Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 10 Petitions, 19259-19263 [2015-07837]

Download as PDF 19259 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket Nos. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0017, FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0018, FWS–HQ–ES– 2015–0019, FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0020, FWS– R8–ES–2015–0021, FWS–R1–ES–2014– 0061, FWS–R8–ES–2015–0022, FWS–R8– ES–2015–0023, FWS–R8–ES–2015–0024, FWS–R7–ES–2015–0025;4500030115] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 10 Petitions Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of petition findings and initiation of status reviews. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90day findings on various petitions to list eight species, reclassify one species, and delist one species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that these 10 petitions present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this document, we are initiating a review of the status of each of these species to determine if the petitioned actions are warranted. The status reviews for two species, the golden conure (which appears in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife as the golden parakeet) and the northern spotted owl, will also serve as 5-year reviews for those species. To ensure that these status reviews are comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information regarding these species. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month findings on the petitions, which will address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct the status reviews, we request that we receive information on or before June 9, 2015. Information submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. ADDRESSES: You may submit information on species for which a status review is being initiated by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket number (see table below). Then click the Search rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 button. You may submit information by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ If your information will fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table below]; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. We request that you send information only by the methods described above. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information section, below, for more details). Species Docket No. Clear Lake hitch ........ FWS–R8–ES–2015– 0017 FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 0018 FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 0019 FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 0020 FWS–R8–ES–2015– 0021 FWS–R1–ES–2014– 0061 FWS–R8–ES–2015– 0022 FWS–R8–ES–2015– 0023 Egyptian tortoise ....... Golden conure .......... Long-tailed chinchilla Mojave shoulderband snail. Northern spotted owl Relict dace ................ San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly. Western pond turtle .. Yellow-cedar ............. FWS–R8–ES–2015– 0024 FWS–R7–ES–2015– 0025 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Species Contact information Clear Lake hitch. Egyptian tortoise. Golden conure Long-tailed chinchilla. Mojave shoulderband snail. Northern spotted owl. Relict dace ...... PO 00000 Frm 00016 Jennifer Norris, telephone (916)-414–6600. Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. Mendel Stewart, telephone (760) 431–9440. Paul Henson, telephone (503) 231–6179. Edward D. Koch, telephone (775) 861–6300. Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Species San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly. Western pond turtle. Yellow-cedar ... Contact information Jennifer Norris, telephone (916) 414–6600. Jennifer Norris, telephone (916) 414–6600. Steve Brockmann, telephone (907) 780–1181. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Information When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial information indicating that listing, reclassification, or delisting a species may be warranted, we are required to promptly review the status of the species (status review). For the status review to be complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, we request information on these species from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties. We seek information on: (1) The species’ biology, range, and population trends, including: (a) Habitat requirements; (b) Genetics and taxonomy; (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns; (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and projected trends; and (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its habitat, or both. (2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing, reclassification, or delisting determination for a species under section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A); (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (Factor B); (c) Disease or predation (Factor C); (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); or (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence (Factor E). (3) The potential effects of climate change on the species and its habitat. (4) For the northern spotted owl, we specifically request information on: (a) Evidence that any of the factors identified under Factor A are having E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM 10APP1 rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 19260 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules population-level effects on the northern spotted owl, either singularly or in combination; (b) Evidence that the West Nile virus or predation by barred owls have caused population-level impacts on northern spotted owls; (c) Identification of shortcoming in existing regulations that are having population-level effects on the northern spotted owl; (d) Evidence that competition with barred owls is having population-level effects on the northern spotted owl; and (e) Evidence that global climate change is having population-level effects on the northern spotted owl. (5) For those domestic (U.S.) species that are not listed, if, after the status review, we determine that listing is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act) under section 4 of the Act for those species that fall within the jurisdiction of the United States, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time we propose to list the species. Therefore, we also specifically request data and information for Clear Lake hitch, Mojave shoulderband snail, relict dace, San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, western pond turtle, and yellow-cedar on: (a) What may constitute ‘‘physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species,’’ within the geographical range occupied by the species; (b) Where these features are currently found; (c) Whether any of these features may require special management considerations or protection; (d) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species that are ‘‘essential for the conservation of the species’’; and (e) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for designation if the species is proposed for listing, and why such habitat meets the requirements of section 4 of the Act. Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include. Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the actions under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.’’ VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 You may submit your information concerning these status reviews by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this personal identifying information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http:// www.regulations.gov. Information and supporting documentation that we received and used in preparing this finding will be available for you to review at http:// www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal business hours at the appropriate lead U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Background Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition and publish our notice of the finding promptly in the Federal Register. Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to promptly commence a review of the status of the species, which we will subsequently summarize in our 12-month finding. Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see (2) under Request For Information, above). We may delist a species according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best available scientific and commercial data indicate that the species is neither an PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 endangered nor threatened species for one or more of the following reasons: (1) The species is extinct; (2) The species has recovered and is no longer an endangered or threatened species; or (3) The original scientific or commercial data used at the time the species was classified, or the interpretation of such data, were in error. In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look beyond the exposure of the species to a factor to evaluate whether the species may respond to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat, and, during the subsequent status review, we attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species may warrant listing as an ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species,’’ as those terms are defined in the Act. However, the identification of factors that could affect a species negatively may not be sufficient for us to find that the information in the petition and our files is substantial. The information must include evidence sufficient to suggest that these factors may be operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species may meet the definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened species’’ under the Act. Evaluation of a Petition To List the Clear Lake Hitch as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0017 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi); California Petition History On January 13, 2013, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife drafted a recommendation to the California Fish and Game Commission to list the Clear Lake hitch as threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act. On September 25, 2014, we received a petition dated September 25, 2014, from the Center for Biological Diversity, requesting that Clear Lake hitch be listed as a endangered or threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM 10APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi) based on Factors A, B, C, and E. Thus, for the Clear Lake hitch, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Evaluation of a Petition To List the Egyptian Tortoise as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0018 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Evaluation of a Petition To Delist the Golden Conure Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0019 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Golden conure (Guaruba guarouba or Aratinga guarouba); Brazil. (Note: The species is listed as ‘‘golden parakeet’’ (Aratinga guarouba) in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h). However, we refer to the species by the common name ‘‘golden conure’’ in this document.) Petition History On August 21, 2014, we received a petition dated August 20, 2014, from the American Federation of Aviculture, Inc., requesting that the golden conure be removed from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (i.e., ‘‘delisted’’) pursuant to the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni); Egypt, Libya, Israel Finding Petition History Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the golden conure (Guaruba guarouba or Aratinga guarouba) based on new population estimates and Fnew information relating to actors A, B, and D. Thus, for the golden conure, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). On June 9, 2014, we received a petition dated May 2014, from Friends of Animals, requesting that the Egyptian tortoise be listed as an endangered or threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition. rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni) based on Factors A, B, C, D, and E. Thus, for the Egyptian tortoise, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see Request for Information, above). VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 Evaluation of a Petition To List the Long-Tailed Chinchilla as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0020 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera); Chile PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 19261 Petition History On October 14, 2014, we received a petition dated October 7, 2014, from Friends of Animals, requesting that the long-tailed chinchilla be listed as a endangered or threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a November 17, 2014, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera) based on Factors A, B, D, and E. Thus, for the long-tailed chinchilla, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Evaluation of a Petition To List Mojave Shoulderband Snail as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0021 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Mohave shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta (coyote) greggi); California Petition History On January 31, 2014, we received a petition dated January 31, 2014, from the Center for Biological Diversity, requesting that Mohave shoulderband snail be listed as a endangered or threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an April 4, 2014, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition. E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM 10APP1 19262 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules Finding occidentalis caurina) based on Factors A, C, D, and E. Thus, for the northern spotted owl, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the Mohave shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta (coyote) greggi)) based on Factors A, C, and E. Thus, for the Mojave shoulderband snail, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify the Northern Spotted Owl as an Endangered Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2014–0061 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina); California, Oregon, and Washington, U.S.A.; British Columbia, Canada. rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Petition History On August 21, 2012, we received a petition dated August 15, 2012, from Environmental Protection Information Center, requesting that the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) be listed as an endangered species under the Act. We published a final rule to list the northern spotted owl as a threatened species under the Act on June 26, 1990 (55 FR 28114); the effective date of that rule was July 23, 1990. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, as required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a September 27, 2012, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency uplisting. We also issued a letter to the petitioner on April 17, 2014, informing them of our anticipated timeline for publication of the 90-day and 12-month findings. This finding addresses the petition. Evaluation of a Petition To List the Relict Dace as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0022 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Relict dace (Relictus solitarius); Nevada Petition History On June 27, 2014, we received a petition dated June 27, 2014, from Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, requesting that relict dace be listed as an endangered species under the Act on an emergency basis. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an August 25, 2014, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the relict dace (Relictus solitarius) based on Factors A, D, and E. Thus, for the relict dace, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Finding Evaluation of a Petition To List the San Joaquin Valley Giant Flower-Loving Fly as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial information that the petitioned action may be warranted for the northern spotted owl (Strix Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0023 under the Supporting Documents section. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Species and Range San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly (Rhaphiomidas trochilus); California. Petition History On June 26, 2014, we received a petition dated June 26, 2014, from Gregory R. Ballmer and Kendall H. Osborne, requesting that San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly be listed as an endangered species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a September 12, 2014, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly (Rhaphiomidas trochilus) based on Factors A and E. Thus, for the San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Evaluation of a Petition To List the Western Pond Turtle as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0024 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range Western pond turtle or Pacific pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata; formerly Clemmys marmorata); California and Washington Petition History On July 11, 2012, we were petitioned by the Center for Biological Diversity to list 53 amphibian and reptile species across the United States. The western pond turtle was one of the species petitioned for listing. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM 10APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) based on Factor A. Thus, for the western pond turtle, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factor identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Evaluation of a Petition To List Yellowcedar as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2015–0025 under the Supporting Documents section. Species and Range YellowYellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis); Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington, U.S.A.; Canada Petition History On June 24, 2014, we received a petition dated June 24, 2014, from Center for Biological Diversity, The Boat Company, Greater Southeast Alaska Conservation Community, and Greenpeace, requesting that yellowcedar be listed as a endangered or threatenedspecies under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis) based on Factors A, B, and E. Thus, for yellow-cedar, the Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, above). rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Conclusion On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that the petitions summarized above for Clear Lake hitch, Egyptian tortoise, golden conure, longtailed chinchilla, Mojave shoulderband snail, northern spotted owl, relict dace, San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, western pond turtle, and yellow- VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 cedar present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the requested actions may be warranted. Because we have found that the petitions present substantial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted, we are initiating status reviews to determine whether these actions under the Act are warranted. At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue a 12month finding in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether or not the Service believes listing, reclassification, or delisting, as appropriate, is warranted. It is important to note that the ‘‘substantial information’’ standard for a 90-day finding as to whether the petitioned action may be warranted differs from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and commercial data’’ standard that applies to the Service’s determination in a 12-month finding as to whether a petitioned action is in fact warranted. A 90-day finding is not based on a status review. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough status review of the species, which is conducted following a substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act’s standards for 90-day and 12month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-day finding does not mean that the 12month finding will result in a warranted finding. 5-Year Review The status reviews of golden conure and northern spotted owl will also serve as the 5-year reviews for thesetheses species. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we conduct a review of listed species at least once every 5 years. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing those species under active review. For additional information about 5-year reviews, go to http://www.fws.gov/ endangered/what-we-do/recoveryoverview.html, scroll down to ‘‘Learn More about 5-Year Reviews,’’ and click on our factsheet. References Cited A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov and upon request from the appropriate lead field offices (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Authors The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the Branch of Foreign Species, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 19263 Authority The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Dated: March 30, 2015. Robert Dreher, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2015–07837 Filed 4–9–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2015–0013; FXES11130900000C6–145–FF09E42000] RIN 1018–BA42 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of Black-Footed Ferrets in Wyoming Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of availability. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), in coordination with the State of Wyoming and other partners, propose to reestablish additional populations of the black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), a federally listed endangered mammal, into occupied prairie dog (Cynomys spp.) habitat in Wyoming. We propose to reestablish the black-footed ferret under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), and to classify any reestablished population as a nonessential experimental population (NEP). This approach would provide relaxed management rules to facilitate reintroductions. We are seeking comments on this proposal and on our draft environmental assessment, prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), which analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed reintroduction. We are also notifying the public that we are amending the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (List) to reflect the scientifically accepted historical range of the black-footed ferret. The revised historical range description includes Mexico. The historical range information in the List is informational, not regulatory. DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM 10APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 69 (Friday, April 10, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19259-19263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07837]



[[Page 19259]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket Nos. FWS-R8-ES-2015-0017, FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0018, FWS-HQ-ES-2015-
0019, FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0020, FWS-R8-ES-2015-0021, FWS-R1-ES-2014-0061, 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0022, FWS-R8-ES-2015-0023, FWS-R8-ES-2015-0024, FWS-R7-
ES-2015-0025;4500030115]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 
10 Petitions

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of petition findings and initiation of status reviews.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on various petitions to list eight species, reclassify one 
species, and delist one species under the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that these 10 
petitions present substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore, 
with the publication of this document, we are initiating a review of 
the status of each of these species to determine if the petitioned 
actions are warranted. The status reviews for two species, the golden 
conure (which appears in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 
as the golden parakeet) and the northern spotted owl, will also serve 
as 5-year reviews for those species. To ensure that these status 
reviews are comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial 
data and other information regarding these species. Based on the status 
reviews, we will issue 12-month findings on the petitions, which will 
address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in 
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.

DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct the status reviews, we 
request that we receive information on or before June 9, 2015. 
Information submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern 
Time on the closing date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit information on species for which a status 
review is being initiated by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket 
number (see table below). Then click the Search button. You may submit 
information by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your information will 
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information 
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate 
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach 
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a 
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table 
below]; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike; 
Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send information only by the methods described 
above. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information 
section, below, for more details).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Species                            Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear Lake hitch..........................  FWS-R8-ES-2015-0017
Egyptian tortoise.........................  FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0018
Golden conure.............................  FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0019
Long-tailed chinchilla....................  FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0020
Mojave shoulderband snail.................  FWS-R8-ES-2015-0021
Northern spotted owl......................  FWS-R1-ES-2014-0061
Relict dace...............................  FWS-R8-ES-2015-0022
San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly  FWS-R8-ES-2015-0023
Western pond turtle.......................  FWS-R8-ES-2015-0024
Yellow-cedar..............................  FWS-R7-ES-2015-0025
------------------------------------------------------------------------


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Species                        Contact information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear Lake hitch..................  Jennifer Norris, telephone (916)-414-
                                     6600.
Egyptian tortoise.................  Janine Van Norman, telephone (703)
                                     358-2171.
Golden conure.....................  Janine Van Norman, telephone (703)
                                     358-2171.
Long-tailed chinchilla............  Janine Van Norman, telephone (703)
                                     358-2171.
Mojave shoulderband snail.........  Mendel Stewart, telephone (760) 431-
                                     9440.
Northern spotted owl..............  Paul Henson, telephone (503) 231-
                                     6179.
Relict dace.......................  Edward D. Koch, telephone (775) 861-
                                     6300.
San Joaquin Valley giant flower-    Jennifer Norris, telephone (916) 414-
 loving fly.                         6600.
Western pond turtle...............  Jennifer Norris, telephone (916) 414-
                                     6600.
Yellow-cedar......................  Steve Brockmann, telephone (907) 780-
                                     1181.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Information

    When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial 
information indicating that listing, reclassification, or delisting a 
species may be warranted, we are required to promptly review the status 
of the species (status review). For the status review to be complete 
and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, 
we request information on these species from governmental agencies, 
Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any 
other interested parties. We seek information on:
    (1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
    (a) Habitat requirements;
    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its 
habitat, or both.
    (2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing, 
reclassification, or delisting determination for a species under 
section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes (Factor B);
    (c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); or
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence (Factor E).
    (3) The potential effects of climate change on the species and its 
habitat.
    (4) For the northern spotted owl, we specifically request 
information on:
    (a) Evidence that any of the factors identified under Factor A are 
having

[[Page 19260]]

population-level effects on the northern spotted owl, either singularly 
or in combination;
    (b) Evidence that the West Nile virus or predation by barred owls 
have caused population-level impacts on northern spotted owls;
    (c) Identification of shortcoming in existing regulations that are 
having population-level effects on the northern spotted owl;
    (d) Evidence that competition with barred owls is having 
population-level effects on the northern spotted owl; and
    (e) Evidence that global climate change is having population-level 
effects on the northern spotted owl.
    (5) For those domestic (U.S.) species that are not listed, if, 
after the status review, we determine that listing is warranted, we 
will propose critical habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) of the 
Act) under section 4 of the Act for those species that fall within the 
jurisdiction of the United States, to the maximum extent prudent and 
determinable at the time we propose to list the species. Therefore, we 
also specifically request data and information for Clear Lake hitch, 
Mojave shoulderband snail, relict dace, San Joaquin Valley giant 
flower-loving fly, western pond turtle, and yellow-cedar on:
    (a) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species,'' within the geographical range 
occupied by the species;
    (b) Where these features are currently found;
    (c) Whether any of these features may require special management 
considerations or protection;
    (d) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species that are ``essential for the conservation of the species''; and
    (e) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for 
designation if the species is proposed for listing, and why such 
habitat meets the requirements of section 4 of the Act.
    Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as 
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to 
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
    Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the actions 
under consideration without providing supporting information, although 
noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section 
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any 
species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on 
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.''
    You may submit your information concerning these status reviews by 
one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit 
information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the 
Web site. If you submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying 
information, you may request at the top of your document that we 
withhold this personal identifying information from public review. 
However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will 
post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
    Information and supporting documentation that we received and used 
in preparing this finding will be available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal 
business hours at the appropriate lead U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on 
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, 
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the 
petition and publish our notice of the finding promptly in the Federal 
Register.
    Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information 
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day 
petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a 
reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition 
may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial 
scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to 
promptly commence a review of the status of the species, which we will 
subsequently summarize in our 12-month finding.
    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species 
to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an 
endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors 
described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see (2) under Request For 
Information, above).
    We may delist a species according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best 
available scientific and commercial data indicate that the species is 
neither an endangered nor threatened species for one or more of the 
following reasons:
    (1) The species is extinct;
    (2) The species has recovered and is no longer an endangered or 
threatened species; or
    (3) The original scientific or commercial data used at the time the 
species was classified, or the interpretation of such data, were in 
error.
    In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look 
beyond the exposure of the species to a factor to evaluate whether the 
species may respond to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts 
to the species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species 
responds negatively, the factor may be a threat, and, during the 
subsequent status review, we attempt to determine how significant a 
threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes 
to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species may 
warrant listing as an ``endangered species'' or a ``threatened 
species,'' as those terms are defined in the Act. However, the 
identification of factors that could affect a species negatively may 
not be sufficient for us to find that the information in the petition 
and our files is substantial. The information must include evidence 
sufficient to suggest that these factors may be operative threats that 
act on the species to the point that the species may meet the 
definition of an ``endangered species'' or ``threatened species'' under 
the Act.

Evaluation of a Petition To List the Clear Lake Hitch as an Endangered 
or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0017 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi); California

Petition History

    On January 13, 2013, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 
drafted a recommendation to the California Fish and Game Commission to 
list the Clear Lake hitch as threatened species under the California 
Endangered Species Act. On September 25, 2014, we received a petition 
dated September 25, 2014, from the Center for Biological Diversity, 
requesting that Clear Lake hitch be listed as a endangered or 
threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly identified 
itself as such and

[[Page 19261]]

included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, 
required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi) based on 
Factors A, B, C, and E.
    Thus, for the Clear Lake hitch, the Service requests information on 
the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including 
the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, 
above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List the Egyptian Tortoise as an Endangered 
or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0018 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni); Egypt, Libya, Israel

Petition History

    On June 9, 2014, we received a petition dated May 2014, from 
Friends of Animals, requesting that the Egyptian tortoise be listed as 
an endangered or threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly 
identified itself as such and included the requisite identification 
information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a 
letter to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information 
presented in the petition and did not find that the species warranted 
emergency listing. This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni) based on 
Factors A, B, C, D, and E.
    Thus, for the Egyptian tortoise, the Service requests information 
on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see 
Request for Information, above).

Evaluation of a Petition To Delist the Golden Conure Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0019 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Golden conure (Guaruba guarouba or Aratinga guarouba); Brazil. 
(Note: The species is listed as ``golden parakeet'' (Aratinga guarouba) 
in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h). 
However, we refer to the species by the common name ``golden conure'' 
in this document.)

Petition History

    On August 21, 2014, we received a petition dated August 20, 2014, 
from the American Federation of Aviculture, Inc., requesting that the 
golden conure be removed from the Federal List of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife (i.e., ``delisted'') pursuant to the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the golden conure (Guaruba guarouba or Aratinga guarouba) 
based on new population estimates and Fnew information relating to 
actors A, B, and D.
    Thus, for the golden conure, the Service requests information on 
the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including 
the factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, 
above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List the Long-Tailed Chinchilla as an 
Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0020 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera); Chile

Petition History

    On October 14, 2014, we received a petition dated October 7, 2014, 
from Friends of Animals, requesting that the long-tailed chinchilla be 
listed as a endangered or threatened species under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(a). In a November 17, 2014, letter to the petitioner, we 
responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition 
and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This 
finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera) based on 
Factors A, B, D, and E.
    Thus, for the long-tailed chinchilla, the Service requests 
information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the 
Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for 
Information, above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List Mojave Shoulderband Snail as an 
Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0021 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Mohave shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta (coyote) greggi); 
California

Petition History

    On January 31, 2014, we received a petition dated January 31, 2014, 
from the Center for Biological Diversity, requesting that Mohave 
shoulderband snail be listed as a endangered or threatened species 
under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and 
included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, 
required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an April 4, 2014, letter to the 
petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in 
the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency 
listing. This finding addresses the petition.

[[Page 19262]]

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the Mohave shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta (coyote) 
greggi)) based on Factors A, C, and E.
    Thus, for the Mojave shoulderband snail, the Service requests 
information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the 
Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for 
Information, above).

Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify the Northern Spotted Owl as an 
Endangered Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R1-ES-2014-0061 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina); California, 
Oregon, and Washington, U.S.A.; British Columbia, Canada.

Petition History

    On August 21, 2012, we received a petition dated August 15, 2012, 
from Environmental Protection Information Center, requesting that the 
northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) be listed as an 
endangered species under the Act. We published a final rule to list the 
northern spotted owl as a threatened species under the Act on June 26, 
1990 (55 FR 28114); the effective date of that rule was July 23, 1990. 
The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the 
requisite identification information for the petitioner, as required by 
50 CFR 424.14(a). In a September 27, 2012, letter to the petitioner, we 
responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition 
and did not find that the species warranted emergency uplisting. We 
also issued a letter to the petitioner on April 17, 2014, informing 
them of our anticipated timeline for publication of the 90-day and 12-
month findings. This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial information 
that the petitioned action may be warranted for the northern spotted 
owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) based on Factors A, C, D, and E.
    Thus, for the northern spotted owl, the Service requests 
information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the 
Act, including the factors identified in this finding (see Request for 
Information, above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List the Relict Dace as an Endangered or 
Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0022 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Relict dace (Relictus solitarius); Nevada

Petition History

    On June 27, 2014, we received a petition dated June 27, 2014, from 
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, requesting that 
relict dace be listed as an endangered species under the Act on an 
emergency basis. The petition clearly identified itself as such and 
included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, 
required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an August 25, 2014, letter to the 
petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information presented in 
the petition and did not find that the species warranted emergency 
listing. This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the relict dace (Relictus solitarius) based on Factors A, 
D, and E.
    Thus, for the relict dace, the Service requests information on the 
five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the 
factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, 
above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List the San Joaquin Valley Giant Flower-
Loving Fly as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0023 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas 
trochilus); California.

Petition History

    On June 26, 2014, we received a petition dated June 26, 2014, from 
Gregory R. Ballmer and Kendall H. Osborne, requesting that San Joaquin 
Valley giant flower-loving fly be listed as an endangered species under 
the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included 
the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required 
at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a September 12, 2014, letter to the petitioner, 
we responded that we reviewed the information presented in the petition 
and did not find that the species warranted emergency listing. This 
finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly 
(Rhaphiomidas trochilus) based on Factors A and E.
    Thus, for the San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, the 
Service requests information on the five listing factors under section 
4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors identified in this finding 
(see Request for Information, above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List the Western Pond Turtle as an 
Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R8-ES-2015-0024 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    Western pond turtle or Pacific pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata; 
formerly Clemmys marmorata); California and Washington

Petition History

    On July 11, 2012, we were petitioned by the Center for Biological 
Diversity to list 53 amphibian and reptile species across the United 
States. The western pond turtle was one of the species petitioned for 
listing.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents

[[Page 19263]]

substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted for the western pond turtle 
(Actinemys marmorata) based on Factor A.
    Thus, for the western pond turtle, the Service requests information 
on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including 
the factor identified in this finding (see Request for Information, 
above).

Evaluation of a Petition To List Yellow-cedar as an Endangered or 
Threatened Species Under the Act

    Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be 
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 
FWS-R7-ES-2015-0025 under the Supporting Documents section.

Species and Range

    YellowYellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis); Alaska, California, 
Oregon, Washington, U.S.A.; Canada

Petition History

    On June 24, 2014, we received a petition dated June 24, 2014, from 
Center for Biological Diversity, The Boat Company, Greater Southeast 
Alaska Conservation Community, and Greenpeace, requesting that yellow-
cedar be listed as a endangered or threatenedspecies under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition.

Finding

    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis) based on Factors 
A, B, and E.
    Thus, for yellow-cedar, the Service requests information on the 
five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the 
factors identified in this finding (see Request for Information, 
above).

Conclusion

    On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented under 
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that the petitions 
summarized above for Clear Lake hitch, Egyptian tortoise, golden 
conure, long-tailed chinchilla, Mojave shoulderband snail, northern 
spotted owl, relict dace, San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, 
western pond turtle, and yellow-cedar present substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the requested actions may be 
warranted. Because we have found that the petitions present substantial 
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted, we 
are initiating status reviews to determine whether these actions under 
the Act are warranted. At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will 
issue a 12-month finding in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the 
Act, as to whether or not the Service believes listing, 
reclassification, or delisting, as appropriate, is warranted.
    It is important to note that the ``substantial information'' 
standard for a 90-day finding as to whether the petitioned action may 
be warranted differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial 
data'' standard that applies to the Service's determination in a 12-
month finding as to whether a petitioned action is in fact warranted. A 
90-day finding is not based on a status review. In a 12-month finding, 
we will determine whether a petitioned action is warranted after we 
have completed a thorough status review of the species, which is 
conducted following a substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's 
standards for 90-day and 12-month findings are different, as described 
above, a substantial 90-day finding does not mean that the 12-month 
finding will result in a warranted finding.

5-Year Review

    The status reviews of golden conure and northern spotted owl will 
also serve as the 5-year reviews for thesetheses species. Section 
4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we conduct a review of listed 
species at least once every 5 years. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 
require that we publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing 
those species under active review. For additional information about 5-
year reviews, go to http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/recovery-overview.html, scroll down to ``Learn More about 5-Year Reviews,'' and 
click on our factsheet.

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at 
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the appropriate lead 
field offices (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the 
Branch of Foreign Species, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service.

Authority

    The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: March 30, 2015.
Robert Dreher,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-07837 Filed 4-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P