposed rule, WREIER-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Jan 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 The public informational session and hearing will be held at Gulfport High School (auditorium), 100 Perry Street, Gulfport, Mississippi 39507. People needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and participate in the public hearing should contact Stephen Ricks, Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office, at (601) 321–1122, as soon as possible (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In order to allow sufficient time to process requests, please call no later than one week before the hearing date (see DATES). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Ricks, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office, 6578 Dogwood View Parkway, Jackson, MS 39213; by telephone (601) 321–1122; facsimile (505) 346–2542. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to the revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog in this document. On September 27, 2011, we published a revised proposed rule (76 FR 59774) to designate critical habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog, and announced the availability of the draft economic analysis (DEA) for the revised proposed critical habitat designation. For a description of previous Federal actions concerning the Mississippi gopher frog, please refer to the revised proposed rule. In response to comments we received during the public comment period that opened on September 27, 2011 and closed on November 28, 2011, we have decided to allow the public more time to submit comments and to hold an informational session and public hearing (as described above), and PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 to modify the revised proposed rule as described below. Changes From the Revised Proposed Rule As the starting point for delineating Mississippi gopher frog critical habitat in our revised proposed rule (76 FR 59774), we used the median value of all data available to us on maximum distance movements of gopher frogs between their breeding ponds and upland habitats. However, in that revised proposed rule, we stated we used the mean value instead of the median. Of the two peer reviewers that commented during the comment period that closed on November 28, 2011, on whether the median or the mean of the maximum movement distances is most appropriate to use in the critical habitat delineation, one reviewer preferred the median and the other preferred the mean. Determining the optimum value to use in calculating the amount of habitat necessary for Mississippi gopher frog conservation is difficult, in part because the data were collected from different States, in studies with different objectives, and in habitat of differing quality. The maximum distance gopher frogs moved varied considerably among studies. At the low end of the range is a value of 240 meters (m) (787 feet (ft)) from one Mississippi gopher frog study, and at the upper end of the range is 3,500 m (11,483 ft) for a gopher frog study in North Carolina. At the suggestion of one peer reviewer, we amended our methodology by combining all movement data from different studies conducted at the same site (Richter et al. 2001 and Tupy and Pechmann 2011, combined; Roznik 2007, Roznik and Johnson 2009a, and Roznik et al. 2009, combined) and discarding one field observation (Carr 1940) that did not provide specific data on breeding pond or upland habitat use. Based on the peer review comments we received and our further review of available data, we have determined the maximum movement distance values to be those provided in the table below. We continue to believe that the median, rather than the mean, is a more appropriate value to use in the delineation of critical habitat due to the skewed distribution of the data, and accordingly identified the median of the values in the table. Table 1. Movement of gopher frogs between wetland and upland sites*. Distance data represent the maximum straight line distance between the middle (except where noted) of a breeding pond and upland burrow sites for each gopher frog study. The gopher E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM 17JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2243-2254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-521]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070; MO92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AX10

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat and Taxonomic Revision for the Pacific Coast
Population of the Western Snowy Plover

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the reopening
of the public comment period on the March 22, 2011, proposed revised
designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast population of the
western snowy plover (Pacific Coast WSP) (Charadrius alexandrinus
nivosus) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We
are also recognizing the recent change to the taxonomy of the currently
threatened taxon in which the species was split into two distinct
species. We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis
(DEA) of the proposed revised designation of critical habitat for
Pacific Coast WSP and an amended required determinations section of the
proposal and reopening of the comment period to allow all interested
parties an opportunity to comment simultaneously on the revised
proposed rule, the associated DEA, and the amended required
determinations section. We are also seeking comment on additional
proposed revisions to Unit CA 46 in Orange County, California. Comments
previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of the final rule.

DATES: We will consider comments received on or before February 16,
2012. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070, which
is the docket number for this rulemaking.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see the Public Comments section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor or Jim
Watkins, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521;
telephone (707) 822-7201; facsimile (707) 822-8411. 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

We will accept written comments and information during this
reopened comment period on our proposed revised designation of critical
habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP that was published in the Federal
Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046), our DEA of the proposed
revised designation, and the amended required determinations provided
in this document. We will consider information and recommendations from
all interested parties. We are particularly interested in comments
concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not revise the designation
of ``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), including whether there are threats to the species from human
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit
of designation such that the designation of critical habitat is not
prudent.
(2) Specific information on:
(a) Areas that provide habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP that we
did not discuss in the proposed revised critical habitat rule, and
(b) Areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at
the time of listing that contain elements of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species which may require
special management considerations or protection and that we should
include in the designation, and reason(s) why.
(3) Specific information on our proposed revised designation of
back-dune systems and other habitats in an attempt to offset the
anticipated effects of sea-level rise associated with climate change.
(4) Specific information on the Pacific Coast WSP, habitat
conditions, and the presence of physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species at any of the critical
habitat units proposed in this revised rule (see Critical Habitat Units
section and previous rules (64 FR 68508, December 7, 1999; 70 FR 56970,
September 29, 2005; 76 FR 16046, March 22, 2011)).
(5) How the proposed revised critical habitat boundaries could be
refined to more closely circumscribe the areas

[[Page 2244]]

identified as containing the features essential to the species'
conservation or how we mapped the water's edge and whether any
alternative methods could be used to better determine the critical
habitat boundaries.
(6) Any foreseeable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts that may result from designating any area that may be included
in the final designation. We are particularly interested in any impacts
on small entities, and the benefits of including or excluding areas
from the proposed revised designation that are subject to these
impacts.
(7) Any information regarding the areas exempted from the proposed
revised rule or whether any specific areas being proposed as revised
critical habitat should be excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act,
and whether the benefits of potentially excluding any particular area
outweigh the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act, including Tribal lands, within the proposed revised
designation.
(8) Information on any quantifiable economic costs or benefits of
the proposed revised designation of critical habitat.
(9) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed revised critical
habitat.
(10) Whether our approach to designating critical habitat could be
improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public
participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating
public concerns and comments.
(11) Information on the extent to which the description of economic
impacts in the DEA is complete and accurate.
(12) The likelihood of adverse social reactions to the designation
of critical habitat, as discussed in the DEA, and how the consequences
of such reactions, if likely to occur, would relate to the conservation
and regulatory benefits of the proposed revised critical habitat
designation.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rule (76
FR 16046) during the initial comment period from March 22, 2011, to May
23, 2011, please do not resubmit them. We have incorporated them into
the public record, and we will fully consider them in the preparation
of our final determination. Our final determination concerning revised
critical habitat will take into consideration all written comments and
any additional information we receive during both comment periods. On
the basis of public comments, 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 materials concerning the proposed
rule or DEA by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We
request that you send comments only by the methods described in the
ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment--including any personal identifying information--will be posted
on the Web site. We will post all hardcopy comments on https://www.regulations.gov as well. If you submit a hardcopy comment that
includes personal identifying information, 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.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing the proposed rule and DEA, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070, or by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain copies of
the proposed rule and the DEA on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070, or by mail from
the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section).

Background

It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the taxonomic name change and designation of critical habitat for
Pacific Coast WSP in this document. For more background information
concerning the Pacific Coast WSP, refer to the proposed revised
designation of critical habitat published in the Federal Register on
March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046). For more information on the Pacific Coast
WSP or its habitat, refer to the final listing rule published in the
Federal Register on March 5, 1993 (58 FR 12864), which is available
online at https://www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number FWS-R8-ES-2010-
0070) or the Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast WSP (Service 2007),
which is online at https://ecos.fws.gov or from the Arcata Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Previous Federal Actions

On March 22, 2011, we published a proposed rule to revise the
designation of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP (76 FR
16046). We proposed to designate approximately 28,261 acres (ac)
(11,436 hectares (ha)) in 68 units located in Washington, Oregon, and
California as critical habitat. That proposal opened a 60-day comment
period, ending May 23, 2011. In this document we are proposing to
revise the boundaries to Unit CA 46 based on new information (see
Changes to Proposed Revised Critical Habitat below). We will submit for
publication in the Federal Register a final critical habitat
designation for the Pacific Coast WSP on or before June 12, 2012.

Taxonomic and Nomenclatural Changes Affecting Charadrius alexandrinus
nivosus

We are making a technical correction to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h) to reflect our acceptance of a
taxonomic and nomenclatural change of western snowy plover to
Charadrius nivosus nivosus from C. alexandrinus nivosus. We listed the
Pacific Coast WSP as threatened under the then-recognized name of
Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (58 FR 12864; March 5, 1993), which is
a subspecies of the Eurasian Kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus
(Linnaeus 1758)). We accepted this taxonomy and have used this name in
all Service documents up to and including our proposed revision to the
critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP (76 FR 16046; March 22,
2011).
In 2009, Clemens K[uuml]pper (Department of Biology and
Biochemistry, University of Bath, Bath, UK); Tam[aacute]s
Sz[eacute]kely (Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of
Bath, Bath, UK); and Terry Burke (Department of Animal and Plant
Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK), submitted a proposal
to the American Ornithologist's Union (AOU)--the recognized body on
ornithological naming and scientific nomenclature (AOU 2010A, pp. 145-
146). The proposal presented information to split the Kentish plover
from the snowy plover and adopt Kentish plover for Palaearctic
populations (zoogeographical region consisting of Europe, Africa north
of the Sahara, and most of Asia north of the Himalayas) and change the
scientific name of the snowy plover in Central and North America to
Charadrius nivosus (Cassin 1858) with three subspecies: C. nivosus
nivosus (currently C. alexandrinus

[[Page 2245]]

nivosus) (range to include all of the continental United States and
portions of Mexico), C. nivosus tenuirostris (currently C. alexandrinus
nivosus) (range to include Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and the
Yucatan Peninsula) and C. nivosus occidentalis (currently C.
alexandrinus occidentalis) (range to include South America). The
proposal cited genetic, morphological, and behavioral differences
between C. alexandrinus and C. nivosus (Funk et al. 2007; K[uuml]pper
et al. 2009). The proposal was adopted by the AOU (AOU 2010B, pp. 1-5;
Chesser et al. 2011, pp. 603-604). We are within this proposed rule
accepting the taxonomic change for the Pacific Coast WSP and recognize
the listed entity as C. nivosus nivosus and will make changes to the
Code of Federal Regulations in the final designation (see Proposed
Regulation Promulgation section). We also make the necessary changes to
the historical range of C. nivosus nivosus at 50 CFR 17.11(h) to
include the entire continental United States. These technical
corrections do not affect the description, distribution, or listing
status of the Pacific Coast WSP. However, the complete range of C.
nivosus nivosus now includes the Florida occurrences of the subspecies.

Critical Habitat

Section 3 of the Act defines critical habitat 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 by the Secretary that such
areas are essential for the conservation of the species. If the
proposed revised rule 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 funding, authorizing, permitting, or proposing actions
affecting critical habitat must consult with us on the effects of their
actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act.

Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that the Secretary shall
designate and revise critical habitat based upon the best scientific
data available, after taking into consideration the economic impact,
the impact on national security, and any other relevant impact of
specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary of
the Interior may exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines
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.
When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the
protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of
actions with a Federal nexus (activities conducted, funded, permitted,
or authorized by Federal agencies), the educational benefits of mapping
areas containing essential features that aid in the recovery of the
listed species, and any benefits that may result from designation due
to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat.
When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among
other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result
in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of
partnerships; or implementation of a management plan. In the case of
the Pacific Coast WSP, the benefits of critical habitat include public
awareness of the presence of the Pacific Coast WSP and the importance
of habitat protection, and, where a Federal nexus exists, increased
habitat protection for Pacific Coast WSP due to protection from adverse
modification or destruction of critical habitat. In practice,
situations with a Federal nexus exist primarily on Federal lands or for
projects undertaken, authorized, or otherwise permitted by Federal
agencies.
The final decision on whether to exclude any areas will be based on
the best scientific and commercial data available at the time of the
final designation, including information obtained during the comment
period and information about the economic impact of designation.
Accordingly, we have prepared a DEA concerning the proposed revised
critical habitat designation, which is available for review and comment
(see ADDRESSES section).

Draft Economic Analysis

The purpose of the DEA is to identify and analyze the potential
economic impacts associated with the proposed revised critical habitat
designation for the Pacific Coast WSP. The DEA separates conservation
measures into two distinct categories according to ``without critical
habitat'' and ``with critical habitat'' scenarios. The ``without
critical habitat'' scenario represents the baseline for the analysis,
considering protections otherwise afforded to the Pacific Coast WSP
(e.g., under the Federal listing and other Federal, State, and local
regulations). The ``with critical habitat'' scenario describes the
incremental impacts specifically due to designation of critical habitat
for the species. In other words, these incremental conservation
measures and associated economic impacts would not occur but for the
designation. Conservation measures implemented under the baseline
(without critical habitat) scenario are described qualitatively within
the DEA, but economic impacts associated with these measures are not
quantified. Economic impacts are only quantified for conservation
measures implemented specifically due to the designation of critical
habitat (i.e., incremental impacts). In other words, the incremental
costs are those attributable solely to the designation of critical
habitat, above and beyond the baseline costs; these are the costs we
may consider in the final designation of critical habitat when weighing
the benefits of inclusion and exclusion of particular areas under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. For a further description of the
methodology of the analysis, see Chapter 2, ``Framework for the
Analysis,'' of the DEA (Industrial Economics Incorporated (IEc) 2011).
The DEA evaluates the potential economic impacts associated with
the proposed revised designation of critical habitat for the Pacific
Coast WSP. The analysis focuses on reasonably foreseeable incremental
impacts of the critical habitat designation, or those impacts not
expected to occur absent critical habitat designation. Forecasted
impacts are based on the planning periods for potentially affected
projects and look out over a 20-year time horizon (through 2031). The
DEA considers economic impacts of Pacific Coast WSP conservation
efforts on the following activities: (1) Recreation; (2) development;
(3) gravel mining; (4) military activities; and (5) habitat and species
management.
Due to strong existing protections (include symbolic fencing, nest
exclosures, signage, driving restrictions, and mechanized beach
cleaning restrictions) for the Pacific Coast WSP, the direct
incremental impacts quantified in the DEA are limited to the
administrative cost of considering adverse modification during section
7 consultation with the Service as well as the additional effort
necessary to include analysis of critical habitat in three future
Habitat Conservation Plans

[[Page 2246]]

and one Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) for
Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB). These incremental impacts of the
proposed revised critical habitat designation over the 20-year
timeframe (2012 through 2031) are estimated to be $261,000 ($24,700 on
an annualized basis), assuming a seven percent discount rate. Impacts
to military activities represent the greatest percentage of these
overall cost estimates--approximately 72 percent. Impacts to
development activities represent approximately 17 percent, habitat and
species management 6 percent, and mining 4 percent of the overall
impacts (percentages do not sum due to rounding). Incremental impacts
to recreational activities are not expected due to lack of a Federal
nexus compelling section 7 consultation with the Service and
significant protection already provided by existing regulations and
programs (IEc 2011, pp. 4-9-4-12).
The analysis also identifies three activities that may experience
indirect incremental impacts of the proposed revised critical habitat
designation: Recreation at Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area
(SVRA) (Unit CA 31), development of the Sterling/McDonald site (Unit CA
22), and development of the Security National Guaranty (SNG) site (Unit
CA 22). Indirect impacts resulting from future litigation or increased
scrutiny from State agencies may include prohibiting off-highway-
vehicle use at Oceano Dunes SVRA and denial of development permits for
the Sterling/McDonald and SNG sites. Due to uncertainty surrounding the
likelihood and extent of such indirect impacts, the data necessary to
quantify these impacts are unavailable. Therefore, these indirect
incremental impacts are discussed qualitatively in the DEA (IEc 2011,
p. 4-2).
Vandenberg Air Force Base INRMP
In the March 22, 2011, proposed revised designation of critical
habitat (76 FR 16046), we did not consider Vandenberg Air Force Base
for exemption under section 4(a)(3) of the Act because they had not yet
completed a Service-approved INRMP. On April 14, 2011, VAFB completed
and we approved the INRMP for VAFB as part of the requirements of the
Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) (for a
full discussion of the Sikes Act, see the Exemptions section of the
March 22, 2011, proposed revision to critical habitat (76 FR 16046)).
The VAFB INRMP provides for the conservation, management, and
stewardship of the natural resources found on the base. The INRMP
includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Because the INRMP was not finalized and approved prior to the March
22, 2011, proposed revised critical habitat designation for the Pacific
Coast WSP (76 FR 16046), we did not exempt these areas prior to their
proposal. We will review the INRMP and will determine in our final
designation of critical habitat if the plan provides a benefit to the
Pacific Coast WSP in those areas covered by the INRMP that we had
determined to be essential to and for the conservation of the Pacific
Coast WSP. If it does, we will exempt those areas covered by the INRMP
from the final designation under the requirements of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) and
section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act.
As we stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the
public on the DEA, as well as all aspects of the proposed revised
designation, the changes contained in this NOA, and our amended
required determinations. We may revise the proposed revised designation
or supporting documents to incorporate or address information we
receive during the public 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,
provided the exclusion will not result in the extinction of this
species.

Changes to Proposed Revised Critical Habitat

In this document, we are making revisions to the proposed revised
critical habitat as identified and described in the proposed rule that
we published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046)
and are seeking comment on the revisions. The changes occur in what was
proposed as subunits CA 46A-D (Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve) and
subunit CA 46E (Bolsa Chica State Beach) of Unit CA 46. We are also
adding one subunit (subunit CA 46F) to Unit CA 46. During the public
comment period for the March 22, 2011, proposed revised critical
habitat (76 FR 16046), we received comments from a species expert
indicating that we should reevaluate the proposed boundaries at the
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve because certain areas included in Unit
CA 46 are not utilized for nesting or foraging by the Pacific Coast
WSP, whereas other areas that were not included in proposed revised
critical habitat within Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve are used for
nesting and foraging (P. Knapp, pers. comm. 2011).
We also received comments and new information from California State
Parks and a species expert indicating that we should reevaluate the
proposed boundaries of subunit CA 46E at Bolsa Chica State Beach
because the area no longer contains the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, and is no longer being
used for wintering by the Pacific Coast WSP and has not been used in
the last 4 years (D. Prior, California State Parks, pers. comm. 2011;
P. Knapp, pers. comm. 2011). The information provided indicated that
areas north of the proposal in subunit CA 46E at Bolsa Chica State
Beach are being used by the Pacific Coast WSP as a wintering habitat
and that we should reevaluate the proposed boundaries of beach areas in
Unit CA 46 (Prior, pers. comm. 2011; Knapp, pers. comm. 2011). We have
reviewed the new information and have determined it appropriate to
adjust our proposed revised designation of Unit CA 46.
The purpose of the revisions described below is to better delineate
the areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for the Pacific
Coast WSP and to ensure that all areas proposed are consistent with the
criteria outlined in the proposed revised rule (see ``Criteria Used To
Identify Critical Habitat'' section in the proposed revised critical
habitat designation (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011)). The areas added to
the proposed unit are within the geographical area that was occupied by
the species at the time it was listed and contain the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species. A
revised map is included in the Proposed Regulation Promulgation section
of this document. Below, we briefly describe the changes made to Unit
CA 46. As a result of these revisions, the naming convention for the
subunits CA 46A-E will change and an additional subunit (CA 46F) will
be added. Also as a result of these revisions, the total area proposed
for designation as critical habitat in Unit CA 46 is 568 ac (230 ha),
an increase of 50 ac (20 ha). The change increases the total amount of
proposed revised critical habitat to 30,497 ac (12,342 ha) (see Table 3
below).

[[Page 2247]]

Changes to Critical Habitat Unit Descriptions

Unit CA 46: Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve
Through this notice, we propose to exchange the naming conventions
between subunits CA 46A and 46E so that the Bolsa Chica State Beach
will now be part of subunit CA 46A and the Bolsa Chica Ecological
Reserve will include subunits CA 46B-F. As revised here, the subunits
in Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve are
located east of the Pacific Coast Highway, in Orange County,
California. As a result of this revision, the total area proposed for
designation as critical habitat at Bolsa Chica State Beach (now
designated as subunit CA 46A) is 93 ac (38 ha); and the total area for
the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve subunits (now designated as subunits
CA 46B-46F) is 475 ac (192 ha). These subunits are entirely owned by
the State of California.
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve contains significant nesting and
foraging areas. This location supported 47 breeding adult Pacific Coast
WSP in 2009 (Knapp and Peterson 2009, p. 8). All subunits at Bolsa
Chica Ecological Reserve were occupied at the time of listing and are
currently occupied and annually support one of the largest breeding
populations of Pacific Coast WSP in the region. The Recovery Plan for
Pacific Coast WSP states that this location contributes to the
conservation goal for the region by providing a management potential of
70 breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix B). This location also
supported an average wintering flock of 14 Pacific Coast WSP from 2003
through 2010 (Service unpublished data). In the proposed revised rule,
we incorrectly stated that this reserve is an abandoned oil field. This
reserve is in fact an active oil field that underwent significant
reconstruction and restoration between 2004 and 2006, including the
addition of three new nest sites and a new ocean inlet that allows the
water level to rise and fall resembling the irregular semi-diurnal
tidal range of southern California's ocean waters (Knapp and Peterson
2009, p. 1). Including these occupied areas for breeding, foraging, and
dispersal is consistent with our criteria used to identify critical
habitat, as outlined in the proposed rule (76 FR 16046; March 22,
2011). No changes were made to subunits CA 46B or CA 46D. Please see
the proposed revised critical habitat for a description of these
subunits (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011).
Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica State Beach
Through this notice, the proposed revised designation's subunit CA
46E is renamed as subunit CA 46A. After further analysis and review of
comments received on the proposed revised designation, we have adjusted
the boundary of the 8 ac (3 ha) of beach that was included in the
proposed rule because the area no longer contains the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and
has not supported Pacific Coast WSP for the past 4 years (Prior, pers.
comm. 2011). The subunit as revised here consists of sandy beach
habitat north of the critical habitat unit proposed in March 2011, and
extends to just south of the Sunset Beach area near Warner Avenue
adjacent to the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. As a result of the
revision reflected here, the area proposed for designation as critical
habitat in subunit CA 46A is 93 ac (38 ha), an increase of 85 ac (35
ha) from what was proposed for Bolsa Chica State Beach in the proposed
revised designation. This subunit is owned entirely by the State of
California. The revised subunit CA 46A was occupied at the time of
listing and is currently occupied and contains the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of the
species, including a wide sandy beach with occasional surf-cast wrack
supporting small invertebrates for foraging, and because it supports an
average wintering flock of 27 Pacific Coast WSP (Service unpublished
data 2003-2010) in a location with high-quality breeding habitat.
Subunit CA 46A may require special management considerations or
protection to address threats from recreational disturbance and beach
raking as discussed for this subunit in the March 2011 proposed revised
rule. Additionally, adding occupied areas for wintering, foraging, and
dispersal is consistent with our criteria used to identify critical
habitat, as outlined in the proposed revised rule (76 FR 16046; March
22, 2011).
Unit CA46: Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve; Subunits CA 46C, 46E, 46F
Subunit CA 46C
We revised subunit CA 46C to include additional areas containing
the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
the species for breeding, foraging, and dispersal that were not
captured in the proposed revised rule. This addition is based on
information received during the public comment period that indicates
that these areas include year-round foraging habitat in extensive
mudflats and additional nesting areas for Pacific Coast WSP to expand
into. This unit was occupied at the time of listing. This location
contains the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, including tidally influenced estuarine mud
flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds that
provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast WSP. As a result
of this revision, the area proposed for designation as critical habitat
in subunit CA 46C is 222 ac (90 ha), an increase of 201 ac (81 ha) from
the proposed rule. This location contains tidally influenced estuarine
mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds and
nesting islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific
Coast WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
vegetation encroachment in nesting and foraging areas and predation of
chicks and eggs.
Subunit CA 46E
Here, we rename the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve areas that were
proposed as subunit CA 46A in the proposed revised rule to subunit CA
46E and remove the areas that do not contain the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species. This area was
occupied at the time of listing. This revised subunit CA 46E is reduced
in size to more accurately represent the nesting and foraging areas
used by Pacific Coast WSP. We removed almost all of the Muted Tidal
Basin area from subunit 46E because this area does not contain the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
Pacific Coast WSP. We have adjusted the boundary in the Future Full
Tidal Basin to represent areas used for nesting and foraging. As a
result of this revision, the area proposed for designation as critical
habitat in subunit CA 46E is 247 ac (100 ha), a decrease of 237 ac (96
ha) from what was proposed as subunit CA 46A in the proposed rule. This
revised location contains tidally influenced estuarine mud flats
supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry ponds and nesting
islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast
WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the conservation
of the species in this subunit may require special management
considerations or protection to address threats from vegetation
encroachment in nesting and

[[Page 2248]]

foraging areas and predation of chicks and eggs.
Subunit 46F
We add one subunit (CA 46F) to represent the single nesting and
foraging area utilized by Pacific Coast WSP in the Muted Tidal Basin
(Nest Site 2). This area was occupied at the time of listing and
contains the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. This location contains tidally influenced
estuarine mud flats supporting small invertebrates, and seasonally dry
ponds and nesting islands that provide nesting and foraging habitat for
Pacific Coast WSP. The physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
vegetation encroachment in nesting and foraging areas and predation of
chicks and eggs. As a result of this addition, the area proposed for
designation as critical habitat in subunit CA 46F is 2 ac (1 ha).
In addition to the unit changes outlined above, we are also
correcting land ownership acreage numbers identified in Table 3 of the
March 22, 2011, proposed revised rule (76 FR 16046). The corrected
Table 3 with changes to Unit CA-46 is below. Also, in the proposed
revised rule we incorrectly stated that no Department of Defense lands
were within the proposed revised designation. Approximately 1,084 ac
(439 ha) have been identified on VAFB in units CA-32 and CA-33. On
April 14, 2011, we approved the INRMP for VAFB and have determined that
the plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat
is proposed for designation. We have now reviewed and approved the VAFB
INRMP and will recommend that the Secretary exempt the areas determined
to be essential to and for the conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP
from the final designation under the requirements of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) and
section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act.

Table 3--Proposed Revised Critical Habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP Showing Federal, State, Tribal, and Other (Private and Local Government) Land
Ownership
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Tribal State Other
Unit number Unit name -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha ac ha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington:
WA 1............................. Copalis Spit........... 407 165 0 0 0 0 407 165 0 0
WA 2............................. Damon Point............ 673 272 0 0 0 0 648 262 25 10
WA 3A............................ Midway Beach........... 697 282 0 0 0 0 697 282 0 0
WA 3B *.......................... Shoalwater/Graveyard... 1,121 454 0 0 336 136 505 204 280 113
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit WA-3 Totals............. ....................... 1,818 736 0 0 336 136 1,202 486 280 113
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WA 4A............................ Leadbetter Spit........ 2,463 997 2,026 820 0 0 437 177 0 0
WA 4B............................ Gunpowder Sands Island. 904 366 904 366 0 0 0 0 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit WA-4 Totals............. ....................... 3,367 1,363 2,930 1,186 0 0 437 177 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON STATE TOTALS.. ....................... 6,265 2,535 2,930 1,186 336 136 2,694 1,090 305 123
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon:
OR 1............................. Columbia River Spit.... 169 68 169 68 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 2............................. Necanicum River Spit... 211 85 0 0 0 0 161 65 50 20
OR 3............................. Nehalem River Spit..... 299 121 0 0 0 0 299 121 0 0
OR 4............................. Bayocean Spit.......... 367 149 279 113 0 0 0 0 88 36
OR 5............................. Netarts Spit........... 541 219 0 0 0 0 541 219 0 0
OR 6............................. Sand Lake South........ 200 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 81
OR 7............................. Sutton/Baker Beaches... 372 151 372 151 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 8A............................ Siltcoos Breach........ 15 6 15 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 8B............................ Siltcoos River Spit.... 241 98 241 98 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 8C............................ Dunes Overlook 716 290 716 290 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tahkenitch Creek Spit.
OR 8D............................ North Umpqua River Spit 236 96 151 61 0 0 85 34 0 0
Unit OR-8 Totals............. ....................... 1,208 489 1,123 454 0 0 85 34 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OR 9............................. Tenmile Creek Spit..... 244 99 244 99 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 10............................ Coos Bay North Spit.... 308 125 308 125 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR 11............................ Bandon to New River.... 1,016 411 459 186 0 0 267 108 290 117
OR 12 *.......................... Elk River Spit......... 167 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 68
OR 13............................ Euchre Creek........... 116 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 47
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OREGON STATE TOTALS...... ....................... 5,218 2,112 2,954 1,195 0 0 1,353 548 911 369
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California:
CA 1............................. Lake Earl.............. 74 30 0 0 0 0 22 9 52 21
CA 2............................. Gold Bluffs Beach...... 235 95 0 0 0 0 235 95 0 0
CA 3A............................ Humboldt Lagoons--Stone 55 22 0 0 0 0 55 22 0 0
Lagoon.
CA 3B............................ Humboldt Lagoons--Big 271 110 0 0 0 0 270 109 <1 <1
Lagoon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-3 Totals............. ....................... 326 132 0 0 0 0 325 132 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 4A............................ Clam Beach/Little River 340 138 0 0 0 0 226 91 114 46
CA 4B............................ Mad River.............. 456 185 0 0 0 0 149 60 307 124
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-4 Totals............. ....................... 796 322 0 0 0 0 375 152 421 170
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2249]]

CA 5A............................ Humboldt Bay South Spit 577 234 20 8 0 0 541 219 16 6
CA 5B............................ Eel River North Spit/ 467 189 0 0 0 0 460 186 7 3
Beach.
CA 5C............................ Eel River South Spit/ 340 138 0 0 0 0 176 71 164 66
Beach.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-5 Totals............. ....................... 1,384 560 20 8 0 0 1,177 476 187 76
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 6............................. Eel River Gravel Bars.. 2,699 1,092 0 0 0 0 591 239 2,108 853
CA 7............................. MacKerricher Beach..... 1,176 476 0 0 0 0 1,102 446 74 30
CA 8............................. Manchester Beach....... 482 195 68 28 0 0 402 163 12 5
CA 9............................. Dillon Beach........... 39 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 16
CA 10A........................... Pt Reyes............... 460 186 460 186 0 0 0 0 0 0
CA 10B........................... Limantour.............. 156 63 156 63 0 0 0 0 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-10 Totals............ ....................... 616 249 616 249 0 0 0 0 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 11............................ Napa................... 618 250 0 0 0 0 618 250 0 0
CA 12............................ Hayward................ 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
CA 13A........................... Eden Landing........... 237 96 0 0 0 0 228 92 8 3
CA 13B........................... Eden Landing........... 171 69 0 0 0 0 171 69 0 0
CA 13C........................... Eden Landing........... 609 246 0 0 0 0 602 244 7 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-13 Totals............ ....................... 1,017 412 0 0 0 0 1,001 405 15 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 14............................ Ravenswood............. 89 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 36
CA 15............................ Warm Springs........... 169 68 169 68 0 0 0 0 0 0
CA 16............................ Half Moon Bay.......... 36 15 0 0 0 0 36 15 0 0
CA 17............................ Waddell Creek Beach.... 25 10 0 0 0 0 19 8 7 3
CA 18............................ Scott Creek Beach...... 23 9 0 0 0 0 15 6 8 3
CA 19............................ Wilder Creek Beach..... 15 6 0 0 0 0 15 6 0 0
CA 20............................ Jetty Road to Aptos.... 400 162 0 0 0 0 370 150 30 12
CA 21............................ Elkhorn Slough Mudflats 281 114 0 0 0 0 281 114 0 0
CA 22............................ Monterey to Moss 971 393 424 172 0 0 286 116 261 106
Landing.
CA 23............................ Point Sur Beach........ 72 29 0 0 0 0 38 15 34 14
CA 24............................ San Carpoforo Creek.... 24 10 4 2 0 0 18 7 3 1
CA 25............................ Arroyo Laguna Creek.... 28 11 0 0 0 0 18 7 10 4
CA 26............................ San Simeon State Beach. 24 10 0 0 0 0 24 10 0 0
CA 27............................ Villa Creek Beach...... 20 8 0 0 0 0 20 8 0 0
CA 28............................ Toro Creek............. 34 14 0 0 0 0 11 4 23 9
CA 29............................ Atascadero Beach/Morro 214 87 0 0 0 0 65 26 149 60
Strand SB.
CA 30............................ Morro Bay Beach........ 1,078 436 0 0 0 0 949 384 129 52
CA 31............................ Pismo Beach/Nipomo 1,655 670 242 98 0 0 553 224 860 348
Dunes.
CA 32............................ Vandenberg North....... 711 288 711 288 0 0 0 0 0 0
CA 33............................ Vandenberg South....... 424 172 374 151 0 0 0 0 50 20
CA 34............................ Devereaux Beach........ 52 21 0 0 0 0 43 17 9 4
CA 35............................ Santa Barbara Beaches.. 65 26 0 0 0 0 30 12 35 14
CA 36............................ Santa Rosa Island 586 237 586 237 0 0 0 0 0 0
Beaches.
CA 37............................ San Buenaventura Beach. 69 28 0 0 0 0 69 28 0 0
CA 38............................ Mandalay to Santa Clara 671 272 0 0 0 0 458 185 213 86
River.
CA 39............................ Ormond Beach........... 319 129 0 0 0 0 159 64 160 65
CA 43............................ Zuma Beach............. 73 30 0 0 0 0 1 0 72 29
CA 44............................ Malibu Beach........... 13 5 0 0 0 0 13 5 0 0
CA 45A........................... Santa Monica Beach..... 48 19 0 0 0 0 29 12 19 8
CA 45B........................... Dockweiler North....... 34 14 0 0 0 0 34 14 0 0
CA 45C........................... Dockweiler South....... 65 26 0 0 0 0 54 22 11 4
CA 45D........................... Hermosa State Beach.... 27 11 0 0 0 0 8 3 19 8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-45 Totals............ ....................... 174 70 0 0 0 0 125 51 49 20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 46A........................... Bolsa Chica State Beach 93 38 0 0 0 0 93 38 0 0
CA 46B........................... Bolsa Chica Reserve.... 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0
CA 46C........................... Bolsa Chica Reserve.... 222 90 0 0 0 0 222 90 0 0
CA 46D........................... Bolsa Chica Reserve.... 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0
CA 46E........................... Bolsa Chica Reserve.... 247 100 0 0 0 0 247 100 0 0
CA 46F........................... Bolsa Chica Reserve.... 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-46 Totals............ ....................... 568 230 0 0 0 0 568 230 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 47............................ Santa Ana River Mouth.. 19 8 0 0 0 0 18 7 1 0
CA 48............................ Balboa Beach........... 25 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 10
CA 50A........................... Batiquitos Lagoon...... 24 10 0 0 0 0 18 7 6 2
CA 50B........................... Batiquitos Lagoon...... 23 9 0 0 0 0 15 6 8 3
CA 50C........................... Batiquitos Lagoon...... 19 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-50 Totals............ ....................... 66 27 0 0 0 0 33 13 33 13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 51A........................... San Elijo Lagoon 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0
Ecological Reserve.
CA 51B........................... San Elijo Lagoon 5 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 2
Ecological Reserve.

[[Page 2250]]

CA 51C........................... San Elijo Lagoon 7 3 0 0 0 0 7 3 0 0
Ecological Reserve.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-51 Totals............ ....................... 15 6 0 0 0 0 11 4 4 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 52A........................... San Dieguito Lagoon.... 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2
CA 52B........................... San Dieguito Lagoon.... 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1
CA 52C........................... San Dieguito Lagoon.... 4 2 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-52 Totals............ ....................... 11 4 0 0 0 0 4 2 7 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 53............................ Los Penasquitos Lagoon. 32 13 0 0 0 0 32 13 1 0
CA 54A........................... Fiesta Island.......... 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
CA 54B........................... Mariner's Point........ 7 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 2
CA 54C........................... South Mission Beach.... 38 15 0 0 0 0 8 3 30 12
CA 54D........................... San Diego River Channel 51 21 0 0 0 0 38 15 13 5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-54 Totals............ ....................... 98 40 0 0 0 0 48 19 50 20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA 55B........................... Coronado Beach......... 74 30 0 0 0 0 74 30 0 0
CA 55E........................... Sweetwater Marsh 132 53 77 31 0 0 1 0 54 22
National Wildlife
Refuge and D Street
Fill.
CA 55F........................... Silver Strand State 82 33 74 30 0 0 8 3 0 0
Beach.
CA 55G........................... Chula Vista Wildlife 10 4 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 0
Reserve.
CA 55I........................... San Diego National 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2
Wildlife Refuge, South
Bay Unit.
CA 55J........................... Tijuana Estuary and 150 61 71 29 0 0 58 23 21 8
Beach.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit CA-55 Totals (does not ....................... 453 183 222 90 0 0 151 61 80 32
include exempt sub-units).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALIFORNIA TOTALS........ ....................... 19,014 7,695 3,436 1,390 0 0 10,279 4,160 5,301 2,145
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON, OREGON, ....................... 30,497 12,342 9,320 3,772 336 136 14,326 5,798 6,517 2,637
CALIFORNIA GRAND TOTALS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

Required Determinations--Amended

In our March 22, 2011, proposed rule (76 FR 16046), 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 became available in the DEA. We have now
made use of the DEA data to make these determinations. In this
document, we affirm the information in our proposed revised rule
concerning Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), E.O. 12630 (Takings), E.O. 13132 (Federalism), E.O. 12988
(Civil Justice Reform), E.O. 13211 (Energy, Supply, Distribution, and
Use), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the President's
memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government Relations with
Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951). However, based on
the DEA data, we are amending our required determination concerning the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

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 of
1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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 regulato

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.