Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Revised Critical Habitat for the Allium munzii, 55788-55793 [2012-22033]
Download as PDF
55788
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
publish a Notice of Proposed Flood
Hazard Determinations in the Federal
Register and a notice in the affected
community’s local newspaper following
issuance of a revised preliminary Flood
Insurance Rate Map and Flood
Insurance Study report.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.
Dated: September 3, 2012.
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Associate Administrator for
Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012–22301 Filed 9–10–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2012–0008;
45000030114]
RIN 1018–AX42
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Revised
Critical Habitat for the Allium munzii
(Munz’s onion) and Atriplex coronata
var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley
Crownscale)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction and
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the public comment period
on the April 17, 2012, proposed revised
designations of critical habitat for
Allium munzii (Munz’s onion) and
Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San
Jacinto Valley crownscale) under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). We also announce the
availability of a draft economic analysis
(DEA) of the proposed designations of
critical habitat for A. munzii and A. c.
var. notatior and an amended required
determinations section of the proposal.
We are reopening the comment period
to allow all interested parties an
opportunity to comment simultaneously
on the proposed revised designations,
the associated DEA, and the amended
required determinations section.
Finally, we correct some errors
regarding the elevations of habitat
necessary for conservation of A. munzii.
Comments previously submitted need
not be resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of the final
rule.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
We will consider all comments
received or postmarked on or before
October 11, 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: Document availability: You
may obtain copies of the proposed rule
and the draft economic analysis at the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2012–0008 or by mail
from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section).
Comment submission: 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 FWS–R8–
ES–2012–0008, 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–2012–0008; 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: Jim
Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley
Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011, by
telephone 760–431–9440, or by
facsimile 760–431–9624. Persons who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Public Comments
We will accept written comments and
information during this reopened
comment period on our proposed
revised designations of critical habitat
for Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata
var. notatior that was published in the
Federal Register on April 17, 2012 (77
FR 23008), our changes to the primary
constituent elements section of the
proposed rule, our DEA of the proposed
designations, and the amended required
determinations provided in this
document. We will consider
information and recommendations from
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
all interested parties. We are
particularly interested in comments
concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or
should not designate habitat as ‘‘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) The distribution of Allium munzii
and Atriplex coronata var. notatior;
(b) The amount and distribution of
Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata
var. notatior habitat; and
(c) What areas within the geographical
area occupied by the taxa at the time of
listing that contain physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the taxa we should
include in the designation and why; and
(d) What areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the taxa
at the time of listing are essential for the
conservation of the taxa and why.
(3) Land use designations and current
or planned activities in the subject areas
and their possible impacts on proposed
critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and
reasonably likely impacts of climate
change on Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior and proposed
critical habitat.
(5) Any foreseeable economic,
national security, or other relevant
impacts that may result from including
any particular area in the final
designations. We are particularly
interested in any impacts on small
entities, and the benefits of including or
excluding areas from the proposed
designations that are subject to these
impacts.
(6) Which specific lands covered by
the Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(Western Riverside County MSHCP) or
other permitted HCPs and proposed for
designation as critical habitat should be
considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and, for those specific
areas, how benefits of exclusion from
the critical habitat designations would
outweigh the benefits of inclusion in the
designations. We are currently
considering excluding, under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, all lands covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
or other permitted HCPs and
Cooperative Agreements as described in
the proposed rule (see Exclusions Based
on Other Relevant Impacts in the
proposed designations of critical habitat
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
published in the Federal Register on
April 17, 2012 (77 FR 23008)).
(7) 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 better
accommodate public concerns and
comments.
(8) Information on the extent to which
the description of economic impacts in
the DEA is complete and accurate.
(9) 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 critical habitat
designations.
If you submitted comments or
information on the proposed rule (77 FR
23008) during the initial comment
period from April 17, 2012, to June 18,
2012, 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 do not meet the
definition of critical habitat, 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–2012–
0008, or by appointment, during normal
business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
This is a notice of availability
announcing the reopening of the public
comment period on the April 17, 2012,
proposed revised designations of critical
habitat for Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior and the
availability of a DEA of the proposed
designations of critical habitat for A.
munzii and A. c. var. notatior.
Allium munzii
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
designation of critical habitat for Allium
munzii in this document. For more
information on previous Federal actions
concerning A. munzii, refer to the
following documents that published in
the Federal Register:
• Proposed designation of critical
habitat (77 FR 23008; April 17, 2012);
• Proposed listing rule (59 FR 64812;
December 15, 1994);
• Final listing rule (63 FR 54975;
October 13, 1998);
• The first proposed designation of
critical habitat (69 FR 31569; June 4,
2004); and
• The subsequent final critical habitat
rule (70 FR 33015; June 7, 2005).
These documents and the 5-year
review for A. munzii, signed on June 17,
2009, are available on our Web site at
https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/, on the
ECOS Web site for Munz’s onion at
https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/
profile/speciesProfile.action?
spcode=Q2X0, or from the Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions—Allium
munzii
Please see the final listing rule for
Allium munzii for a description of
previous Federal actions through
October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975). At the
time of listing, we concluded that
designation of critical habitat for A.
munzii was not prudent because such
designation would not benefit the
species. On June 4, 2004, we published
a proposed rule to designate 227 ac (92
ha) of critical habitat for A. munzii on
Federal land (Cleveland National Forest)
in western Riverside County, California
(69 FR 31569). On June 7, 2005, we
published a final rule designating 176 ac
(71 ha) of land as critical habitat for A.
munzii (70 FR 33015).
On March 22, 2006, we announced
the initiation of the 5-year review for
Allium munzii and requested
information from the public (71 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55789
14538). The A. munzii 5-year review
was completed on June 17, 2009, and
recommended no change to the
endangered status of A. munzii.
On October 2, 2008, a complaint was
filed against the Department of the
Interior (DOI) and the Service by the
Center for Biological Diversity (CBD v.
Kempthorne, No. 08–CV–01348 (S.D.
Cal.)) challenging our final critical
habitat designation for Allium munzii.
In an order dated March 24, 2009, the
U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California, Eastern Division,
adopted a Stipulated Settlement
Agreement that was entered into by all
parties. The agreement stipulates that
the Service will reconsider critical
habitat designations for both A. munzii
and Atriplex coronata var. notatior and
shall submit to the Federal Register
proposed revised critical habitat
determinations for both plants by
October 7, 2011. An extension for the
completion of the new proposed
determinations was granted on
September 14, 2011; the new
submission date to the Federal Register
was April 6, 2012. Until the effective
date of the final determinations (to be
submitted to the Federal Register on or
before April 6, 2013), the existing final
critical habitat designations for A.
munzii and A. c. var. notatior remain in
place.
On April 17, 2012, we published a
proposed rule to designate critical
habitat for the Allium munzii (77 FR
23008). We proposed to designate
approximately 889 acres (ac) (360
hectares (ha)) in 5 units containing 13
subunits located in Riverside County,
California, as critical habitat. A legal
notice announcing the publication of
the proposed rule in the Federal
Register and opening of the 60-day
public comment period was prepared by
the Service and published in the The
Press-Enterprise on April 27, 2012. We
will submit for publication in the
Federal Register a combined final
critical habitat rule for Allium munzii
and Atriplex coronata var. notatior on
or before April 6, 2013.
Atriplex coronata var. notatior
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
designation of critical habitat for
Atriplex coronata var. notatior in this
document. For more information on
previous Federal actions concerning A.
c. var. notatior, refer to the following
documents that published in the
Federal Register:
• Proposed designation of critical
habitat (77 FR 23008; April 17, 2012);
• Proposed listing rule (59 FR 64812;
December 15, 1994);
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
55790
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
• Final listing rule (63 FR 54975;
October 13, 1998);
• The first proposed designation of
critical habitat (69 FR 59844; October 6,
2004); and
• The subsequent final critical habitat
rule (70 FR 59952; October 13, 2005).
These documents and the 5-year review
for A. coronata var. notatior, completed
on March 31, 2008, are available on our
Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
carlsbad/, on our ECOS Web page for
San Jacinto Valley crownscale at
https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/
profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=
Q2ZR, or from the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions—Atriplex
coronata var. notatior
Please see the final listing rule for
Atriplex coronata var. notatior for a
description of previous Federal actions
through October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975),
including proposed critical habitat in
1994 (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994).
At the time of the final listing rule in
1998, the Service withdrew the
proposed critical habitat designation
based on the taxon’s continued decline
and determined that designation of
critical habitat was not prudent,
indicating that no benefit over that
provided by listing would result from
such designation (63 FR 54991; October
13, 1998).
On October 6, 2004, we published a
proposed rule to designate critical
habitat for Atriplex coronata var.
notatior and identified 15,232 ac (6,164
ha) of habitat that met the definition of
critical habitat (69 FR 59844). However,
we concluded in the 2004 proposed rule
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act that the
benefits of excluding lands covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
outweighed the benefits of including
them as critical habitat, and,
consequently, no lands were proposed
for designation as critical habitat in the
proposed rule. On October 13, 2005, we
published a final critical habitat
determination for A. c. var. notatior (70
FR 59952); there was no change from
the proposed rule. We concluded that
all 15,232 ac (6,136 ha) of habitat
meeting the definition of critical habitat
were located either within our estimate
of the areas to be conserved and
managed by the approved Western
Riverside County MSHCP on existing
Public/Quasi-Public Lands, or within
areas where the MSHCP would ensure
that future projects would not adversely
alter essential hydrological processes,
and all areas were excluded from
critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
On March 22, 2006, we announced
the initiation of the 5-year review for
Atriplex coronata var. notatior and
requested information from the public
(71 FR 14538). The 5-year review was
completed on March 31, 2008, and
recommended no change to the
endangered status of A. c. var. notatior.
On October 2, 2008, a complaint was
filed against the DOI and the Service by
the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD
v. Kempthorne, No. 08–CV–01348 (S.D.
Cal.)) challenging our final critical
habitat determinations for Allium
munzii and Atriplex coronata var.
notatior (see Previous Federal Actions—
Allium Munzii section above for a
detailed account of this lawsuit and
settlement agreement).
On April 17, 2012, we published a
proposed rule to designate critical
habitat for the Atriplex coronata var.
notatior (77 FR 23008). We proposed to
designate approximately 8,020 ac (3,246
ha) in 3 units located in Riverside
County, California, as critical habitat. A
legal notice announcing the publication
of the proposed rule in the Federal
Register and opening of the 60-day
public comment period was prepared by
the Service and published in The PressEnterprise on April 27, 2012. We will
submit for publication in the Federal
Register a combined final critical
habitat rule for Atriplex coronata var.
notatior and Allium munzii on or before
April 6, 2013.
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 that
such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species. If the
proposed rule is made final, section 7 of
the Act will prohibit destruction or
adverse modification (collectively
referred to as ‘‘adverse modification’’) of
the designated critical habitat by any
activity funded, authorized, or carried
out by any Federal agency. Federal
agencies proposing actions that may
affect critical habitat must consult with
us on the effects of their proposed
actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
We are revising the proposed
designation of revised critical habitat for
Allium munzii to clarify primary
constituent elements (PCEs) (2)(i)(b) and
(2)(ii) regarding elevations necessary for
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conservation of A. munzii. We stated in
the proposed rule that A. munzii is
found in Riverside County generally
between the elevations of 1,200 to 2,700
ft (366 to 823 m) above mean sea level.
Allium munzii is also found in
Riverside County (Unit 3: Elsinore Peak)
at an elevation ranging from 3,200 to
3,500 feet (ft) (975 to 1,067 meters (m)).
Therefore, PCE (2)(i)(b) should read,
‘‘Generally between the elevations of
1,200 ft to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m),
above mean sea level,’’ and PCE (2)(ii)
should read, ‘‘Outcrops of igneous rocks
(pyroxenite) on rocky-sandy loam or
clay soils within Riversidean sage scrub,
generally between the elevations of
1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m), above
mean sea level.’’
Consideration of Impacts Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that
we designate or revise critical habitat
based upon the best scientific data
available, after taking into consideration
the economic impact, impact on
national security, or any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area
as critical habitat. We may exclude an
area from critical habitat if we
determine that the benefits of excluding
the area outweigh the benefits of
including the area as critical habitat,
provided such exclusion will not result
in the extinction of the species.
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 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. In the
case of Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior, the benefits of
critical habitat include public awareness
of the presence of these taxa and the
importance of habitat protection, and,
where a Federal nexus exists, increased
habitat protection for these taxa due to
protection from adverse modification of
critical habitat. In practice, situations
with a Federal nexus exist primarily on
Federal lands or for projects undertaken
by Federal agencies.
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.
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The final decision on whether to
exclude any areas will be based on the
best scientific data available at the time
of the final designations, including
information obtained during the
comment period and information about
the economic impact of designation.
Accordingly, we have prepared a draft
economic analysis (DEA) concerning the
proposed critical habitat designations,
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
critical habitat designations for Allium
munzii and Atriplex coronata var.
notatior. 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
afforded to A. munzii and A. c. var.
notatior (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 two taxa. 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). For a further
description of the methodology of the
analysis, see Chapter 2, Framework for
the Analysis, of the DEA.
The DEA provides estimated costs of
the foreseeable potential economic
impacts of the proposed critical habitat
designations for Allium munzii and
Atriplex coronata var. notatior over the
next 20 years, which was determined to
be the appropriate period for analysis
because limited planning information is
available for most activities to forecast
activity levels for projects beyond a 20year timeframe. It identifies potential
incremental costs as a result of the
proposed critical habitat designations;
these are those costs attributed to
critical habitat over and above those
baseline costs attributed to listing.
The DEA considers quantification of
economic impacts of Allium munzii
conservation efforts associated with the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
following categories of activity: (1)
Development; (2) agricultural
operations; (3) transportation; (4) fire
management; (5) mining (clay); and (6)
recreational activities (Industrial
Economics, Incorporated [IEC] 2012, p.
1–6).
The DEA considers quantification of
economic impacts of Atriplex coronata
var. notatior conservation efforts
associated with the following categories
of activity: (1) Development; (2)
agricultural operations; (3)
transportation; (4) fire management; (5)
flood control; and (6) utilities (IEC 2012,
p. 1–6).
Because of the substantial baseline
protections already afforded Allium
munzii and Atriplex coronata var.
notatior under the Act, and the
conservation plans, partnerships, or
agreements developed and being
implemented as a result of the listing of
the taxa, the incremental effects analysis
in the DEA focuses on quantifying the
following categories: (1) Activities that
the Service considers threats to Allium
munzii or its habitat that are not
addressed by existing conservation
plans (i.e., clay mining), (2) activities
occurring within A. munzii proposed
critical habitat Unit 3 (Elsinore Peak), an
area not managed under an existing
conservation plan, and (3)
administrative costs associated with
future section 7 consultations for both
taxa (IEC 2012, p. 4–1).
The DEA indicates that the total cost
that may result from the proposed
designation of critical habitat for both
plants is $166,000 in present-value
terms, assuming a seven percent
discount rate. The total cost that may
result from the proposed designation for
Allium munzii is $92,000 over the 20year period of the analysis in presentvalue terms, assuming a seven percent
discount rate. In areas not currently
being considered for exclusion from A.
munzii critical habitat (Unit 3),
incremental costs are estimated at
$25,000 in present-value terms,
assuming a seven percent discount rate.
In areas currently being considered for
exclusion from A. munzii critical
habitat, incremental costs are estimated
at $67,000 (IEC 2012, p. 4–2).
The total cost that may result from the
proposed designation for Atriplex
coronata var. notatior is $74,000 over
the 20-year period of the analysis, in
present-value terms assuming a seven
percent discount rate. The entire
proposed critical habitat for A. c. var.
notatior is presently being considered
for exclusion from the final designation.
All of these incremental impacts consist
entirely of administrative costs,
including reinitiations of programmatic
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55791
consultations and additional effort of
addressing adverse modification as part
of future section 7 consultations for
activities that may affect the two taxa or
their habitat (IEC 2012, p. 4–2).
As we stated earlier, we are soliciting
data and comments from the public on
the DEA, as well as all aspects of the
proposed rule and our amended
required determinations. We may revise
the proposed rule 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 Allium munzii or
Atriplex coronata var. notatior.
Required Determinations—Amended
In our April 17, 2012, proposed rule
(77 FR 23008), 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 designations 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
rule concerning Executive Order (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). We also
clarify below the information
concerning E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563.
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 Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
Management and Budget will review all
significant rules. The OIRA has
determined that this rule is not
significant. E.O. 13563 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 while calling
for improvements in the nation’s
regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
55792
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that regulations must be based
on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
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 effects 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 the agency certifies the rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
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
designations, we provide our analysis
for determining whether the proposed
rule would result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Based on
comments 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
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,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
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
these designations 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
designations of critical habitat for
Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata
var. notatior would affect a substantial
number of small entities, we considered
the number of small entities affected
within particular types of economic
activities, such as (1) Development, (2)
agricultural operations, (3)
transportation, (4) fire management, (5)
mining (clay), (6) recreational activities,
(7) flood control, and (8) utilities. 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 A.
munzii and A. c. var. notatior are
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 taxa. If we finalize these
proposed revised critical habitat
designations, 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 designations of critical
habitat for Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior. The Western
Riverside County MSHCP and the Lake
Mathews MSHCP were evaluated for
this analysis. For the Western Riverside
MSHCP, seven small jurisdictions were
identified (IEC 2012, p. A–7). However,
applying a conservative assumption that
all of the third-party costs would be
borne by a single small entity, the onetime impact of reinitiation of the
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Western Riverside County MSHCP was
0.2 percent of reported annual revenues
(IEC 2012, p. A–8). For the Lake
Mathews MSHCP with only one small
entity identified, a similar assumption
indicated that a single small entity
would bear a one-time impact of 0.06
percent of reported annual revenues for
reinitiation of this conservation plan
(IEC 2012, p. A–8). Please refer to the
DEA for a more detailed discussion of
our evaluation of potential economic
impacts.
In summary, we have considered
whether the proposed revised
designations 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 our
files. We have identified eight small
entities that may be impacted by the
proposed critical habitat designation.
For the above reasons and based on
currently available information, we
certify that, if promulgated, the
proposed revised critical habitat
designations 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 Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office, Pacific Southwest
Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further
amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as proposed to be amended
at 77 FR 23008, April 17, 2012, as
follows:
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
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. Amend § 17.96(a) by revising the
proposed entry for ‘‘Allium munzii
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(Munz’s onion)’’ in paragraphs (2)(i)(B)
and (ii) to read as follows:
§ 17.96
Critical habitat—plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
*
*
*
*
*
Family Alliaceae: Allium munzii
(Munz’s onion)
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
18:01 Sep 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Generally between the elevations
of 1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m)
above mean sea level;
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Outcrops of igneous rocks
(pyroxenite) on rocky-sandy loam or
clay soils within Riversidean sage scrub,
generally between the elevations of
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
55793
1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m) above
mean sea level.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 28, 2012.
Michael J. Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2012–22033 Filed 9–10–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55788-55793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22033]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2012-0008; 45000030114]
RIN 1018-AX42
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Revised Critical Habitat for the Allium munzii (Munz's onion) and
Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley Crownscale)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction and reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the public comment period on the April 17, 2012, proposed
revised designations of critical habitat for Allium munzii (Munz's
onion) and Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley
crownscale) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis (DEA) of
the proposed designations of critical habitat for A. munzii and A. c.
var. notatior and an amended required determinations section of the
proposal. We are reopening the comment period to allow all interested
parties an opportunity to comment simultaneously on the proposed
revised designations, the associated DEA, and the amended required
determinations section. Finally, we correct some errors regarding the
elevations of habitat necessary for conservation of A. munzii. Comments
previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of the final rule.
DATES: We will consider all comments received or postmarked on or
before October 11, 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: Document availability: You may obtain copies of the proposed
rule and the draft economic analysis at the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2012-0008 or by mail
from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section).
Comment submission: 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 FWS-R8-ES-2012-0008, 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-2012-0008; 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: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010
Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011, by telephone 760-
431-9440, or by facsimile 760-431-9624. 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 designations of
critical habitat for Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior
that was published in the Federal Register on April 17, 2012 (77 FR
23008), our changes to the primary constituent elements section of the
proposed rule, our DEA of the proposed designations, 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 designate habitat as
``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) The distribution of Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var.
notatior;
(b) The amount and distribution of Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior habitat; and
(c) What areas within the geographical area occupied by the taxa at
the time of listing that contain physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the taxa we should include in the
designation and why; and
(d) What areas outside the geographical area occupied by the taxa
at the time of listing are essential for the conservation of the taxa
and why.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior and
proposed critical habitat.
(5) Any foreseeable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts that may result from including any particular area in the final
designations. We are particularly interested in any impacts on small
entities, and the benefits of including or excluding areas from the
proposed designations that are subject to these impacts.
(6) Which specific lands covered by the Western Riverside County
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County
MSHCP) or other permitted HCPs and proposed for designation as critical
habitat should be considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, and, for those specific areas, how benefits of exclusion from the
critical habitat designations would outweigh the benefits of inclusion
in the designations. We are currently considering excluding, under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act, all lands covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP or other permitted HCPs and Cooperative Agreements as
described in the proposed rule (see Exclusions Based on Other Relevant
Impacts in the proposed designations of critical habitat
[[Page 55789]]
published in the Federal Register on April 17, 2012 (77 FR 23008)).
(7) 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 better accommodate public
concerns and comments.
(8) Information on the extent to which the description of economic
impacts in the DEA is complete and accurate.
(9) 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 critical habitat designations.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rule (77
FR 23008) during the initial comment period from April 17, 2012, to
June 18, 2012, 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 do not
meet the definition of critical habitat, 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-2012-0008, or by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
This is a notice of availability announcing the reopening of the
public comment period on the April 17, 2012, proposed revised
designations of critical habitat for Allium munzii and Atriplex
coronata var. notatior and the availability of a DEA of the proposed
designations of critical habitat for A. munzii and A. c. var. notatior.
Allium munzii
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the designation of critical habitat for Allium munzii in this document.
For more information on previous Federal actions concerning A. munzii,
refer to the following documents that published in the Federal
Register:
Proposed designation of critical habitat (77 FR 23008;
April 17, 2012);
Proposed listing rule (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994);
Final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13, 1998);
The first proposed designation of critical habitat (69 FR
31569; June 4, 2004); and
The subsequent final critical habitat rule (70 FR 33015;
June 7, 2005).
These documents and the 5-year review for A. munzii, signed on June
17, 2009, are available on our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/
, on the ECOS Web site for Munz's onion at https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action? spcode=Q2X0, or from the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions--Allium munzii
Please see the final listing rule for Allium munzii for a
description of previous Federal actions through October 13, 1998 (63 FR
54975). At the time of listing, we concluded that designation of
critical habitat for A. munzii was not prudent because such designation
would not benefit the species. On June 4, 2004, we published a proposed
rule to designate 227 ac (92 ha) of critical habitat for A. munzii on
Federal land (Cleveland National Forest) in western Riverside County,
California (69 FR 31569). On June 7, 2005, we published a final rule
designating 176 ac (71 ha) of land as critical habitat for A. munzii
(70 FR 33015).
On March 22, 2006, we announced the initiation of the 5-year review
for Allium munzii and requested information from the public (71 FR
14538). The A. munzii 5-year review was completed on June 17, 2009, and
recommended no change to the endangered status of A. munzii.
On October 2, 2008, a complaint was filed against the Department of
the Interior (DOI) and the Service by the Center for Biological
Diversity (CBD v. Kempthorne, No. 08-CV-01348 (S.D. Cal.)) challenging
our final critical habitat designation for Allium munzii. In an order
dated March 24, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California, Eastern Division, adopted a Stipulated Settlement
Agreement that was entered into by all parties. The agreement
stipulates that the Service will reconsider critical habitat
designations for both A. munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior and
shall submit to the Federal Register proposed revised critical habitat
determinations for both plants by October 7, 2011. An extension for the
completion of the new proposed determinations was granted on September
14, 2011; the new submission date to the Federal Register was April 6,
2012. Until the effective date of the final determinations (to be
submitted to the Federal Register on or before April 6, 2013), the
existing final critical habitat designations for A. munzii and A. c.
var. notatior remain in place.
On April 17, 2012, we published a proposed rule to designate
critical habitat for the Allium munzii (77 FR 23008). We proposed to
designate approximately 889 acres (ac) (360 hectares (ha)) in 5 units
containing 13 subunits located in Riverside County, California, as
critical habitat. A legal notice announcing the publication of the
proposed rule in the Federal Register and opening of the 60-day public
comment period was prepared by the Service and published in the The
Press-Enterprise on April 27, 2012. We will submit for publication in
the Federal Register a combined final critical habitat rule for Allium
munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior on or before April 6, 2013.
Atriplex coronata var. notatior
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the designation of critical habitat for Atriplex coronata var. notatior
in this document. For more information on previous Federal actions
concerning A. c. var. notatior, refer to the following documents that
published in the Federal Register:
Proposed designation of critical habitat (77 FR 23008;
April 17, 2012);
Proposed listing rule (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994);
[[Page 55790]]
Final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13, 1998);
The first proposed designation of critical habitat (69 FR
59844; October 6, 2004); and
The subsequent final critical habitat rule (70 FR 59952;
October 13, 2005).
These documents and the 5-year review for A. coronata var. notatior,
completed on March 31, 2008, are available on our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/, on our ECOS Web page for San Jacinto Valley
crownscale at https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=Q2ZR, or from the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions--Atriplex coronata var. notatior
Please see the final listing rule for Atriplex coronata var.
notatior for a description of previous Federal actions through October
13, 1998 (63 FR 54975), including proposed critical habitat in 1994 (59
FR 64812; December 15, 1994). At the time of the final listing rule in
1998, the Service withdrew the proposed critical habitat designation
based on the taxon's continued decline and determined that designation
of critical habitat was not prudent, indicating that no benefit over
that provided by listing would result from such designation (63 FR
54991; October 13, 1998).
On October 6, 2004, we published a proposed rule to designate
critical habitat for Atriplex coronata var. notatior and identified
15,232 ac (6,164 ha) of habitat that met the definition of critical
habitat (69 FR 59844). However, we concluded in the 2004 proposed rule
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act that the benefits of excluding lands
covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP outweighed the benefits
of including them as critical habitat, and, consequently, no lands were
proposed for designation as critical habitat in the proposed rule. On
October 13, 2005, we published a final critical habitat determination
for A. c. var. notatior (70 FR 59952); there was no change from the
proposed rule. We concluded that all 15,232 ac (6,136 ha) of habitat
meeting the definition of critical habitat were located either within
our estimate of the areas to be conserved and managed by the approved
Western Riverside County MSHCP on existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands,
or within areas where the MSHCP would ensure that future projects would
not adversely alter essential hydrological processes, and all areas
were excluded from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
On March 22, 2006, we announced the initiation of the 5-year review
for Atriplex coronata var. notatior and requested information from the
public (71 FR 14538). The 5-year review was completed on March 31,
2008, and recommended no change to the endangered status of A. c. var.
notatior.
On October 2, 2008, a complaint was filed against the DOI and the
Service by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD v. Kempthorne, No.
08-CV-01348 (S.D. Cal.)) challenging our final critical habitat
determinations for Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior
(see Previous Federal Actions--Allium Munzii section above for a
detailed account of this lawsuit and settlement agreement).
On April 17, 2012, we published a proposed rule to designate
critical habitat for the Atriplex coronata var. notatior (77 FR 23008).
We proposed to designate approximately 8,020 ac (3,246 ha) in 3 units
located in Riverside County, California, as critical habitat. A legal
notice announcing the publication of the proposed rule in the Federal
Register and opening of the 60-day public comment period was prepared
by the Service and published in The Press-Enterprise on April 27, 2012.
We will submit for publication in the Federal Register a combined final
critical habitat rule for Atriplex coronata var. notatior and Allium
munzii on or before April 6, 2013.
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 that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. If the proposed rule is
made final, section 7 of the Act will prohibit destruction or adverse
modification (collectively referred to as ``adverse modification'') of
the designated critical habitat by any activity funded, authorized, or
carried out by any Federal agency. Federal agencies proposing actions
that may affect critical habitat must consult with us on the effects of
their proposed actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
We are revising the proposed designation of revised critical
habitat for Allium munzii to clarify primary constituent elements
(PCEs) (2)(i)(b) and (2)(ii) regarding elevations necessary for
conservation of A. munzii. We stated in the proposed rule that A.
munzii is found in Riverside County generally between the elevations of
1,200 to 2,700 ft (366 to 823 m) above mean sea level. Allium munzii is
also found in Riverside County (Unit 3: Elsinore Peak) at an elevation
ranging from 3,200 to 3,500 feet (ft) (975 to 1,067 meters (m)).
Therefore, PCE (2)(i)(b) should read, ``Generally between the
elevations of 1,200 ft to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m), above mean sea
level,'' and PCE (2)(ii) should read, ``Outcrops of igneous rocks
(pyroxenite) on rocky-sandy loam or clay soils within Riversidean sage
scrub, generally between the elevations of 1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to
1,067 m), above mean sea level.''
Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate or revise
critical habitat based upon the best scientific data available, after
taking into consideration the economic impact, impact on national
security, or any other relevant impact of specifying any particular
area as critical habitat. We may exclude an area from critical habitat
if we determine that the benefits of excluding the area outweigh the
benefits of including the area as critical habitat, provided such
exclusion will not result in the extinction of the species.
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 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. In the case of
Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior, the benefits of
critical habitat include public awareness of the presence of these taxa
and the importance of habitat protection, and, where a Federal nexus
exists, increased habitat protection for these taxa due to protection
from adverse modification of critical habitat. In practice, situations
with a Federal nexus exist primarily on Federal lands or for projects
undertaken by Federal agencies.
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.
[[Page 55791]]
The final decision on whether to exclude any areas will be based on
the best scientific data available at the time of the final
designations, including information obtained during the comment period
and information about the economic impact of designation. Accordingly,
we have prepared a draft economic analysis (DEA) concerning the
proposed critical habitat designations, 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 critical habitat
designations for Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior. 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 afforded to A.
munzii and A. c. var. notatior (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 two taxa. 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). For a
further description of the methodology of the analysis, see Chapter 2,
Framework for the Analysis, of the DEA.
The DEA provides estimated costs of the foreseeable potential
economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat designations for
Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior over the next 20
years, which was determined to be the appropriate period for analysis
because limited planning information is available for most activities
to forecast activity levels for projects beyond a 20-year timeframe. It
identifies potential incremental costs as a result of the proposed
critical habitat designations; these are those costs attributed to
critical habitat over and above those baseline costs attributed to
listing.
The DEA considers quantification of economic impacts of Allium
munzii conservation efforts associated with the following categories of
activity: (1) Development; (2) agricultural operations; (3)
transportation; (4) fire management; (5) mining (clay); and (6)
recreational activities (Industrial Economics, Incorporated [IEC] 2012,
p. 1-6).
The DEA considers quantification of economic impacts of Atriplex
coronata var. notatior conservation efforts associated with the
following categories of activity: (1) Development; (2) agricultural
operations; (3) transportation; (4) fire management; (5) flood control;
and (6) utilities (IEC 2012, p. 1-6).
Because of the substantial baseline protections already afforded
Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior under the Act, and
the conservation plans, partnerships, or agreements developed and being
implemented as a result of the listing of the taxa, the incremental
effects analysis in the DEA focuses on quantifying the following
categories: (1) Activities that the Service considers threats to Allium
munzii or its habitat that are not addressed by existing conservation
plans (i.e., clay mining), (2) activities occurring within A. munzii
proposed critical habitat Unit 3 (Elsinore Peak), an area not managed
under an existing conservation plan, and (3) administrative costs
associated with future section 7 consultations for both taxa (IEC 2012,
p. 4-1).
The DEA indicates that the total cost that may result from the
proposed designation of critical habitat for both plants is $166,000 in
present-value terms, assuming a seven percent discount rate. The total
cost that may result from the proposed designation for Allium munzii is
$92,000 over the 20-year period of the analysis in present-value terms,
assuming a seven percent discount rate. In areas not currently being
considered for exclusion from A. munzii critical habitat (Unit 3),
incremental costs are estimated at $25,000 in present-value terms,
assuming a seven percent discount rate. In areas currently being
considered for exclusion from A. munzii critical habitat, incremental
costs are estimated at $67,000 (IEC 2012, p. 4-2).
The total cost that may result from the proposed designation for
Atriplex coronata var. notatior is $74,000 over the 20-year period of
the analysis, in present-value terms assuming a seven percent discount
rate. The entire proposed critical habitat for A. c. var. notatior is
presently being considered for exclusion from the final designation.
All of these incremental impacts consist entirely of administrative
costs, including reinitiations of programmatic consultations and
additional effort of addressing adverse modification as part of future
section 7 consultations for activities that may affect the two taxa or
their habitat (IEC 2012, p. 4-2).
As we stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the
public on the DEA, as well as all aspects of the proposed rule and our
amended required determinations. We may revise the proposed rule 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 Allium munzii or Atriplex coronata var. notatior.
Required Determinations--Amended
In our April 17, 2012, proposed rule (77 FR 23008), 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 designations 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 rule concerning
Executive Order (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). We also clarify
below the information concerning E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563. 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 Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget will
review all significant rules. The OIRA has determined that this rule is
not significant. E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866
while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to
promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative,
[[Page 55792]]
and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive
order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with
regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations
must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking
process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of
ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these
requirements.
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 effects 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 the agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 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
designations, we provide our analysis for determining whether the
proposed rule would result in a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Based on comments 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 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 these
designations 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 designations of critical
habitat for Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior would
affect a substantial number of small entities, we considered the number
of small entities affected within particular types of economic
activities, such as (1) Development, (2) agricultural operations, (3)
transportation, (4) fire management, (5) mining (clay), (6)
recreational activities, (7) flood control, and (8) utilities. 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 A. munzii and A.
c. var. notatior are 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 taxa. If we finalize these
proposed revised critical habitat designations, 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 designations of critical habitat for Allium
munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior. The Western Riverside
County MSHCP and the Lake Mathews MSHCP were evaluated for this
analysis. For the Western Riverside MSHCP, seven small jurisdictions
were identified (IEC 2012, p. A-7). However, applying a conservative
assumption that all of the third-party costs would be borne by a single
small entity, the one-time impact of reinitiation of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP was 0.2 percent of reported annual revenues (IEC
2012, p. A-8). For the Lake Mathews MSHCP with only one small entity
identified, a similar assumption indicated that a single small entity
would bear a one-time impact of 0.06 percent of reported annual
revenues for reinitiation of this conservation plan (IEC 2012, p. A-8).
Please refer to the DEA for a more detailed discussion of our
evaluation of potential economic impacts.
In summary, we have considered whether the proposed revised
designations 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 our
files. We have identified eight small entities that may be impacted by
the proposed critical habitat designation. For the above reasons and
based on currently available information, we certify that, if
promulgated, the proposed revised critical habitat designations 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
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Pacific Southwest Region, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to
be amended at 77 FR 23008, April 17, 2012, as follows:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
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. Amend Sec. 17.96(a) by revising the proposed entry for ``Allium
munzii
[[Page 55793]]
(Munz's onion)'' in paragraphs (2)(i)(B) and (ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Alliaceae: Allium munzii (Munz's onion)
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Generally between the elevations of 1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to
1,067 m) above mean sea level;
* * * * *
(ii) Outcrops of igneous rocks (pyroxenite) on rocky-sandy loam or
clay soils within Riversidean sage scrub, generally between the
elevations of 1,200 to 3,500 ft (366 to 1,067 m) above mean sea level.
* * * * *
Dated: August 28, 2012.
Michael J. Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2012-22033 Filed 9-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P