Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances Policy, 26817-26825 [2016-10479]
Download as PDF
26817
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5909–N–34]
30-Day Notice of Proposed Information
Collection: Screening and Eviction for
Drug Abuse and Other Criminal
Activity
Office of the Chief Information
Officer, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
HUD has submitted the
proposed information collection
requirement described below to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review, in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act. The
purpose of this notice is to allow for an
additional 30 days of public comment.
DATES: Comments Due Date: June 3,
2016.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this proposal. Comments should refer to
the proposal by name and/or OMB
Control Number and should be sent to:
SUMMARY:
HUD Desk Officer, Office of
Management and Budget, New
Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503; fax: 202–395–5806. Email:
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colette Pollard, Reports Management
Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street
SW., Washington, DC 20410; email
Colette Pollard at Colette.Pollard@
hud.gov or telephone 202–402–3400.
This is not a toll-free number. Persons
with hearing or speech impairments
may access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Relay
Service at (800) 877–8339.
Copies of available documents
submitted to OMB may be obtained
from Ms. Pollard.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice informs the public that HUD is
seeking approval from OMB for the
information collection described in
Section A.
The Federal Register notice that
solicited public comment on the
information collection for a period of 60
Response
type and
number
Information collection
Frequency of
response
days was published on February 8, 2016
at 81 FR 6535.
A. Overview of Information Collection
Title of Information Collection:
Screening and Eviction for Drug Abuse
and Other Criminal Activity.
OMB Approval Number: 2577–0232.
Type of Request: Reinstatement, with
change, of a previously approved
collection.
Form Number: None.
Description of the need for the
information and proposed use: The
information and collection requirements
consist of PHAs screening requirements
to obtain criminal conviction records
from law enforcement agencies to
prevent admission of criminals into the
Public Housing and Section 8 programs
and to assist in lease enforcement and
eviction of those individuals in the
Public Housing and Section 8 programs
who engage in criminal activity.
Respondents: State, Local or Tribal
Government, Public Housing Agencies
(PHAs), Individuals or Households.
Frequency
per annum
Burden hour
per response
Annual burden
hours
HUD–2577–0232 ...................................................................
A. 93,289 .....
B. 1,711,933
C. 124,821 ...
D. 3,567,789
1
0.04
1
0.04
93,289
68,477
124,821
142,712
1
9
1
9
93,289
616,293
124,821
1,284,408
Total ...............................................................................
5,497,832 .....
........................
429,299
........................
2,118,811
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
B. Solicitation of Public Comment
This notice is soliciting comments
from members of the public and affected
parties concerning the collection of
information described in Section A on
the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond; including through
the use of appropriate automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
HUD encourages interested parties to
submit comment in response to these
questions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Dated: April 26, 2016.
Colette Pollard,
Department Reports Management Officer,
Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–10446 Filed 5–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[Docket Nos. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0177 and
160223138–6138–01; FF09E40000 156
FXES11150900000]
RIN 1018–BB08; 0648–BF79
Candidate Conservation Agreements
With Assurances Policy
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), Interior; National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), Commerce.
ACTION: Announcement of draft revised
policy and solicitation of public
comment.
AGENCIES:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (Services when
referring to both, and Service when
referring to when the action is taken by
SUMMARY:
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
26818
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
one agency), announce proposed
revisions to the Candidate Conservation
Agreements with Assurances policy
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. We propose to add
a definition of ‘‘net conservation
benefit’’ to this policy and to eliminate
references to the confusing requirement
of ‘‘other necessary properties’’ to
clarify the level of conservation effort
each agreement needs to include in
order for the Service to approve an
agreement. In a separate document
published in today’s Federal Register,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is
proposing changes to its regulations
regarding Candidate Conservation
Agreements with Assurances to make
them consistent with these proposed
changes to the policy.
DATES: We will accept comments that
we receive on or before July 5, 2016.
Comments 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 comments
by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box
enter the Docket number for the draft
policy, which is FWS–HQ–ES–2015–
0177. You may enter a comment by
clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ Please
ensure that you have found the correct
document before submitting your
comment.
• U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No.
FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0177; Division of
Policy, Performance, and Management
Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 5275 Leesburg Pike; MS: BPHC;
Falls Church, VA 22041.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see Request
for Information, below, for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Serfis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Chief, Branch of Conservation and
Communications, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters, MS: ES, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803 (telephone 703–358–2171); or
Angela Somma, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Chief, Endangered
Species Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
(telephone 301–427–8403, facsimile
301–713–0376). Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
may call the Federal Information Relay
Service at 800–877–8339.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) are charged
with implementing the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA or Act); among
the purposes of the ESA are to provide
a means to conserve the ecosystems
upon which species listed as
endangered or threatened depend and a
program for listed species conservation.
Through the Candidate Conservation
program, one of the Services’ goals is to
encourage the public to implement
specific conservation measures for
declining species prior to them being
listed under the ESA. The cumulative
outcome of such conservation measures
may result in not needing to list a
species, or may result in listing a
species as threatened instead of
endangered and provide the basis for its
recovery and eventual removal from the
protections of the ESA. The Services put
in place a voluntary conservation
program for non-Federal property
owners to help accomplish this goal:
Candidate Conservation Agreements
with Assurances (CCAAs). The policy
for this type of agreement was finalized
on June 17, 1999 (64 FR 32726), along
with implementing regulations for FWS
in part 17 of title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) (64 FR
32706). The FWS revised the CCAA
regulations in 2004 (69 FR 24084; May
2, 2004) to make them easier to
understand and implement by defining
‘‘property owner,’’ and clarifying several
points, including the transfer of permits,
permit revocation, and advanced
notification of take.
To participate in a CCAA, nonFederal property owners agree to
implement specific conservation
measures on their land that reduce or
eliminate threats to the species that are
covered under the agreement. An ESA
section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of
survival permit is issued to the
agreement participant providing a
specific level of incidental take coverage
should the property owner’s agreedupon conservation measures and
routine property management actions
(e.g., agricultural, ranching, or forestry
activities) result in take of the covered
species if listed. Property owners
receive assurances that they will not be
required to undertake any other
conservation measures than those
agreed to, even if new information
indicates that additional or revised
conservation measures are needed for
the species, and they will not be subject
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to additional resource use or land use
restrictions.
Under the current policy, to approve
a CCAA we must ‘‘determine that the
benefits of the conservation measures
implemented by a property owner under
a CCAA, when combined with those
benefits that would be achieved if it is
assumed that conservation measures
were also to be implemented on other
necessary properties, would preclude or
remove any need to list the covered
species.’’ The hypothetical concept of
conservation measures needing to be
implemented on ‘‘other necessary
properties’’ has caused confusion, and
therefore we are clarifying and revising
the CCAA standard to require a net
conservation benefit to the covered
species specifically on the property to
be enrolled and eliminating references
to ‘‘other necessary properties.’’
Proposed Revisions to Candidate
Conservation Agreements With
Assurances Policy
Based on our experience reviewing
and approving CCAAs over the past 16
years, we are proposing changes to the
policy that will clarify the level of
conservation effort each agreement
needs to include in order for the Service
to approve an agreement. We are
proposing the following changes to the
policy primarily to (a) address
confusion regarding the existing CCAA
approval requirements (standards) and
(b) make CCAAs more consistent with
Safe Harbor Agreement requirements,
because these agreements have similar
purposes, which are to provide a
conservation benefit to the covered
species while providing assurances to
non-Federal property owners:
(1) Add a new definition of ‘‘net
conservation benefit’’ to Part 2. What
Definitions Apply to this Policy?:
Net conservation benefit (for CCAA) is
defined as the cumulative benefits of
specific conservation measures designed
to improve the status of a covered
species by removing or minimizing
threats, stabilizing populations, and
increasing its numbers and improving
its habitat. The benefit would be
measured by the projected increase in
the species’ population or improvement
of the species’ habitat, taking into
account the duration of the Agreement
and any off-setting adverse effects
attributable to the incidental taking
allowed by the enhancement of survival
permit. The conservation measures and
property management activities covered
by the agreement must be designed to
reduce or eliminate those current and
future threats on the property that are
under the property owner’s control, in
order to increase the species’
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
populations or improve its habitat. In
the case where the species and habitat
are already adequately managed to the
benefit of the species, a net conservation
benefit will be achieved when the
property owner commits to manage the
species for a specified period of time
with the anticipation that the
population will increase or habitat
quality will improve.
(2) Delete the definition of ‘‘other
necessary properties’’ under Part 2.
What Definitions Apply to this Policy?
and delete references to this term from
the CCAA policy as follows:
• Revise the third sentence in the
second paragraph of Part 1. What is the
Purpose of the Policy? to read as
follows: Accordingly, the Service will
enter into an Agreement when we
determine that the conservation
measures to be implemented address the
current and anticipated future threats
that are under the property owner’s
control and will result in a net
conservation benefit to the covered
species.
• Revise the fifth paragraph under
Part 1 to read as follows: The Service
must determine that the benefits of the
conservation measures to be
implemented by a property owner under
a CCAA are reasonably expected to
result in a net conservation benefit to
the covered species. Pursuant to section
7 of the ESA, the Service must also
ensure that the conservation measures
and ongoing property management
activities included in a CCAA, and the
incidental take allowed under the
enhancement of survival section
10(a)(1)(A) permit for these measures
and activities are not likely to
jeopardize listed species or species
proposed for listing and are not likely to
destroy or adversely modify proposed or
designated critical habitat.
• Revise section C of Part 3. What Are
Candidate Conservation Agreements
With Assurances? to read as follows:
The benefits expected to result from the
conservation measures described in B
above (e.g., increase in population
numbers; enhancement, restoration, or
preservation of habitat; removal of
threats) and from the conditions that the
participating non-Federal property
owner agrees to maintain. The Service
must determine that the benefits of the
conservation measures implemented by
a property owner under a CCAA will
reasonably be expected to provide a net
conservation benefit.
• Revise Part 4. What Are the Benefits
to the Species? to read as follows: Before
entering into a CCAA, the Service must
make a written finding that the benefits
of the conservation measures to be
implemented by a property owner under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
a CCAA would result in a net
conservation benefit to the covered
species. If the Service and the
participating property owner cannot
agree on conservation measures that
satisfy this requirement, the Service will
not enter into the Agreement. Expected
benefits of the specific conservation
measures could include, but are not
limited to: removal or reduction of
current and anticipated future threats
for a specified period of time;
restoration, enhancement, or
preservation of habitat; maintenance or
increase of population numbers; and
reduction or elimination of impacts to
the species from agreed-upon, ongoing
property management actions.
(3) Revise the definition of ‘‘NonFederal property owner’’ in Part 2. What
Definitions Apply to this Policy? to be
consistent with the definition of
‘‘property owner’’ found at 50 CFR 17.3.
The revised definition makes it clear
that participants in a CCAA may
include entities that own the property as
well as entities that lease or hold other
interests in the property, as long as they
have the authority to carry out the
proposed management activities on the
land covered by the CCAA. Also note
for purposes of this policy that
‘‘management activities’’ includes the
conservation measures included in the
CCAA. The revised definition reads as
follows:
Property owner means a person with
a fee simple, leasehold, or other
property interest (including owners of
water rights or other natural resources),
or any other entity that may have a
property interest, sufficient to carry out
the proposed management activities,
subject to applicable State law, on nonFederal land.
(4) Add language to Part 3 to further
explain the assurances provided to a
property owner who is enrolled in a
CCAA if there are changed
circumstances or unforeseen
circumstances that could require
changes to or additional conservation
measures. This language is already
included in FWS’s regulations at 50 CFR
17.22(d)(5) and 17.32(d)(5) and does not
represent a change in current CCAA
practice. Adding this language to the
policy will make the policy and
regulations consistent.
(5) Add language to Part 8 to require
that a property owner notify the
Services prior to termination of their
CCAA. Currently, the FWS includes this
requirement as part of the conditions of
the section 10(a)(1)(A) permit that is
issued in conjunction with a CCAA. So
while this is new language the Services
are adding to the policy, it is not a new
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26819
practice in how the FWS administers
CCAAs.
(6) Revise the first sentence of Part 10
by adding ‘‘and meets the applicable
permit issuance criteria’’ to make it
clear that any property owner who
agrees to become a party to an original
Agreement, through a transfer, must
meet the issuance criteria for a CCAA.
While most of the issuance criteria
would already be met, assuming the
transferred CCAA was not changing in
any major way, in particular, the FWS
would need to ensure the new property
owner would meet issuance criteria at
50 CFR 17.22(d)(2)(vi) and
17.32(d)(2)(vi) which requires that the
applicant (i.e., property owner) has
shown capability for and commitment
to implementing all of the terms of the
Agreement. While this is new language
being added to the policy, it is not a
new requirement for a CCAA but serves
to make the policy and regulations
consistent.
(7) Revise additional language in the
policy to improve clarity.
Draft Revised Candidate Conservation
Agreements With Assurances Policy
Part 1. What is the purpose of the
policy?
This policy is intended to facilitate
the conservation of species proposed for
listing under the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) and candidate species, and
species likely to become candidates or
proposed for listing in the near future,
by giving non-Federal citizens, States,
local governments, Tribes, businesses,
organizations, and other non-Federal
property owners incentives to
implement conservation measures for
declining species by providing
regulatory assurances with regard to
land, water, or resource use restrictions
that might otherwise apply should the
species later become listed as
endangered or threatened under the
ESA. Under the policy, property owners
who commit in a Candidate
Conservation Agreement with
Assurances (CCAA or Agreement) to
implement mutually agreed-upon
conservation measures for a species
proposed for listing or candidate
species, or a species likely to become a
candidate or proposed for listing in the
near future, will receive assurances from
the Service that additional conservation
measures above and beyond those
contained in the Agreement will not be
required, and that additional land,
water, or resource use restrictions will
not be imposed upon them should the
species become listed in the future. In
determining whether to enter into a
CCAA, the Service will consider the
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
26820
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
extent to which the Agreement reduces
threats to the covered species so as to
contribute to the conservation and
stabilization of populations and habitat
of the species.
While the Services recognize that the
actions of a single property owner
usually will not sufficiently contribute
to the conservation of the species to
remove the need to list it, we also
recognize that the collective result of the
conservation measures of many property
owners may remove the need to list the
species. Accordingly, the Service will
enter into an Agreement when we
determine that the conservation
measures to be implemented address the
current and anticipated future threats
that are under the property owner’s
control and will result in a net
conservation benefit to the covered
species. While some property owners
are willing to manage their lands to
benefit species proposed for listing,
candidate species, or species likely to
become candidates or proposed for
listing in the near future, most desire
some degree of regulatory certainty and
assurances with regard to possible
future land, water, or resource use
restrictions that may be imposed if the
species is listed in the future.
The Service will provide regulatory
assurances to a non-Federal property
owner who enters into a CCAA by
authorizing, through issuance of an
enhancement of survival permit under
section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA, a
specified level of incidental take of the
covered species. Incidental take
authorization and the associated
agreement benefit property owners in
two ways. First, in the event the species
is listed, incidental take authorization
enables property owners to continue
current and agreed-upon land uses that
have the potential to cause take,
provided the take is at or reduced to a
level consistent with the overall goal of
providing a net conservation benefit to
the species. Second, the property owner
is provided the assurance that, if the
species is listed, no additional
conservation measures will be required
and no additional land use restrictions
will be imposed.
These Agreements will be developed
in coordination and cooperation with
appropriate State fish and wildlife
agencies and other affected State
agencies and Tribes. Coordination with
State fish and wildlife agencies is
particularly important given their
primary responsibilities and authorities
for the management of unlisted resident
species. These Agreements must be
consistent with applicable State laws
and regulations governing the
management of these species.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
The Service must determine that the
benefits of the conservation measures to
be implemented by a property owner
under a CCAA are reasonably expected
to result in a net conservation benefit to
the covered species. Pursuant to section
7 of the ESA, the Service must also
ensure that the conservation measures
and ongoing property management
activities included in a CCAA, and the
incidental take allowed under the
enhancement of survival section
10(a)(1)(A) permit for these measures
and activities, are not likely to
jeopardize listed species or species
proposed for listing and are not likely to
destroy or adversely modify proposed or
designated critical habitat.
Because some property owners may
not have the necessary resources or
expertise to develop a CCAA, the
Services are committed to providing, to
the maximum extent practicable given
available resources, the necessary
technical assistance to develop
Agreements and prepare enhancement
of survival permit applications. Also,
based on available resources, the
Service may assist or train property
owners to implement conservation
measures. Development of a biologically
sound Agreement and enhancement of
survival permit application is intricately
linked. The Service will process the
permit application following the
procedures described in 50 CFR
17.22(d)(1) and 17.32(d)(1), and part
222, as appropriate. All terms and
conditions of the permit must be
consistent with the specific
conservation measures included in the
associated CCAA.
Part 2. What definitions apply to this
policy?
The following definitions apply for
the purposes of this policy.
Candidate Conservation Agreement
(CCA) means an agreement signed by
either Service, or both Services jointly,
and other Federal or State agencies,
local governments, Tribes, businesses,
organizations, or a citizen that identifies
specific conservation measures that the
participants will voluntarily undertake
to conserve the covered species. There
are no specific requirements for entering
into a CCA and no standard has to be
met; no incidental take permit or
assurances are provided under these
Agreements.
Candidate Conservation Agreements
with Assurances means a Candidate
Conservation Agreement with a nonFederal property owner that meets the
standards described in this policy and
provides the property owner with the
assurances described in this policy.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Candidate Conservation Assurances
means the associated assurances that are
authorized by an enhancement of
survival permit. Such assurances may
apply to a whole parcel of land, or a
portion, as identified in the Agreement.
The assurances provided to a nonFederal property owner in a CCAA are
that no additional conservation
measures and no land, water, or
resource use restrictions, in addition to
the measures and restrictions described
in the Agreement will be imposed
should the covered species become
listed in the future. Also the
enhancement of survival permit
provides a prescribed level of incidental
take that may occur from agreed-upon,
ongoing property management actions
and the conservation measures.
Candidate species are defined
differently by the Services. The Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) defines
candidate species as species for which
FWS has sufficient information on file
relative to status and threats to support
issuance of proposed listing rules. The
National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) defines candidate species as (1)
species that are the subject of a petition
to list and for which NMFS has
determined that listing may be
warranted, pursuant to section
4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, and (2) species
that are not the subject of a petition but
for which NMFS has announced the
initiation of a status review in the
Federal Register. The term ‘‘candidate
species’’ used in this policy refers to
those species designated as candidates
by either of the Services.
Conservation measures as it applies to
CCAAs are actions that a property
owner voluntarily agrees to undertake
when entering into a CCAA that, by
addressing the threats that are occurring
or have the potential to occur on their
property, will result in an improvement
or expansion of the species’ habitat with
the potential for an increase in the
species’ population numbers. The
appropriate conservation measures
designed to address the threats that are
causing the species to decline will be
based on the best available scientific
information relative to the conservation
needs of the species such as those
contained in an up-to-date conservation
strategy.
Covered species means those species
that are the subject of a CCAA and
associated enhancement of survival
permit. Covered species are limited to
species that are candidates or proposed
for listing and species that are likely to
become candidates or proposed for
listing in the near future.
Enhancement of survival permit
means a permit issued under section
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA that, as related to
this policy, authorizes the permittee to
incidentally take species covered in a
CCAA.
Net conservation benefit (for CCAA) is
defined as the cumulative benefits of
specific conservation measures designed
to improve the status of a covered
species by removing or minimizing
threats, stabilizing populations, and
increasing its numbers and improving
its habitat. The benefit is measured by
the projected increase in the species’
population or improvement of the
species’ habitat, taking into account the
duration of the Agreement and any offsetting adverse effects attributable to the
incidental taking allowed by the
enhancement of survival permit. The
conservation measures and property
management activities covered by the
agreement must be designed to reduce
or eliminate those current and future
threats on the property that are under
the property owner’s control, in order to
increase the species’ populations or
improve its habitat. In the case where
the species and habitat is already
adequately managed to the benefit of the
species, a net conservation benefit will
be achieved when the property owner
commits to manage the species for a
specified period of time with the
anticipation that the population will
increase or habitat quality will improve.
Property owner means a person with
a fee simple, leasehold, or other
property interest (including owners of
water rights or other natural resources),
or any other entity that may have a
property interest, sufficient to carry out
the proposed management activities,
subject to applicable State law, on nonFederal land.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Part 3. What are Candidate
Conservation Agreements With
Assurances?
A CCAA will identify or include:
A. The population levels (if available
or determinable) of the covered species
existing at the time the parties negotiate
the Agreement; the existing habitat
characteristics that sustain any current,
permanent, or seasonal use, or potential
use by the covered species on lands or
waters in which the participating
property owner has an interest; and
consideration of the existing and
anticipated condition of the landscape
of the contiguous lands or waters not on
the participating owner’s property so
that the property enrolled in a CCAA
may serve as a habitat corridor or
connector or as a potential source for
the covered species to populate the
property to be enrolled if they do not
already exist on that property.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
B. The conservation measures the
participating property owner agrees to
undertake to conserve the species
included in the Agreement.
C. The benefits expected to result
from the conservation measures
described in B above (e.g., increase in
population numbers; enhancement,
restoration, or preservation of habitat;
removal of threats) and from the
conditions that the participating
property owner agrees to maintain. The
Service must determine that the benefits
of the conservation measures
implemented by a property owner under
a CCAA will reasonably be expected to
provide a net conservation benefit.
D. Assurances related to take of the
covered species will be authorized by
the Service through a section 10(a)(1)(A)
enhancement of survival permit (see
Part 5). Assurances include that no
additional conservation measures will
be required and no additional land,
water, or resource use restrictions will
be imposed beyond those described in
B above should the covered species be
listed in the future. If conservation
measures not provided for in the CCAA
are necessary to respond to changed
circumstances, the Service will not
require any conservation measures in
addition to those provided for in the
CCAA without the consent of the
property owner, provided the CCAA is
being properly implemented. If
additional conservation measures are
necessary to respond to unforeseen
circumstances, the Service may require
additional measures of the property
owner where the CCAA is being
properly implemented, only if those
measures maintain the original terms of
the CCAA to the maximum extent
possible. Additional conservation
measures will not involve the
commitment of additional land, water,
or financial compensation, or additional
restrictions on the use of land, water, or
other natural resources available for
development or use under the original
terms of the CCAA without the consent
of the property owner. The permit also
allows a prescribed amount of
incidental take that may result from the
conservation measures or from the
agreed-to ongoing property management
actions.
E. A monitoring provision that
requires measuring and reporting on: (1)
Progress in implementing the
conservation measures described in B
above, and (2) changes in habitat
conditions and the species’ status
resulting from these measures.
F. As appropriate, a notification
requirement to provide the Service or
appropriate State agencies with a
reasonable opportunity to rescue
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26821
individuals of the covered species
before any authorized incidental take
occurs.
Part 4. What are the benefits to the
species?
Before entering into a CCAA, the
Service must make a written finding
that the benefits of the conservation
measures to be implemented by a
property owner under an Agreement
would reasonably be expected to result
in a net conservation benefit to the
covered species. If the Service and the
participating property owner cannot
agree on conservation measures that
satisfy this requirement, the Service will
not enter into the Agreement. Expected
benefits of the specific conservation
measures could include, but are not
limited to: removal or reduction of
current and anticipated future threats
for a specified period of time;
restoration, enhancement, or
preservation of habitat; maintenance or
increase of population numbers; and
reduction or elimination of impacts to
the species from agreed-upon, ongoing
property management actions.
Part 5. What are assurances to property
owners?
Through a CCAA, the Service will
provide the assurance that, if any
species covered by the Agreement is
listed, and the Agreement has been
implemented in good faith by the
participating property owner, the
Service will not require additional
conservation measures nor impose
additional land, water, or resource use
restrictions beyond those the property
owner voluntarily committed to under
the terms of the original Agreement.
Assurances involving incidental take
will be authorized through issuance of
a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of
survival permit, which will allow the
property owner to take a specific
number of individuals of the covered
species or quantity of habitat, should
the species be listed, as long as the level
of take is consistent with those levels
agreed upon and identified in the
Agreement. The Service will issue an
enhancement of survival permit at the
time of entering into the CCAA. This
permit will have a delayed effective date
tied to the date of any future listing of
the covered species. The Service is
prepared as a last resort to revoke a
permit implementing a CCAA where
continuation of the permitted activity
would be likely to result in jeopardy to
a species covered by the permit. Prior to
taking such a step, however, the Service
will first have to exercise all possible
means to remedy such a situation.
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
26822
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Part 6. How does the service comply
with the National Environmental Policy
Act?
The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the regulations
of the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) require all Federal
agencies to examine the environmental
impacts of their actions, to analyze a full
range of alternatives, and to use public
participation in the planning and
implementation of their actions. The
purpose of the NEPA process is to help
Federal agencies make better decisions
and to ensure that those decisions are
based on an understanding of
environmental consequences. Federal
agencies can satisfy NEPA requirements
either by preparing an Environmental
Assessment (EA) or Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) or by showing
that the proposed action is categorically
excluded from individual NEPA
analysis. The Service will review each
proposed CCAA and associated
enhancement of survival permit
application for other significant
environmental, economic, social,
historical or cultural impact, or for
significant controversy (516 DM 2,
Appendix 2 for FWS and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA’s)
Environmental Review Procedures and
NOAA Administrative Order Series
216–6). If the Service determines that
the Agreement and permit will likely
result in any of the above effects,
preparation of an EA or EIS will be
required. General guidance on when the
Service excludes an action categorically
and when and how to prepare an EA or
EIS is found in the FWS’s
Administrative Manual (30 AM 3) and
NOAA Administrative Order Series
216–6. The Services expect that most
CCAAs and associated enhancement of
survival permits will result in minor or
negligible effects on the environment
and will be categorically excluded from
individual NEPA analysis.
Part 7. Will there be public review?
Public participation in the
development of a proposed CCAA will
be provided only when agreed to by the
participating property owner. However,
the Service will make every proposed
Agreement available for public review
and comment as part of the public
evaluation process that is statutorily
required for issuance of the associated
enhancement of survival permit. This
comment period will generally be 30
days. The public will also be given other
opportunities to review CCAAs in
certain cases. For example, when the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
Service receives an Agreement covering
a species proposed for listing, and when
the Service determines, based upon a
preliminary evaluation, that the
Agreement could potentially justify
withdrawal of the proposed rule to list
the species under the ESA, the comment
period for the proposed rule will be
extended or reopened to allow for
public comments on the CCAA’s
adequacy in removing or reducing
threats to the species. However, the
statutory deadlines in the ESA may
prevent the Service from considering in
their final listing determination those
CCAAs that are not received within a
reasonable period of time after issuance
of the proposed rule.
Part 8. Do property owners retain their
discretion?
Nothing in this policy prevents a
participating property owner from
implementing conservation measures
not described in the Agreement,
provided such measures are consistent
with the conservation measures and
conservation goal described in the
CCAA. The Service will provide
technical advice, to the maximum
extent practicable, to the property
owner when requested. Additionally, a
participating property owner can
terminate the Agreement prior to its
expiration date, even if the terms and
conditions of the Agreement have not
been realized. However, the property
owner is required to notify the Service
prior to termination. The enhancement
of survival permit is terminated at the
same time, and the property owner
would no longer have the assurances.
Part 9. What is the discretion of all
parties?
Nothing in this policy compels any
party to enter into a CCAA at any time.
Entering into an Agreement is voluntary
for property owners and the Service.
Unless specifically noted, a CCAA does
not otherwise create or waive any legal
rights of any party to the Agreement.
Part 10. Can agreements be transferred?
If a property owner who is a party to
a CCAA transfers ownership of the
enrolled property, the Service will
regard the new property owner as
having the same rights and obligations
as the original property owner if the
new property owner agrees to become a
party to the original Agreement and
meets the applicable permit issuance
criteria. Actions taken by the new
participating property owner that result
in the incidental take of species covered
by the Agreement would be authorized
if the new property owner maintains the
terms and conditions of the original
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Agreement. If the new property owner
does not become a party to the
Agreement, the new owner would
neither incur responsibilities nor
receive any assurances relative to the
ESA take prohibitions resulting from
listing of the covered species. An
Agreement must commit the
participating property owner to notify
the Service of any transfer of ownership
at the time of the transfer of any
property subject to the CCAA. This
provision allows the Service the
opportunity to contact the new property
owner to explain the prior CCAA and to
determine whether the new property
owner would like to continue the
Agreement or enter a new Agreement.
When a new property owner continues
an existing Agreement, the Service will
honor the terms and conditions of that
Agreement and associated permit.
Part 11. Is monitoring required?
The Service will ensure that necessary
monitoring provisions are included in
the CCAA and associated enhancement
of survival permit. Monitoring is
necessary to ensure that the
conservation measures specified in an
Agreement and permit are being
implemented and to learn about the
effectiveness of the agreed-upon
conservation measures. In particular,
when adaptive management principles
are included in an Agreement,
monitoring is especially helpful for
obtaining the information needed to
measure the effectiveness of the
conservation program and detect
changes in conditions. However, the
level of effort and expense required for
monitoring can vary substantially
among CCAAs depending on the
circumstances. For many, monitoring
can be conducted by the Service or a
State agency and may involve only a
brief site inspection and appropriate
documentation. Monitoring programs
must be agreed upon prior to public
review and comment. The Services are
committed to providing as much
technical assistance as possible in the
development of acceptable monitoring
programs. These monitoring programs
will provide valuable information that
the Services can use to evaluate program
implementation and success.
Part 12. How are cooperation and
coordination with the States and Tribes
described in the policy?
Coordination between the Service, the
appropriate State fish and wildlife
agencies, affected Tribal governments,
and property owners is important to the
successful development and
implementation of CCAAs. When
appropriate, the Service will coordinate
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
and consult with the affected State fish
and wildlife agency and any affected
Tribal government that has a treaty right
to any fish or wildlife resources covered
by a CCAA.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Request for Information
We solicit comments, information,
and recommendations from
governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific
community, industry groups,
environmental interest groups, and any
other interested parties on this draft
policy. All comments,
recommendations, and materials
received by the date listed in DATES,
above, will be considered prior to the
approval of a final policy.
In addition to more general comments
and information, we specifically request
comment on the following aspects of the
policy:
(1) Is the definition of ‘‘Net
conservation benefit (for CCAA)’’ clear
as a requirement (or standard)?
(2) Will the revisions be an
improvement over the current policy?
You may submit your information
concerning this draft revised policy by
one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If your submission is
made via 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
https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting
documentation that we receive in
response to this draft policy will be
available for you to review at https://
www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Required Determinations
As discussed above, we intend to
apply this policy, when finalized, in
considering whether to approve a
CCAA. Below we discuss compliance
with several Executive Orders and
statutes as they pertain to this draft
policy.
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
Management and Budget will review all
significant rules. OIRA has determined
that this policy is not a significant rule.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 while calling
for improvements in the nation’s
regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that our regulatory system must
be based on the best available science
and that the rulemaking process must
allow for public participation and an
open exchange of ideas. We have
developed this policy in a manner
consistent with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C.
601 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
statement of the factual basis for
certifying that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We
are certifying that the proposed
revisions to the CCAA policy would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The following discussion explains our
rationale. This draft policy sets forth the
Service’s revisions to existing CCAA
policy. A full description of the action,
why it is being considered, and the legal
basis for this action are set forth earlier
in this document. The policy will
provide clarity to State or local
government agencies, Tribes,
nongovernmental organizations, or
private individuals who are considering
entering into voluntary CCAAs.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26823
The Services, States, local government
agencies, Tribes, nongovernmental
organizations, and private landowners
are the entities that are affected by the
draft revision to the existing policy.
While the policy revision introduces
and defines the term ‘‘net conservation
benefit’’ for CCAAs and clarifies what
must be achieved in order for a CCAA
to be approved, the Services believe that
this addition does not necessarily
change the level of conservation
currently required under a CCAA.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.):
(a) On the basis of information
contained in the ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility
Act’’ section above, this draft policy
would not ‘‘significantly or uniquely’’
affect small governments. As explained
above, small governments could
potentially be affected if they chose to
enter into a CCAA. However, we have
determined and certify pursuant to the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1502, that this policy would not
impose a cost of $100 million or more
in any given year on local or State
governments or private entities.
(b) This draft policy would not
produce a Federal mandate on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the
private sector of $100 million or greater
in any year; that is, it is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
This policy, if finalized, does not
impose any additional obligations on
State, local, or tribal governments who
participate in a CCAA by requiring them
to take additional or different
conservation measures above what they
would be required to take under the
current CCAA policy. As such, a Small
Government Agency Plan is not
required.
Takings—Executive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, this draft policy would not have
significant takings implications. This
draft policy would not pertain to
‘‘taking’’ of private property interests,
nor would it directly affect private
property. A takings implication
assessment is not required because this
draft policy (1) would not effectively
compel a property owner to suffer a
physical invasion of property and (2)
would not deny all economically
beneficial or productive use of the land
or aquatic resources. This draft policy
would substantially advance a
legitimate government interest (clarify
existing policy through which non-
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
26824
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
Federal entities may voluntarily help to
conserve unlisted and listed species)
and would not present a barrier to all
reasonable and expected beneficial use
of private property.
Federalism—Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order
13132 (Federalism), this draft policy
does not have significant Federalism
effects and a federalism summary
impact statement is not required. This
draft policy revision pertains only to the
Service’s requirement of a net
conservation benefit to the covered
species for approval of a CCAA and
would not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.
Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order
12988
In accordance with Executive Order
12988 (Civil Justice Reform), this draft
policy would not unduly burden the
judicial system and meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order. We are revising the
existing policy for CCAAs specifically
for the purpose of eliminating ambiguity
and presenting the policy provisions in
clear language.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA)
This policy revision does not contain
any new collections of information that
require approval by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This
policy will not impose new
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
on State or local governments;
individuals; businesses; or
organizations. OMB has reviewed and
approved the application form that
property owners use to apply for
approval of a CCAA and associated
enhancement of survival permit (Form
3–200–54) and assigned OMB control
number 1018–0094, which expires
January 31, 2017. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
We have analyzed the draft policy in
accordance with the criteria of the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4332(c)), the Council
on Environmental Quality’s Regulations
for Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
1508), and the Department of the
Interior’s NEPA procedures (516 DM 2
and 8; 43 CFR part 46) and NOAA’s
Administrative Order regarding NEPA
compliance (NAO 216–6 (May 20,
1999)).
We have determined that the draft
policy is categorically excluded from
NEPA documentation requirements
consistent with 40 CFR 1508.4 and 43
CFR 46.210(i). This categorical
exclusion applies to policies, directives,
regulations, and guidelines that are ‘‘of
an administrative, financial, legal,
technical, or procedural nature.’’ This
action does not trigger an extraordinary
circumstance, as outlined in 43 CFR
46.215, applicable to the categorical
exclusion. Therefore, the draft policy
does not constitute a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
We have also determined that this
action satisfies the standards for
reliance upon a categorical exclusion
under NOAA Administrative Order
(NAO) 216–6. Specifically, the policy
fits within two categorical exclusion
provisions in § 6.03c.3(i)—for
‘‘preparation of regulations, Orders,
manuals, or other guidance that
implement, but do not substantially
change these documents, or other
guidance’’ and for ‘‘policy directives,
regulations and guidelines of an
administrative, financial, legal,
technical or procedural nature.’’ NAO
216–6, § 6.03c.3(i). The policy would
not trigger an exception precluding
reliance on the categorical exclusions
because it does not involve a geographic
area with unique characteristics, is not
the subject of public controversy based
on potential environmental
consequences, will not result in
uncertain environmental impacts or
unique or unknown risks, does not
establish a precedent or decision in
principle about future proposals, will
not have significant cumulative impacts,
and will not have any adverse effects
upon endangered or threatened species
or their habitats. Id. at § 5.05c. As such,
it is categorically excluded from the
need to prepare an Environmental
Assessment.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175 ‘‘Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments,’’ and the Department of
the Interior Manual at 512 DM 2, we
have considered possible effects on
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
federally recognized Indian tribes and
have preliminarily determined that
there are no potential adverse effects of
issuing this draft policy. Our intent with
the draft policy revision is to provide
clarity in regard to the net conservation
benefit requirements for a CCAA to be
approved, including any agreements in
which Tribes may choose to participate.
We will continue to work with Tribes as
we finalize this draft policy.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use) requires agencies
to prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions. The
draft policy, if made final, is not
expected to significantly affect energy
supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore,
this action is not a significant energy
action and no Statement of Energy
Effects is required.
Clarity of the Draft Policy
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule or
policy we publish must:
a. Be logically organized;
b. Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
c. Use clear language rather than
jargon;
d. Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
e. Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise this draft policy,
your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you believe
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Authors
The primary authors of the policy are
staff members of the Ecological Services
Program, Branch of Communications
and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, MS: ES, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices
Dated: April 13, 2016.
Noah Matson,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Dated: April 13, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
Houghten, Chief, Lands Division, 911
NE 11th Ave., Portland, OR 97232.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Houghten, (503) 231–6207
(phone).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2016–10479 Filed 5–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R1–R–2015–N020; FF01R05000–
FVRS8451–0100000]
Marianas Trench Marine National
Monument, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands; Northern
Islands Submerged Lands Transfer to
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands Draft Environmental
Assessment
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
Notice of availability; request
for comments.
ACTION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft environmental
assessment (Draft EA) for the Marianas
Trench Marine National Monument
(Monument) Northern Islands
Submerged Lands (submerged lands)
Transfer to the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), for
public review and comment. The Draft
EA describes our proposal for the
Secretary of the Interior to convey
specific submerged lands within the
Monument from the United States to the
CNMI Government under the authority
of the Territorial Submerged Lands Act
(TSLA), 48 U.S.C. 1705, et seq.
DATES: To ensure consideration of your
comments, please send your written
comments by June 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You can download the Draft
EA from our Web site: www.fws.gov/
marianastrenchmarinemonument/, and
review printed copies of it at the
locations listed under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. Submit comments on the
Draft EA and requests for more
information by any of the following
methods.
Email: fw1_sltransfer_cnmi@fws.gov.
Include ‘‘Submerged Lands Transfer’’ in
the subject line of the message.
Fax: Attn: Charles Houghten, (503)
231–6161.
U.S. Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Pacific Region, Attn: Charles
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:44 May 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
Introduction
With this notice, we are announcing
the availability of our Draft EA
developed in cooperation with the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) and the CNMI
Government, and in compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.); NEPA Regulations (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508); other Federal laws
and regulations; and our policies and
procedures for compliance with those
laws and regulations. We are also
requesting public comments on the
Draft EA, and will review and consider
all comments as part of our NEPA
process.
Background
The subject of our EA is the Northern
Islands submerged lands surrounding
the islands of Farallon de Pajaros
(Uracas), Maug, and Asuncion in the
CNMI, which include lands
permanently or periodically covered by
tidal waters up to the mean low water
line, and extending three miles seaward
from the mean high tide line of each of
these islands.
The submerged lands are among some
of the most biologically diverse in the
Western Pacific Ocean, with relatively
pristine coral reef ecosystems that have
been proclaimed objects of scientific
interest and reserved for protection as
part of the Monument’s Islands Unit, by
Presidential Proclamation 8335 of
January 6, 2009.
The submerged lands and associated
waters were excepted from transfer to
the CNMI Government by operation of
the TSLA in Presidential Proclamation
9077 of January 15, 2014. Proclamation
9077 also provided that it did not affect
the authority of the Secretary of the
Interior granted under the TSLA, to
convey the submerged lands after an
agreement has been entered for
coordination of management that
ensures the protection of the
Monument.
The Draft EA
The purpose of the Draft EA is to
analyze alternatives for the proposed
conveyance of the Northern Islands
submerged lands and associated waters
to the CNMI Government. We identify
two alternatives in the Draft EA.
Alternative 1 is our Current Land
Status Alternative (No Action); under it,
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26825
the Department of the Interior (DOI)
would not convey the submerged lands,
including mineral rights, to CNMI. The
Service and NOAA would continue to
coordinate management of the
submerged lands and associated waters,
including fishery-related activities of
the Islands Unit, in consultation with
the CNMI Government. We would
manage the Monument in accordance
with the directives of Presidential
Proclamation 8335, and implement
activities to address priority
management needs based on agencyspecific authorities and an integrated
management plan.
Under our preferred alternative,
Alternative 2 (or Northern Islands
Submerged Lands Conveyance
alternative), DOI would convey the
submerged lands, including mineral
rights, to the CNMI Government through
a patent with a reserved easement.
Consistent with the requirements of
Proclamation 9077, a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) would also be
implemented to outline the roles and
responsibilities of the CNMI
Government, the Service, and NOAA,
for ensuring protection of the
Monument, and managing and
conducting activities within the
submerged lands and associated waters.
Upon the conveyance of the NISL to
CNMI and pursuant to the MOA, the
Service and NOAA would, at no
additional cost to the CNMI, continue
managing the conveyed submerged
lands, for the benefit of and in
consultation with the CNMI
Government, until such time that the
CNMI Government notifies the
Secretaries of Interior and Commerce of
its intent to assume either all or a
portion of the management
responsibilities of the conveyed
submerged lands.
Alternative 2 would allow the CNMI
Government to assume primary
responsibility for managing and
protecting the Northern Islands
submerged lands and associated waters
consistent with the purposes and
requirements of Proclamations 8335 and
9077, and in coordination with the
Service and NOAA, at such time as the
CNMI Government notifies the
Secretaries of Interior and Commerce of
its desire to do so. Consistent with the
Proclamations 8335 and 9077, this
management would include the benthic
and living marine resources of the
associated water column, and
subterranean of the submerged lands,
and the associated mineral rights
within.
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26817-26825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10479]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[Docket Nos. FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0177 and 160223138-6138-01; FF09E40000 156
FXES11150900000]
RIN 1018-BB08; 0648-BF79
Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances Policy
AGENCIES: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Interior; National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Commerce.
ACTION: Announcement of draft revised policy and solicitation of public
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (Services when referring to both, and Service when
referring to when the action is taken by
[[Page 26818]]
one agency), announce proposed revisions to the Candidate Conservation
Agreements with Assurances policy under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. We propose to add a definition of ``net conservation
benefit'' to this policy and to eliminate references to the confusing
requirement of ``other necessary properties'' to clarify the level of
conservation effort each agreement needs to include in order for the
Service to approve an agreement. In a separate document published in
today's Federal Register, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is
proposing changes to its regulations regarding Candidate Conservation
Agreements with Assurances to make them consistent with these proposed
changes to the policy.
DATES: We will accept comments that we receive on or before July 5,
2016. Comments 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 comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In
the Search box enter the Docket number for the draft policy, which is
FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0177. You may enter a comment by clicking on ``Comment
Now!'' Please ensure that you have found the correct document before
submitting your comment.
U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0177; Division of Policy, Performance,
and Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 5275 Leesburg
Pike; MS: BPHC; Falls Church, VA 22041.
We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see
Request for Information, below, for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Serfis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Chief, Branch of Conservation and Communications, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA 22041-3803 (telephone 703-358-2171); or Angela Somma,
National Marine Fisheries Service, Chief, Endangered Species
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (telephone 301-427-8403, facsimile
301-713-0376). Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) are charged with implementing the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA or Act);
among the purposes of the ESA are to provide a means to conserve the
ecosystems upon which species listed as endangered or threatened depend
and a program for listed species conservation. Through the Candidate
Conservation program, one of the Services' goals is to encourage the
public to implement specific conservation measures for declining
species prior to them being listed under the ESA. The cumulative
outcome of such conservation measures may result in not needing to list
a species, or may result in listing a species as threatened instead of
endangered and provide the basis for its recovery and eventual removal
from the protections of the ESA. The Services put in place a voluntary
conservation program for non-Federal property owners to help accomplish
this goal: Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances (CCAAs).
The policy for this type of agreement was finalized on June 17, 1999
(64 FR 32726), along with implementing regulations for FWS in part 17
of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (64 FR 32706). The
FWS revised the CCAA regulations in 2004 (69 FR 24084; May 2, 2004) to
make them easier to understand and implement by defining ``property
owner,'' and clarifying several points, including the transfer of
permits, permit revocation, and advanced notification of take.
To participate in a CCAA, non-Federal property owners agree to
implement specific conservation measures on their land that reduce or
eliminate threats to the species that are covered under the agreement.
An ESA section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit is issued to
the agreement participant providing a specific level of incidental take
coverage should the property owner's agreed-upon conservation measures
and routine property management actions (e.g., agricultural, ranching,
or forestry activities) result in take of the covered species if
listed. Property owners receive assurances that they will not be
required to undertake any other conservation measures than those agreed
to, even if new information indicates that additional or revised
conservation measures are needed for the species, and they will not be
subject to additional resource use or land use restrictions.
Under the current policy, to approve a CCAA we must ``determine
that the benefits of the conservation measures implemented by a
property owner under a CCAA, when combined with those benefits that
would be achieved if it is assumed that conservation measures were also
to be implemented on other necessary properties, would preclude or
remove any need to list the covered species.'' The hypothetical concept
of conservation measures needing to be implemented on ``other necessary
properties'' has caused confusion, and therefore we are clarifying and
revising the CCAA standard to require a net conservation benefit to the
covered species specifically on the property to be enrolled and
eliminating references to ``other necessary properties.''
Proposed Revisions to Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances
Policy
Based on our experience reviewing and approving CCAAs over the past
16 years, we are proposing changes to the policy that will clarify the
level of conservation effort each agreement needs to include in order
for the Service to approve an agreement. We are proposing the following
changes to the policy primarily to (a) address confusion regarding the
existing CCAA approval requirements (standards) and (b) make CCAAs more
consistent with Safe Harbor Agreement requirements, because these
agreements have similar purposes, which are to provide a conservation
benefit to the covered species while providing assurances to non-
Federal property owners:
(1) Add a new definition of ``net conservation benefit'' to Part 2.
What Definitions Apply to this Policy?:
Net conservation benefit (for CCAA) is defined as the cumulative
benefits of specific conservation measures designed to improve the
status of a covered species by removing or minimizing threats,
stabilizing populations, and increasing its numbers and improving its
habitat. The benefit would be measured by the projected increase in the
species' population or improvement of the species' habitat, taking into
account the duration of the Agreement and any off-setting adverse
effects attributable to the incidental taking allowed by the
enhancement of survival permit. The conservation measures and property
management activities covered by the agreement must be designed to
reduce or eliminate those current and future threats on the property
that are under the property owner's control, in order to increase the
species'
[[Page 26819]]
populations or improve its habitat. In the case where the species and
habitat are already adequately managed to the benefit of the species, a
net conservation benefit will be achieved when the property owner
commits to manage the species for a specified period of time with the
anticipation that the population will increase or habitat quality will
improve.
(2) Delete the definition of ``other necessary properties'' under
Part 2. What Definitions Apply to this Policy? and delete references to
this term from the CCAA policy as follows:
Revise the third sentence in the second paragraph of Part
1. What is the Purpose of the Policy? to read as follows: Accordingly,
the Service will enter into an Agreement when we determine that the
conservation measures to be implemented address the current and
anticipated future threats that are under the property owner's control
and will result in a net conservation benefit to the covered species.
Revise the fifth paragraph under Part 1 to read as
follows: The Service must determine that the benefits of the
conservation measures to be implemented by a property owner under a
CCAA are reasonably expected to result in a net conservation benefit to
the covered species. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, the Service must
also ensure that the conservation measures and ongoing property
management activities included in a CCAA, and the incidental take
allowed under the enhancement of survival section 10(a)(1)(A) permit
for these measures and activities are not likely to jeopardize listed
species or species proposed for listing and are not likely to destroy
or adversely modify proposed or designated critical habitat.
Revise section C of Part 3. What Are Candidate
Conservation Agreements With Assurances? to read as follows: The
benefits expected to result from the conservation measures described in
B above (e.g., increase in population numbers; enhancement,
restoration, or preservation of habitat; removal of threats) and from
the conditions that the participating non-Federal property owner agrees
to maintain. The Service must determine that the benefits of the
conservation measures implemented by a property owner under a CCAA will
reasonably be expected to provide a net conservation benefit.
Revise Part 4. What Are the Benefits to the Species? to
read as follows: Before entering into a CCAA, the Service must make a
written finding that the benefits of the conservation measures to be
implemented by a property owner under a CCAA would result in a net
conservation benefit to the covered species. If the Service and the
participating property owner cannot agree on conservation measures that
satisfy this requirement, the Service will not enter into the
Agreement. Expected benefits of the specific conservation measures
could include, but are not limited to: removal or reduction of current
and anticipated future threats for a specified period of time;
restoration, enhancement, or preservation of habitat; maintenance or
increase of population numbers; and reduction or elimination of impacts
to the species from agreed-upon, ongoing property management actions.
(3) Revise the definition of ``Non-Federal property owner'' in Part
2. What Definitions Apply to this Policy? to be consistent with the
definition of ``property owner'' found at 50 CFR 17.3. The revised
definition makes it clear that participants in a CCAA may include
entities that own the property as well as entities that lease or hold
other interests in the property, as long as they have the authority to
carry out the proposed management activities on the land covered by the
CCAA. Also note for purposes of this policy that ``management
activities'' includes the conservation measures included in the CCAA.
The revised definition reads as follows:
Property owner means a person with a fee simple, leasehold, or
other property interest (including owners of water rights or other
natural resources), or any other entity that may have a property
interest, sufficient to carry out the proposed management activities,
subject to applicable State law, on non-Federal land.
(4) Add language to Part 3 to further explain the assurances
provided to a property owner who is enrolled in a CCAA if there are
changed circumstances or unforeseen circumstances that could require
changes to or additional conservation measures. This language is
already included in FWS's regulations at 50 CFR 17.22(d)(5) and
17.32(d)(5) and does not represent a change in current CCAA practice.
Adding this language to the policy will make the policy and regulations
consistent.
(5) Add language to Part 8 to require that a property owner notify
the Services prior to termination of their CCAA. Currently, the FWS
includes this requirement as part of the conditions of the section
10(a)(1)(A) permit that is issued in conjunction with a CCAA. So while
this is new language the Services are adding to the policy, it is not a
new practice in how the FWS administers CCAAs.
(6) Revise the first sentence of Part 10 by adding ``and meets the
applicable permit issuance criteria'' to make it clear that any
property owner who agrees to become a party to an original Agreement,
through a transfer, must meet the issuance criteria for a CCAA. While
most of the issuance criteria would already be met, assuming the
transferred CCAA was not changing in any major way, in particular, the
FWS would need to ensure the new property owner would meet issuance
criteria at 50 CFR 17.22(d)(2)(vi) and 17.32(d)(2)(vi) which requires
that the applicant (i.e., property owner) has shown capability for and
commitment to implementing all of the terms of the Agreement. While
this is new language being added to the policy, it is not a new
requirement for a CCAA but serves to make the policy and regulations
consistent.
(7) Revise additional language in the policy to improve clarity.
Draft Revised Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances Policy
Part 1. What is the purpose of the policy?
This policy is intended to facilitate the conservation of species
proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and
candidate species, and species likely to become candidates or proposed
for listing in the near future, by giving non-Federal citizens, States,
local governments, Tribes, businesses, organizations, and other non-
Federal property owners incentives to implement conservation measures
for declining species by providing regulatory assurances with regard to
land, water, or resource use restrictions that might otherwise apply
should the species later become listed as endangered or threatened
under the ESA. Under the policy, property owners who commit in a
Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA or Agreement) to
implement mutually agreed-upon conservation measures for a species
proposed for listing or candidate species, or a species likely to
become a candidate or proposed for listing in the near future, will
receive assurances from the Service that additional conservation
measures above and beyond those contained in the Agreement will not be
required, and that additional land, water, or resource use restrictions
will not be imposed upon them should the species become listed in the
future. In determining whether to enter into a CCAA, the Service will
consider the
[[Page 26820]]
extent to which the Agreement reduces threats to the covered species so
as to contribute to the conservation and stabilization of populations
and habitat of the species.
While the Services recognize that the actions of a single property
owner usually will not sufficiently contribute to the conservation of
the species to remove the need to list it, we also recognize that the
collective result of the conservation measures of many property owners
may remove the need to list the species. Accordingly, the Service will
enter into an Agreement when we determine that the conservation
measures to be implemented address the current and anticipated future
threats that are under the property owner's control and will result in
a net conservation benefit to the covered species. While some property
owners are willing to manage their lands to benefit species proposed
for listing, candidate species, or species likely to become candidates
or proposed for listing in the near future, most desire some degree of
regulatory certainty and assurances with regard to possible future
land, water, or resource use restrictions that may be imposed if the
species is listed in the future.
The Service will provide regulatory assurances to a non-Federal
property owner who enters into a CCAA by authorizing, through issuance
of an enhancement of survival permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the
ESA, a specified level of incidental take of the covered species.
Incidental take authorization and the associated agreement benefit
property owners in two ways. First, in the event the species is listed,
incidental take authorization enables property owners to continue
current and agreed-upon land uses that have the potential to cause
take, provided the take is at or reduced to a level consistent with the
overall goal of providing a net conservation benefit to the species.
Second, the property owner is provided the assurance that, if the
species is listed, no additional conservation measures will be required
and no additional land use restrictions will be imposed.
These Agreements will be developed in coordination and cooperation
with appropriate State fish and wildlife agencies and other affected
State agencies and Tribes. Coordination with State fish and wildlife
agencies is particularly important given their primary responsibilities
and authorities for the management of unlisted resident species. These
Agreements must be consistent with applicable State laws and
regulations governing the management of these species.
The Service must determine that the benefits of the conservation
measures to be implemented by a property owner under a CCAA are
reasonably expected to result in a net conservation benefit to the
covered species. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, the Service must
also ensure that the conservation measures and ongoing property
management activities included in a CCAA, and the incidental take
allowed under the enhancement of survival section 10(a)(1)(A) permit
for these measures and activities, are not likely to jeopardize listed
species or species proposed for listing and are not likely to destroy
or adversely modify proposed or designated critical habitat.
Because some property owners may not have the necessary resources
or expertise to develop a CCAA, the Services are committed to
providing, to the maximum extent practicable given available resources,
the necessary technical assistance to develop Agreements and prepare
enhancement of survival permit applications. Also, based on available
resources, the Service may assist or train property owners to implement
conservation measures. Development of a biologically sound Agreement
and enhancement of survival permit application is intricately linked.
The Service will process the permit application following the
procedures described in 50 CFR 17.22(d)(1) and 17.32(d)(1), and part
222, as appropriate. All terms and conditions of the permit must be
consistent with the specific conservation measures included in the
associated CCAA.
Part 2. What definitions apply to this policy?
The following definitions apply for the purposes of this policy.
Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) means an agreement signed by
either Service, or both Services jointly, and other Federal or State
agencies, local governments, Tribes, businesses, organizations, or a
citizen that identifies specific conservation measures that the
participants will voluntarily undertake to conserve the covered
species. There are no specific requirements for entering into a CCA and
no standard has to be met; no incidental take permit or assurances are
provided under these Agreements.
Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances means a Candidate
Conservation Agreement with a non-Federal property owner that meets the
standards described in this policy and provides the property owner with
the assurances described in this policy.
Candidate Conservation Assurances means the associated assurances
that are authorized by an enhancement of survival permit. Such
assurances may apply to a whole parcel of land, or a portion, as
identified in the Agreement. The assurances provided to a non-Federal
property owner in a CCAA are that no additional conservation measures
and no land, water, or resource use restrictions, in addition to the
measures and restrictions described in the Agreement will be imposed
should the covered species become listed in the future. Also the
enhancement of survival permit provides a prescribed level of
incidental take that may occur from agreed-upon, ongoing property
management actions and the conservation measures.
Candidate species are defined differently by the Services. The Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) defines candidate species as species for
which FWS has sufficient information on file relative to status and
threats to support issuance of proposed listing rules. The National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) defines candidate species as (1)
species that are the subject of a petition to list and for which NMFS
has determined that listing may be warranted, pursuant to section
4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, and (2) species that are not the subject of a
petition but for which NMFS has announced the initiation of a status
review in the Federal Register. The term ``candidate species'' used in
this policy refers to those species designated as candidates by either
of the Services.
Conservation measures as it applies to CCAAs are actions that a
property owner voluntarily agrees to undertake when entering into a
CCAA that, by addressing the threats that are occurring or have the
potential to occur on their property, will result in an improvement or
expansion of the species' habitat with the potential for an increase in
the species' population numbers. The appropriate conservation measures
designed to address the threats that are causing the species to decline
will be based on the best available scientific information relative to
the conservation needs of the species such as those contained in an up-
to-date conservation strategy.
Covered species means those species that are the subject of a CCAA
and associated enhancement of survival permit. Covered species are
limited to species that are candidates or proposed for listing and
species that are likely to become candidates or proposed for listing in
the near future.
Enhancement of survival permit means a permit issued under section
[[Page 26821]]
10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA that, as related to this policy, authorizes the
permittee to incidentally take species covered in a CCAA.
Net conservation benefit (for CCAA) is defined as the cumulative
benefits of specific conservation measures designed to improve the
status of a covered species by removing or minimizing threats,
stabilizing populations, and increasing its numbers and improving its
habitat. The benefit is measured by the projected increase in the
species' population or improvement of the species' habitat, taking into
account the duration of the Agreement and any off-setting adverse
effects attributable to the incidental taking allowed by the
enhancement of survival permit. The conservation measures and property
management activities covered by the agreement must be designed to
reduce or eliminate those current and future threats on the property
that are under the property owner's control, in order to increase the
species' populations or improve its habitat. In the case where the
species and habitat is already adequately managed to the benefit of the
species, a net conservation benefit will be achieved when the property
owner commits to manage the species for a specified period of time with
the anticipation that the population will increase or habitat quality
will improve.
Property owner means a person with a fee simple, leasehold, or
other property interest (including owners of water rights or other
natural resources), or any other entity that may have a property
interest, sufficient to carry out the proposed management activities,
subject to applicable State law, on non-Federal land.
Part 3. What are Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances?
A CCAA will identify or include:
A. The population levels (if available or determinable) of the
covered species existing at the time the parties negotiate the
Agreement; the existing habitat characteristics that sustain any
current, permanent, or seasonal use, or potential use by the covered
species on lands or waters in which the participating property owner
has an interest; and consideration of the existing and anticipated
condition of the landscape of the contiguous lands or waters not on the
participating owner's property so that the property enrolled in a CCAA
may serve as a habitat corridor or connector or as a potential source
for the covered species to populate the property to be enrolled if they
do not already exist on that property.
B. The conservation measures the participating property owner
agrees to undertake to conserve the species included in the Agreement.
C. The benefits expected to result from the conservation measures
described in B above (e.g., increase in population numbers;
enhancement, restoration, or preservation of habitat; removal of
threats) and from the conditions that the participating property owner
agrees to maintain. The Service must determine that the benefits of the
conservation measures implemented by a property owner under a CCAA will
reasonably be expected to provide a net conservation benefit.
D. Assurances related to take of the covered species will be
authorized by the Service through a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of
survival permit (see Part 5). Assurances include that no additional
conservation measures will be required and no additional land, water,
or resource use restrictions will be imposed beyond those described in
B above should the covered species be listed in the future. If
conservation measures not provided for in the CCAA are necessary to
respond to changed circumstances, the Service will not require any
conservation measures in addition to those provided for in the CCAA
without the consent of the property owner, provided the CCAA is being
properly implemented. If additional conservation measures are necessary
to respond to unforeseen circumstances, the Service may require
additional measures of the property owner where the CCAA is being
properly implemented, only if those measures maintain the original
terms of the CCAA to the maximum extent possible. Additional
conservation measures will not involve the commitment of additional
land, water, or financial compensation, or additional restrictions on
the use of land, water, or other natural resources available for
development or use under the original terms of the CCAA without the
consent of the property owner. The permit also allows a prescribed
amount of incidental take that may result from the conservation
measures or from the agreed-to ongoing property management actions.
E. A monitoring provision that requires measuring and reporting on:
(1) Progress in implementing the conservation measures described in B
above, and (2) changes in habitat conditions and the species' status
resulting from these measures.
F. As appropriate, a notification requirement to provide the
Service or appropriate State agencies with a reasonable opportunity to
rescue individuals of the covered species before any authorized
incidental take occurs.
Part 4. What are the benefits to the species?
Before entering into a CCAA, the Service must make a written
finding that the benefits of the conservation measures to be
implemented by a property owner under an Agreement would reasonably be
expected to result in a net conservation benefit to the covered
species. If the Service and the participating property owner cannot
agree on conservation measures that satisfy this requirement, the
Service will not enter into the Agreement. Expected benefits of the
specific conservation measures could include, but are not limited to:
removal or reduction of current and anticipated future threats for a
specified period of time; restoration, enhancement, or preservation of
habitat; maintenance or increase of population numbers; and reduction
or elimination of impacts to the species from agreed-upon, ongoing
property management actions.
Part 5. What are assurances to property owners?
Through a CCAA, the Service will provide the assurance that, if any
species covered by the Agreement is listed, and the Agreement has been
implemented in good faith by the participating property owner, the
Service will not require additional conservation measures nor impose
additional land, water, or resource use restrictions beyond those the
property owner voluntarily committed to under the terms of the original
Agreement. Assurances involving incidental take will be authorized
through issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival
permit, which will allow the property owner to take a specific number
of individuals of the covered species or quantity of habitat, should
the species be listed, as long as the level of take is consistent with
those levels agreed upon and identified in the Agreement. The Service
will issue an enhancement of survival permit at the time of entering
into the CCAA. This permit will have a delayed effective date tied to
the date of any future listing of the covered species. The Service is
prepared as a last resort to revoke a permit implementing a CCAA where
continuation of the permitted activity would be likely to result in
jeopardy to a species covered by the permit. Prior to taking such a
step, however, the Service will first have to exercise all possible
means to remedy such a situation.
[[Page 26822]]
Part 6. How does the service comply with the National Environmental
Policy Act?
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) require all Federal agencies to examine the
environmental impacts of their actions, to analyze a full range of
alternatives, and to use public participation in the planning and
implementation of their actions. The purpose of the NEPA process is to
help Federal agencies make better decisions and to ensure that those
decisions are based on an understanding of environmental consequences.
Federal agencies can satisfy NEPA requirements either by preparing an
Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
or by showing that the proposed action is categorically excluded from
individual NEPA analysis. The Service will review each proposed CCAA
and associated enhancement of survival permit application for other
significant environmental, economic, social, historical or cultural
impact, or for significant controversy (516 DM 2, Appendix 2 for FWS
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's)
Environmental Review Procedures and NOAA Administrative Order Series
216-6). If the Service determines that the Agreement and permit will
likely result in any of the above effects, preparation of an EA or EIS
will be required. General guidance on when the Service excludes an
action categorically and when and how to prepare an EA or EIS is found
in the FWS's Administrative Manual (30 AM 3) and NOAA Administrative
Order Series 216-6. The Services expect that most CCAAs and associated
enhancement of survival permits will result in minor or negligible
effects on the environment and will be categorically excluded from
individual NEPA analysis.
Part 7. Will there be public review?
Public participation in the development of a proposed CCAA will be
provided only when agreed to by the participating property owner.
However, the Service will make every proposed Agreement available for
public review and comment as part of the public evaluation process that
is statutorily required for issuance of the associated enhancement of
survival permit. This comment period will generally be 30 days. The
public will also be given other opportunities to review CCAAs in
certain cases. For example, when the Service receives an Agreement
covering a species proposed for listing, and when the Service
determines, based upon a preliminary evaluation, that the Agreement
could potentially justify withdrawal of the proposed rule to list the
species under the ESA, the comment period for the proposed rule will be
extended or reopened to allow for public comments on the CCAA's
adequacy in removing or reducing threats to the species. However, the
statutory deadlines in the ESA may prevent the Service from considering
in their final listing determination those CCAAs that are not received
within a reasonable period of time after issuance of the proposed rule.
Part 8. Do property owners retain their discretion?
Nothing in this policy prevents a participating property owner from
implementing conservation measures not described in the Agreement,
provided such measures are consistent with the conservation measures
and conservation goal described in the CCAA. The Service will provide
technical advice, to the maximum extent practicable, to the property
owner when requested. Additionally, a participating property owner can
terminate the Agreement prior to its expiration date, even if the terms
and conditions of the Agreement have not been realized. However, the
property owner is required to notify the Service prior to termination.
The enhancement of survival permit is terminated at the same time, and
the property owner would no longer have the assurances.
Part 9. What is the discretion of all parties?
Nothing in this policy compels any party to enter into a CCAA at
any time. Entering into an Agreement is voluntary for property owners
and the Service. Unless specifically noted, a CCAA does not otherwise
create or waive any legal rights of any party to the Agreement.
Part 10. Can agreements be transferred?
If a property owner who is a party to a CCAA transfers ownership of
the enrolled property, the Service will regard the new property owner
as having the same rights and obligations as the original property
owner if the new property owner agrees to become a party to the
original Agreement and meets the applicable permit issuance criteria.
Actions taken by the new participating property owner that result in
the incidental take of species covered by the Agreement would be
authorized if the new property owner maintains the terms and conditions
of the original Agreement. If the new property owner does not become a
party to the Agreement, the new owner would neither incur
responsibilities nor receive any assurances relative to the ESA take
prohibitions resulting from listing of the covered species. An
Agreement must commit the participating property owner to notify the
Service of any transfer of ownership at the time of the transfer of any
property subject to the CCAA. This provision allows the Service the
opportunity to contact the new property owner to explain the prior CCAA
and to determine whether the new property owner would like to continue
the Agreement or enter a new Agreement. When a new property owner
continues an existing Agreement, the Service will honor the terms and
conditions of that Agreement and associated permit.
Part 11. Is monitoring required?
The Service will ensure that necessary monitoring provisions are
included in the CCAA and associated enhancement of survival permit.
Monitoring is necessary to ensure that the conservation measures
specified in an Agreement and permit are being implemented and to learn
about the effectiveness of the agreed-upon conservation measures. In
particular, when adaptive management principles are included in an
Agreement, monitoring is especially helpful for obtaining the
information needed to measure the effectiveness of the conservation
program and detect changes in conditions. However, the level of effort
and expense required for monitoring can vary substantially among CCAAs
depending on the circumstances. For many, monitoring can be conducted
by the Service or a State agency and may involve only a brief site
inspection and appropriate documentation. Monitoring programs must be
agreed upon prior to public review and comment. The Services are
committed to providing as much technical assistance as possible in the
development of acceptable monitoring programs. These monitoring
programs will provide valuable information that the Services can use to
evaluate program implementation and success.
Part 12. How are cooperation and coordination with the States and
Tribes described in the policy?
Coordination between the Service, the appropriate State fish and
wildlife agencies, affected Tribal governments, and property owners is
important to the successful development and implementation of CCAAs.
When appropriate, the Service will coordinate
[[Page 26823]]
and consult with the affected State fish and wildlife agency and any
affected Tribal government that has a treaty right to any fish or
wildlife resources covered by a CCAA.
Request for Information
We solicit comments, information, and recommendations from
governmental agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific
community, industry groups, environmental interest groups, and any
other interested parties on this draft policy. All comments,
recommendations, and materials received by the date listed in DATES,
above, will be considered prior to the approval of a final policy.
In addition to more general comments and information, we
specifically request comment on the following aspects of the policy:
(1) Is the definition of ``Net conservation benefit (for CCAA)''
clear as a requirement (or standard)?
(2) Will the revisions be an improvement over the current policy?
You may submit your information concerning this draft revised
policy by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit
information via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the
Web site. If your submission is made via 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 https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting documentation that we receive in
response to this draft policy will be available for you to review at
https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Required Determinations
As discussed above, we intend to apply this policy, when finalized,
in considering whether to approve a CCAA. Below we discuss compliance
with several Executive Orders and statutes as they pertain to this
draft policy.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget will
review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this policy is
not a significant rule.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that our regulatory system must be based on the best available science
and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and
an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this policy in a manner
consistent with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C.
601 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 statement of the
factual basis for certifying that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We are
certifying that the proposed revisions to the CCAA policy would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The following discussion explains our rationale. This draft
policy sets forth the Service's revisions to existing CCAA policy. A
full description of the action, why it is being considered, and the
legal basis for this action are set forth earlier in this document. The
policy will provide clarity to State or local government agencies,
Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, or private individuals who are
considering entering into voluntary CCAAs.
The Services, States, local government agencies, Tribes,
nongovernmental organizations, and private landowners are the entities
that are affected by the draft revision to the existing policy. While
the policy revision introduces and defines the term ``net conservation
benefit'' for CCAAs and clarifies what must be achieved in order for a
CCAA to be approved, the Services believe that this addition does not
necessarily change the level of conservation currently required under a
CCAA.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.):
(a) On the basis of information contained in the ``Regulatory
Flexibility Act'' section above, this draft policy would not
``significantly or uniquely'' affect small governments. As explained
above, small governments could potentially be affected if they chose to
enter into a CCAA. However, we have determined and certify pursuant to
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502, that this policy would
not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or
State governments or private entities.
(b) This draft policy would not produce a Federal mandate on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or
greater in any year; that is, it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. This policy, if
finalized, does not impose any additional obligations on State, local,
or tribal governments who participate in a CCAA by requiring them to
take additional or different conservation measures above what they
would be required to take under the current CCAA policy. As such, a
Small Government Agency Plan is not required.
Takings--Executive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this draft policy would
not have significant takings implications. This draft policy would not
pertain to ``taking'' of private property interests, nor would it
directly affect private property. A takings implication assessment is
not required because this draft policy (1) would not effectively compel
a property owner to suffer a physical invasion of property and (2)
would not deny all economically beneficial or productive use of the
land or aquatic resources. This draft policy would substantially
advance a legitimate government interest (clarify existing policy
through which non-
[[Page 26824]]
Federal entities may voluntarily help to conserve unlisted and listed
species) and would not present a barrier to all reasonable and expected
beneficial use of private property.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this draft
policy does not have significant Federalism effects and a federalism
summary impact statement is not required. This draft policy revision
pertains only to the Service's requirement of a net conservation
benefit to the covered species for approval of a CCAA and would not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform),
this draft policy would not unduly burden the judicial system and meets
the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are
revising the existing policy for CCAAs specifically for the purpose of
eliminating ambiguity and presenting the policy provisions in clear
language.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
This policy revision does not contain any new collections of
information that require approval by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This policy will
not impose new recordkeeping or reporting requirements on State or
local governments; individuals; businesses; or organizations. OMB has
reviewed and approved the application form that property owners use to
apply for approval of a CCAA and associated enhancement of survival
permit (Form 3-200-54) and assigned OMB control number 1018-0094, which
expires January 31, 2017. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
We have analyzed the draft policy in accordance with the criteria
of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4332(c)),
the Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508), and the Department of
the Interior's NEPA procedures (516 DM 2 and 8; 43 CFR part 46) and
NOAA's Administrative Order regarding NEPA compliance (NAO 216-6 (May
20, 1999)).
We have determined that the draft policy is categorically excluded
from NEPA documentation requirements consistent with 40 CFR 1508.4 and
43 CFR 46.210(i). This categorical exclusion applies to policies,
directives, regulations, and guidelines that are ``of an
administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature.''
This action does not trigger an extraordinary circumstance, as outlined
in 43 CFR 46.215, applicable to the categorical exclusion. Therefore,
the draft policy does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
We have also determined that this action satisfies the standards
for reliance upon a categorical exclusion under NOAA Administrative
Order (NAO) 216-6. Specifically, the policy fits within two categorical
exclusion provisions in Sec. 6.03c.3(i)--for ``preparation of
regulations, Orders, manuals, or other guidance that implement, but do
not substantially change these documents, or other guidance'' and for
``policy directives, regulations and guidelines of an administrative,
financial, legal, technical or procedural nature.'' NAO 216-6, Sec.
6.03c.3(i). The policy would not trigger an exception precluding
reliance on the categorical exclusions because it does not involve a
geographic area with unique characteristics, is not the subject of
public controversy based on potential environmental consequences, will
not result in uncertain environmental impacts or unique or unknown
risks, does not establish a precedent or decision in principle about
future proposals, will not have significant cumulative impacts, and
will not have any adverse effects upon endangered or threatened species
or their habitats. Id. at Sec. 5.05c. As such, it is categorically
excluded from the need to prepare an Environmental Assessment.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,'' and the Department of
the Interior Manual at 512 DM 2, we have considered possible effects on
federally recognized Indian tribes and have preliminarily determined
that there are no potential adverse effects of issuing this draft
policy. Our intent with the draft policy revision is to provide clarity
in regard to the net conservation benefit requirements for a CCAA to be
approved, including any agreements in which Tribes may choose to
participate. We will continue to work with Tribes as we finalize this
draft policy.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires
agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking
certain actions. The draft policy, if made final, is not expected to
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore,
this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Clarity of the Draft Policy
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule or policy we publish must:
a. Be logically organized;
b. Use the active voice to address readers directly;
c. Use clear language rather than jargon;
d. Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
e. Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise this draft policy, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you believe lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Authors
The primary authors of the policy are staff members of the
Ecological Services Program, Branch of Communications and Candidate
Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS:
ES, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
[[Page 26825]]
Dated: April 13, 2016.
Noah Matson,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Dated: April 13, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-10479 Filed 5-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P