Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing as Endangered and Designation of Critical Habitat for Six West Texas Aquatic Invertebrate Species, 8096-8100 [2013-02051]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8096
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(10) IP CTS default settings. (i) IP CTS
providers must ensure that their
equipment and software used in
conjunction with their service have a
default setting of captions off, so that all
new and existing IP CTS users must
affirmatively turn on captioning for each
telephone call initiated or received
before captioning is provided.
(ii) When IP CTS equipment is in
operation with captions off, and during
the time period after the user of IP CTS
takes action to initiate captioning and
before any such captioning commences,
the IP CTS provider must display on the
screen of the user’s IP CTS equipment
the following message: ‘‘FCC regulations
permit the use of captions only by
people with hearing loss who require
captions to communicate effectively
using the telephone.’’
(11) IP CTS equipment. (i) An IP CTS
provider shall not provide to
consumers, directly or indirectly,
equipment at no cost or at de minimis
cost, whether through giveaway, sale,
loan, or otherwise. For the cost to be
above de minimis cost, the cost must be
large enough such that the consumer is
likely to consider such cost in
determining whether the benefit
received from the IP CTS service is
worth the cost of the specialized
equipment or software. IP CTS
providers providing such equipment or
software at no cost or for a de minimis
cost shall be ineligible to receive
compensation for minutes of IP CTS use
generated by consumers receiving,
directly or indirectly, equipment or
software at no cost or at de minimis
cost.
(ii) IP CTS providers shall ensure that
any equipment newly distributed for
use with IP CTS has a label on its face
in a conspicuous location specifying
that FCC regulations permit the use of
captions only by people with hearing
loss who require captions to
communicate effectively using the
telephone. For IP CTS equipment
already distributed to users by any IP
CTS provider as of the effective date of
this paragraph, such provider shall
distribute to users equipment labels
specifying that FCC regulations permit
the use of captions only by people with
hearing loss who require captions to
communicate effectively using the
telephone, along with specific
instructions directing the users to place
such labels on the face of their IP CTS
equipment in a conspicuous location.
■ 2. Amend § 64.606 by adding
paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(F) to read as follows:
§ 64.606 Internet-based TRS provider and
TRS program certification.
(a) * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:28 Feb 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
(F) In the case of applicants to provide
IP CTS or IP CTS providers, a
description of measures taken by such
applicants or providers to ensure that
they do not and will not request or
collect payment from the TRS Fund for
service to consumers who do not satisfy
the registration and certification
requirements in § 64.604(c)(9), and an
explanation of how these measures
provide such assurance.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–02370 Filed 2–1–13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0004;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–AZ26
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing as Endangered and
Designation of Critical Habitat for Six
West Texas Aquatic Invertebrate
Species
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the public comment period
on the August 16, 2012, proposed
endangered status for six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). We also announce the
reopening of comment on the August
16, 2012, proposed designation of
critical habitat for the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species and the
availability of a draft economic analysis
of the proposed designation and
amended required determinations in the
proposed rule. We are reopening the
comment period to allow all interested
parties an opportunity to comment
simultaneously on the proposed rules,
the associated draft economic analysis,
and the amended required
determinations. Comments previously
submitted need not be resubmitted, as
they will be fully considered in
preparation of the final rules.
DATES: We will consider comments
received or postmarked on or before
March 22, 2013. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
section, below) must be received by
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing
date. Any comments that we receive
after the closing date may not be
considered in the final decision on this
action.
Public Hearing: We will hold a public
hearing on these proposed rules at
Balmorhea State Park in Toyahvale,
Texas, on February 21, 2013 (see
ADDRESSES).
Document availability: You
may obtain a copy of the proposed rule
on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029 or by mail
from the Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain
a copy of the draft economic analysis at
Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0004.
Written comments: You may submit
written comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
on the listing proposal to Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029, and submit
comments on the critical habitat
proposal and associated draft economic
analysis to Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–
2013–0004. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for an explanation of the
two dockets.
(2) By hard copy: Submit comment on
the listing proposal by U.S. mail or
hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2012–
0029; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
Submit comment on the critical habitat
proposal and draft economic analysis by
U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–
ES–2013–0004; 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).
Public informational session and
public hearing: The public
informational session and hearing will
be held in the conference room at
Balmorhea State Park, State Highway
17, Toyahvale, Texas. The public
information session will begin at 5:00
p.m., and the public hearing will begin
at 6:00 p.m. Central Time. People
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
needing reasonable accommodation in
order to attend and participate in the
public hearing should contact Adam
Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, Austin
Ecological Services Office, as soon as
possible (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin
Ecological Services Field Office, 10711
Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX
78758; by telephone (512–490–0057); or
by facsimile (512–490–0974). 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 are reopening the comment period
for our proposed listing determination
and proposed critical habitat
designation for the Phantom Cave snail
(Pyrgulopsis texana), Phantom
springsnail (Tryonia cheatumi),
diminutive amphipod (Gammarus
hyalleloides), Diamond Y Spring snail
(Pseudotryonia adamantina), Gonzales
springsnail (Tryonia circumstriata), and
Pecos amphipod (Gammarus pecos) (the
six west Texas aquatic invertebrate
species) that was published in the
Federal Register on August 16, 2012 (77
FR 49602). We are specifically seeking
comments on the draft economic
analysis, which is now available, for the
critical habitat designation; see
ADDRESSES.
We are also notifying the public that
we will publish two separate rules for
the final listing determination and the
final critical habitat determination for
the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate
species. The final listing rule will
publish under the existing docket
number, FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029, and
the final critical habitat designation will
publish under docket number FWS–R2–
ES–2013–0004.
We request that you provide
comments specifically on our listing
determination under the existing docket
number [FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029]. We
will consider information and
recommendations from all interested
parties. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to this species
and regulations that may be addressing
those threats.
(2) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status, range,
distribution, and population size of this
species, including the locations of any
additional populations of this species.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:28 Feb 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
(3) Any information on the biological
or ecological requirements of the
species, and ongoing conservation
measures for the species and its habitat.
(4) Current or planned activities in the
areas occupied by the species and
possible impacts of these activities on
this species.
We request that you provide
comments specifically on the critical
habitat determination and draft
economic analysis under docket number
[FWS–R2–ES–2013–0004]. We will
consider information and
recommendations from all interested
parties. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(5) 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 may not be prudent.
(6) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of
habitat for the six west Texas aquatic
invertebrates;
(b) What areas, that were occupied at
the time of listing (or are currently
occupied) and that contain features
essential to the conservation of the
species, should be included in the
designation and why;
(c) Special management
considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are
proposing, including managing for the
potential effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the
time of listing are essential for the
conservation of the species and why.
(7) Land use designations and current
or planned activities in the subject areas
and their possible impacts on proposed
critical habitat.
(8) Information on the projected and
reasonably likely impacts of climate
change on the six west Texas aquatic
invertebrates and proposed critical
habitat.
(9) Any probable economic, national
security, or other relevant impacts of
designating any area that may be
included in the final designation; in
particular, any impacts on small entities
or families, and the benefits of including
or excluding areas that exhibit these
impacts.
(10) Information on the extent to
which the description of economic
impacts in the draft economic analysis
is complete and accurate.
(11) Whether any specific areas we are
proposing for critical habitat
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8097
designation should be considered for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, and whether the benefits of
potentially excluding any specific area
outweigh the benefits of including that
area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(12) Whether the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of including the
area proposed as critical habitat around
San Solomon Spring at Balmorhea State
Park based on the existing habitat
conservation plan or other relevant
factors.
(13) Whether we could improve or
modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for
greater public participation and
understanding, or to better
accommodate public concerns and
comments.
If you submitted comments or
information on the proposed rules (77
FR 49601; August 16, 2012) during the
initial comment period from August 16,
2012, to October 15, 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 rules. On the basis of public
comments and other relevant
information, we may, during the
development of our final determination
on the proposed critical habitat
designation, 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 draft economic analysis 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, will be available for public
inspection on https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029 (for the
proposed listing rule) and Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2013–0004 (for the
proposed critical habitat designation
and draft economic analysis), or by
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
8098
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain
copies of the proposed rule on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029 and
the draft economic analysis at Docket
No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0004, or by mail
from the Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
designation of critical habitat for six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
in this document. For more information
on the six west Texas aquatic
invertebrate species, the species’
habitat, and previous Federal actions
concerning the species, refer to the
proposed listing rule and designation of
critical habitat, published in the Federal
Register on August 16, 2012 (77 FR
49602). The proposed rule is available
online at https://www.regulations.gov (at
Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2012–0029) or
from the Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Previous Federal Actions
On August 16, 2012, we published a
proposed rule to list as endangered and
to designate critical habitat for the six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
(77 FR 49602). In total, approximately
181.7 hectares (ha) (450.6 acres (ac))
were proposed for designation as critical
habitat in four units for three species
and one unit for three other species. The
proposed critical habitat is located in
Pecos, Reeves, and Jeff Davis Counties,
Texas. We proposed to designate
approximately 3.7 ha (9.2 ac) in four
units located in Reeves and Jeff Davis
Counties, Texas, as critical habitat for
the Phantom Cave snail, Phantom
springsnail, and diminutive amphipod.
We also proposed to designate
approximately 178.6 ha (441.1 ac) in
one unit located in Pecos County, Texas,
as critical habitat for the Diamond Y
Spring snail, Gonzales springsnail, and
Pecos amphipod. That proposal had a
60-day comment period, ending October
15, 2012. We received a request for a
public hearing; therefore, a public
hearing will be held (see DATES and
ADDRESSES). We will submit for
publication in the Federal Register a
final listing determination and critical
habitat designation for the six west
Texas aquatic invertebrates on or before
August 16, 2013.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:28 Feb 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 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 proposing actions
affecting critical habitat must consult
with us on the effects of their proposed
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
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 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.
We are considering excluding the San
Solomon Spring Unit that is currently
covered under a habitat conservation
plan with Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department for the Phantom Cave snail,
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Phantom springsnail, and diminutive
amphipod for management activities at
Balmorhea State Park. However, the
final decision on whether to exclude
any areas will be based on the best
scientific 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 draft
economic analysis concerning the
proposed critical habitat designation,
which is available for review and
comment (see ADDRESSES section).
Draft Economic Analysis
The purpose of the draft economic
analysis is to identify and analyze the
potential economic impacts associated
with the proposed critical habitat
designation for the Phantom Cave snail,
Phantom springsnail, diminutive
amphipod, Diamond Y Spring snail,
Gonzales springsnail, and Pecos
amphipod. The draft economic analysis
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 six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
(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 draft
economic analysis, 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 Appendix B,
‘‘Framework,’’ of the draft economic
analysis.
The draft economic analysis provides
estimated costs of the foreseeable
potential economic impacts of the
proposed critical habitat designation for
the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate
species 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.
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
It identifies potential incremental costs
as a result of the proposed critical
habitat designation; these are those costs
attributed to critical habitat over and
above those baseline costs attributed to
listing.
The draft economic analysis
quantifies economic impacts of the six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
conservation efforts associated with the
following categories of activity: (1)
Water withdrawals for agricultural and
municipal use; (2) oil and gas
development; and (3) recreation and
species management.
We do not anticipate recommending
incremental conservation measures to
avoid adverse modification of critical
habitat over and above those
recommended to avoid jeopardy of the
species, and, as such, the economic
analysis forecasts few incremental
economic impacts as a result of the
designation of critical habitat for these
species. A number of factors limit the
extent to which the proposed critical
habitat designation will result in
incremental costs, including the fact
that all the proposed habit is occupied
by the species, the species’ survival is
so closely linked to the quality of their
habitat, few actions being carried out in
the area are subject to a Federal nexus,
and much of the proposed habitat is
currently managed for conservation.
The total projected incremental costs
of administrative efforts resulting from
section 7 consultations on the six
invertebrates are approximately $40,000
over 20 years ($4,000 on an annualized
basis), assuming a seven percent
discount rate. The analysis estimates
potential future administrative impacts
based on the historical rate of
consultation on co-occurring listed
species in areas proposed for critical
habitat, as discussed in Chapter 2 of the
draft economic analysis.
As stated earlier, we are soliciting
data and comments from the public on
the draft economic analysis, as well as
all aspects of the proposed rules and our
amended required determinations. We
may revise the proposed rules 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.
Required Determinations—Amended
In our August 16, 2012, proposed rule
(77 FR 49601), we indicated that we
would defer our determination of
compliance with several statutes and
executive orders until the information
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:41 Feb 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
concerning potential economic impacts
of the designation and potential effects
on landowners and stakeholders became
available in the draft economic analysis.
We have now made use of the draft
economic analysis data to make these
determinations. In this document, we
affirm the information in our proposed
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 draft economic analysis
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 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 draft economic analysis of
the proposed designation, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8099
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
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
designation of critical habitat for the six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
would affect a substantial number of
small entities, we considered the
number of small entities affected within
particular types of economic activities,
such as water withdrawals for
agricultural and municipal use, oil and
gas development, and recreation and
species management. 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. If we finalize the
proposed listing for the species, in areas
where any one of the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species is present,
Federal agencies will be 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 critical
habitat designation, consultations to
avoid the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat would be
incorporated into the existing
consultation process.
In the draft economic analysis, we
evaluated the potential economic effects
on small entities resulting from
implementation of conservation actions
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
8100
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
related to the proposed designation of
critical habitat for the Phantom Cave
snail, Phantom springsnail, diminutive
amphipod, Diamond Y Spring snail,
Gonzales springsnail, and Pecos
amphipod. We do not anticipate
recommending incremental
conservation measures to avoid adverse
modification of critical habitat over and
above those recommended to avoid
jeopardy of the species, and as such the
economic analysis forecasts few
incremental economic impacts as a
result of the designation of critical
habitat for these species. Those
incremental impacts forecasted are
solely related to administrative costs for
adverse modification analyses in section
7 consultations. We anticipate
conducting approximately 7 formal, 15
informal, and 3 technical assistance
consultations considering the
designation, for a total of 25
consultations, over the next 20 years.
Assuming the consultations are equally
likely to occur in any year, this results
in fewer than two consultations a year.
Based on the consultation history, most
consultations are unlikely to involve a
third party. If any consultations were to
involve a third party, fewer than two
small entities, if any, could be affected
each year. The incremental cost per
entity of participating in a consultation
is likely to range from $400 to $5,000.
Please refer to Appendix A of the draft
economic analysis of the proposed
critical habitat designation for a more
detailed discussion of potential
economic impacts.
The Service’s current understanding
of recent case law is that Federal
agencies are only required to evaluate
the potential impacts of rulemaking on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:28 Feb 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
those entities directly regulated by the
rulemaking; therefore, they are not
required to evaluate the potential
impacts to those entities not directly
regulated. The designation of critical
habitat for an endangered or threatened
species only has a regulatory effect
where a Federal action agency is
involved in a particular action that may
affect the designated critical habitat.
Under these circumstances, only the
Federal action agency is directly
regulated by the designation, and,
therefore, consistent with the Service’s
current interpretation of RFA and recent
case law, the Service may limit its
evaluation of the potential impacts to
those identified for Federal action
agencies. Under this interpretation,
there is no requirement under the RFA
to evaluate the potential impacts to
entities not directly regulated, such as
small businesses. However, Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 direct Federal
agencies to assess costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives in
quantitative (to the extent feasible) and
qualitative terms. Consequently, it is the
current practice of the Service to assess
to the extent practicable these potential
impacts, if sufficient data are available,
whether or not this analysis is believed
by the Service to be strictly required by
the RFA. In other words, while the
effects analysis required under the RFA
is limited to entities directly regulated
by the rulemaking, the effects analysis
under the Act, consistent with the EO
regulatory analysis requirements, can
take into consideration impacts to both
directly and indirectly impacted
entities, where practicable and
reasonable.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
In summary, we have considered
whether the proposed 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 conclude that future
consultations are unlikely to involve a
third party. However if a third party
were to be involved in a consultation,
we identified fewer than two small
business entities that could be affected
each year as a result of the designation
of critical habitat for the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species. For the
above reasons and based on currently
available information, we certify that, if
promulgated, the proposed 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 Austin
Ecological Services Field Office,
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.).
Dated: January 23, 2013.
Michael J. Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2013–02051 Filed 2–4–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 5, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8096-8100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02051]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AZ26
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing as
Endangered and Designation of Critical Habitat for Six West Texas
Aquatic Invertebrate Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the public comment period on the August 16, 2012, proposed
endangered status for six west Texas aquatic invertebrate species under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We also announce
the reopening of comment on the August 16, 2012, proposed designation
of critical habitat for the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate species
and the availability of a draft economic analysis of the proposed
designation and amended required determinations in the proposed rule.
We are reopening the comment period to allow all interested parties an
opportunity to comment simultaneously on the proposed rules, the
associated draft economic analysis, and the amended required
determinations. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted,
as they will be fully considered in preparation of the final rules.
DATES: We will consider comments received or postmarked on or before
March 22, 2013. 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. Any comments that we
receive after the closing date may not be considered in the final
decision on this action.
Public Hearing: We will hold a public hearing on these proposed
rules at Balmorhea State Park in Toyahvale, Texas, on February 21, 2013
(see ADDRESSES).
ADDRESSES: Document availability: You may obtain a copy of the proposed
rule on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-
R2-ES-2012-0029 or by mail from the Austin Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain a copy of
the draft economic analysis at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004.
Written comments: You may submit written comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments on the listing proposal to Docket
No. FWS-R2-ES-2012-0029, and submit comments on the critical habitat
proposal and associated draft economic analysis to Docket No. FWS-R2-
ES-2013-0004. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of the
two dockets.
(2) By hard copy: Submit comment on the listing proposal by U.S.
mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-
2012-0029; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA
22203. Submit comment on the critical habitat proposal and draft
economic analysis by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004; 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).
Public informational session and public hearing: The public
informational session and hearing will be held in the conference room
at Balmorhea State Park, State Highway 17, Toyahvale, Texas. The public
information session will begin at 5:00 p.m., and the public hearing
will begin at 6:00 p.m. Central Time. People
[[Page 8097]]
needing reasonable accommodation in order to attend and participate in
the public hearing should contact Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor,
Austin Ecological Services Office, as soon as possible (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office,
10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; by telephone (512-490-
0057); or by facsimile (512-490-0974). 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 are reopening the comment period for our proposed listing
determination and proposed critical habitat designation for the Phantom
Cave snail (Pyrgulopsis texana), Phantom springsnail (Tryonia
cheatumi), diminutive amphipod (Gammarus hyalleloides), Diamond Y
Spring snail (Pseudotryonia adamantina), Gonzales springsnail (Tryonia
circumstriata), and Pecos amphipod (Gammarus pecos) (the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species) that was published in the Federal
Register on August 16, 2012 (77 FR 49602). We are specifically seeking
comments on the draft economic analysis, which is now available, for
the critical habitat designation; see ADDRESSES.
We are also notifying the public that we will publish two separate
rules for the final listing determination and the final critical
habitat determination for the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate
species. The final listing rule will publish under the existing docket
number, FWS-R2-ES-2012-0029, and the final critical habitat designation
will publish under docket number FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004.
We request that you provide comments specifically on our listing
determination under the existing docket number [FWS-R2-ES-2012-0029].
We will consider information and recommendations from all interested
parties. We are particularly interested in comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and regulations that may
be addressing those threats.
(2) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species,
including the locations of any additional populations of this species.
(3) Any information on the biological or ecological requirements of
the species, and ongoing conservation measures for the species and its
habitat.
(4) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by the
species and possible impacts of these activities on this species.
We request that you provide comments specifically on the critical
habitat determination and draft economic analysis under docket number
[FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004]. We will consider information and recommendations
from all interested parties. We are particularly interested in comments
concerning:
(5) 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 may not be
prudent.
(6) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of habitat for the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrates;
(b) What areas, that were occupied at the time of listing (or are
currently occupied) and that contain features essential to the
conservation of the species, should be included in the designation and
why;
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing
for the potential effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why.
(7) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(8) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on the six west Texas aquatic invertebrates and proposed
critical habitat.
(9) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final
designation; in particular, any impacts on small entities or families,
and the benefits of including or excluding areas that exhibit these
impacts.
(10) Information on the extent to which the description of economic
impacts in the draft economic analysis is complete and accurate.
(11) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding
any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(12) Whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
including the area proposed as critical habitat around San Solomon
Spring at Balmorhea State Park based on the existing habitat
conservation plan or other relevant factors.
(13) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rules (77
FR 49601; August 16, 2012) during the initial comment period from
August 16, 2012, to October 15, 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 rules. On the basis of
public comments and other relevant information, we may, during the
development of our final determination on the proposed critical habitat
designation, 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 draft economic analysis 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, will be available for public inspection on
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2012-0029 (for the
proposed listing rule) and Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0004 (for the
proposed critical habitat designation and draft economic analysis), or
by
[[Page 8098]]
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain copies of the proposed
rule on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-
R2-ES-2012-0029 and the draft economic analysis at Docket No. FWS-R2-
ES-2013-0004, or by mail from the Austin Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the designation of critical habitat for six west Texas aquatic
invertebrate species in this document. For more information on the six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species, the species' habitat, and
previous Federal actions concerning the species, refer to the proposed
listing rule and designation of critical habitat, published in the
Federal Register on August 16, 2012 (77 FR 49602). The proposed rule is
available online at https://www.regulations.gov (at Docket No. FWS-R2-
ES-2012-0029) or from the Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
On August 16, 2012, we published a proposed rule to list as
endangered and to designate critical habitat for the six west Texas
aquatic invertebrate species (77 FR 49602). In total, approximately
181.7 hectares (ha) (450.6 acres (ac)) were proposed for designation as
critical habitat in four units for three species and one unit for three
other species. The proposed critical habitat is located in Pecos,
Reeves, and Jeff Davis Counties, Texas. We proposed to designate
approximately 3.7 ha (9.2 ac) in four units located in Reeves and Jeff
Davis Counties, Texas, as critical habitat for the Phantom Cave snail,
Phantom springsnail, and diminutive amphipod. We also proposed to
designate approximately 178.6 ha (441.1 ac) in one unit located in
Pecos County, Texas, as critical habitat for the Diamond Y Spring
snail, Gonzales springsnail, and Pecos amphipod. That proposal had a
60-day comment period, ending October 15, 2012. We received a request
for a public hearing; therefore, a public hearing will be held (see
DATES and ADDRESSES). We will submit for publication in the Federal
Register a final listing determination and critical habitat designation
for the six west Texas aquatic invertebrates on or before August 16,
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 by the Secretary 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 of critical habitat by any activity
funded, authorized, or carried out by any Federal agency. Federal
agencies proposing actions affecting critical habitat must consult with
us on the effects of their proposed 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 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 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. We are
considering excluding the San Solomon Spring Unit that is currently
covered under a habitat conservation plan with Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department for the Phantom Cave snail, Phantom springsnail, and
diminutive amphipod for management activities at Balmorhea State Park.
However, the final decision on whether to exclude any areas will be
based on the best scientific 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 draft economic analysis concerning the proposed
critical habitat designation, which is available for review and comment
(see ADDRESSES section).
Draft Economic Analysis
The purpose of the draft economic analysis is to identify and
analyze the potential economic impacts associated with the proposed
critical habitat designation for the Phantom Cave snail, Phantom
springsnail, diminutive amphipod, Diamond Y Spring snail, Gonzales
springsnail, and Pecos amphipod. The draft economic analysis 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 six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species (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 draft economic
analysis, 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 Appendix B, ``Framework,'' of the
draft economic analysis.
The draft economic analysis provides estimated costs of the
foreseeable potential economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat
designation for the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate species 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.
[[Page 8099]]
It identifies potential incremental costs as a result of the proposed
critical habitat designation; these are those costs attributed to
critical habitat over and above those baseline costs attributed to
listing.
The draft economic analysis quantifies economic impacts of the six
west Texas aquatic invertebrate species conservation efforts associated
with the following categories of activity: (1) Water withdrawals for
agricultural and municipal use; (2) oil and gas development; and (3)
recreation and species management.
We do not anticipate recommending incremental conservation measures
to avoid adverse modification of critical habitat over and above those
recommended to avoid jeopardy of the species, and, as such, the
economic analysis forecasts few incremental economic impacts as a
result of the designation of critical habitat for these species. A
number of factors limit the extent to which the proposed critical
habitat designation will result in incremental costs, including the
fact that all the proposed habit is occupied by the species, the
species' survival is so closely linked to the quality of their habitat,
few actions being carried out in the area are subject to a Federal
nexus, and much of the proposed habitat is currently managed for
conservation.
The total projected incremental costs of administrative efforts
resulting from section 7 consultations on the six invertebrates are
approximately $40,000 over 20 years ($4,000 on an annualized basis),
assuming a seven percent discount rate. The analysis estimates
potential future administrative impacts based on the historical rate of
consultation on co-occurring listed species in areas proposed for
critical habitat, as discussed in Chapter 2 of the draft economic
analysis.
As stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the
public on the draft economic analysis, as well as all aspects of the
proposed rules and our amended required determinations. We may revise
the proposed rules 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.
Required Determinations--Amended
In our August 16, 2012, proposed rule (77 FR 49601), 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 draft economic
analysis. We have now made use of the draft economic analysis data to
make these determinations. In this document, we affirm the information
in our proposed 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 draft economic analysis 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 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 draft economic analysis of the
proposed designation, 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 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 designation of critical habitat for
the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate species would affect a
substantial number of small entities, we considered the number of small
entities affected within particular types of economic activities, such
as water withdrawals for agricultural and municipal use, oil and gas
development, and recreation and species management. 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. If we finalize the proposed listing
for the species, in areas where any one of the six west Texas aquatic
invertebrate species is present, Federal agencies will be 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 critical habitat designation, consultations to avoid the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat would be
incorporated into the existing consultation process.
In the draft economic analysis, we evaluated the potential economic
effects on small entities resulting from implementation of conservation
actions
[[Page 8100]]
related to the proposed designation of critical habitat for the Phantom
Cave snail, Phantom springsnail, diminutive amphipod, Diamond Y Spring
snail, Gonzales springsnail, and Pecos amphipod. We do not anticipate
recommending incremental conservation measures to avoid adverse
modification of critical habitat over and above those recommended to
avoid jeopardy of the species, and as such the economic analysis
forecasts few incremental economic impacts as a result of the
designation of critical habitat for these species. Those incremental
impacts forecasted are solely related to administrative costs for
adverse modification analyses in section 7 consultations. We anticipate
conducting approximately 7 formal, 15 informal, and 3 technical
assistance consultations considering the designation, for a total of 25
consultations, over the next 20 years. Assuming the consultations are
equally likely to occur in any year, this results in fewer than two
consultations a year. Based on the consultation history, most
consultations are unlikely to involve a third party. If any
consultations were to involve a third party, fewer than two small
entities, if any, could be affected each year. The incremental cost per
entity of participating in a consultation is likely to range from $400
to $5,000. Please refer to Appendix A of the draft economic analysis of
the proposed critical habitat designation for a more detailed
discussion of potential economic impacts.
The Service's current understanding of recent case law is that
Federal agencies are only required to evaluate the potential impacts of
rulemaking on those entities directly regulated by the rulemaking;
therefore, they are not required to evaluate the potential impacts to
those entities not directly regulated. The designation of critical
habitat for an endangered or threatened species only has a regulatory
effect where a Federal action agency is involved in a particular action
that may affect the designated critical habitat. Under these
circumstances, only the Federal action agency is directly regulated by
the designation, and, therefore, consistent with the Service's current
interpretation of RFA and recent case law, the Service may limit its
evaluation of the potential impacts to those identified for Federal
action agencies. Under this interpretation, there is no requirement
under the RFA to evaluate the potential impacts to entities not
directly regulated, such as small businesses. However, Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives in quantitative (to the extent
feasible) and qualitative terms. Consequently, it is the current
practice of the Service to assess to the extent practicable these
potential impacts, if sufficient data are available, whether or not
this analysis is believed by the Service to be strictly required by the
RFA. In other words, while the effects analysis required under the RFA
is limited to entities directly regulated by the rulemaking, the
effects analysis under the Act, consistent with the EO regulatory
analysis requirements, can take into consideration impacts to both
directly and indirectly impacted entities, where practicable and
reasonable.
In summary, we have considered whether the proposed 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
conclude that future consultations are unlikely to involve a third
party. However if a third party were to be involved in a consultation,
we identified fewer than two small business entities that could be
affected each year as a result of the designation of critical habitat
for the six west Texas aquatic invertebrate species. For the above
reasons and based on currently available information, we certify that,
if promulgated, the proposed 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
Austin Ecological Services Field Office, 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.).
Dated: January 23, 2013.
Michael J. Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2013-02051 Filed 2-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
