Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Two Species, 44265-44267 [2020-15154]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Cleanup Levels for OU–12
Cleanup levels were developed for
soil COCs (PAHs, PCBs, dieldrin, iron,
and lead) at OU–21 on the basis of the
EPA Region 9 PRGs listed for industrial
and residential scenarios or on the basis
of a background value for a particular
parameter (iron), and therefore, the final
remedy cleaned up OU–12 to residential
standards suitable for UU/UE. The
following are the cleanup levels for
COCs at OU–12:
• PAH (as benzo(a)pyrene
equivalent)—60 micrograms per
kilogram (mg/kg) (residential) or 210 mg/
kg (industrial);
• PCBs—220 mg/kg (residential) or
740 mg/kg (industrial);
• Dieldrin—30 mg/kg (residential) or
110 mg/kg (industrial);
• Lead—400 milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg) (residential) or 800 mg/kg
(industrial); and
• Iron—66,400 mg/kg.
The cleanup level for iron is the
subsurface soil background value, as
referenced in the OU–12 RI Report
(NASA, OU–12, 2008). The iron
background value was used instead of
the EPA Region 9 PRG despite that the
background value is one order of
magnitude higher than the PRG., the
EPA policy does not require CERCLA
cleaning up to below background levels
in soils provided the levels are
protective of human health and the
environment. This cleanup level was
obtained at OU–12.
Operation and Maintenance, If
Applicable
Neither OU–09 nor OU–12 require
any operation and maintenance (O&M)
activities. All cleanup objectives in the
RODs were met, and no further remedial
action or O&M is required.
jbell on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Five-Year Review, If Applicable
NASA conducted a statutory FiveRear Review (FYR) of the MSFC Site in
2013 and 2018 in accordance with
CERCLA Section 121(c). The 2018 FYR
confirmed that soil and groundwater at
OU–09 and soil (including sediment) at
OU–12 met UU/UE criteria and further
reviews are not required for either OU–
09 and OU–12 (OU–20 or OU–21,
respectively for Redstone Arsenal).
The soil media at OU–09 was
recommended for NFA in the final 2000
ROD. To address the EPA and ADEM
comments with respect to a residential
risk evaluation, NASA collected
additional soil samples at OU–09 and
submitted a 2016 CCED. The FFA
parties determined that the site met
residential exposure levels and no
further action required.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Jul 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
Remedial actions are complete for soil
(including sediment) at OU–12 and any
residual risks for that media are
considered to be protective of human
health and the environment for future
unrestricted residential use and
therefore does not require LUCs.
Community Involvement
The EPA and ADEM satisfied public
participation activities as required in
CERCLA Section 113(k), 42 United
States Code (U.S.C.) 9613. The EPA
published notifications in The
Huntsville Times announcing the FYR
and inviting the public to comment and
express their concerns about the Site at
the start of the 2013 and 2018 FYRs as
well as offer public comment for
proposed plans for all of the EPA Site
decision documents and this proposed
NPL partial deletion. The
Administrative Record file contains the
documentation NASA considered in
selecting the CERCLA response actions
for both OU–09 and OU–12 in
accordance with the NCP requirements.
Determination That the Criteria for
Deletion Have Been Met
OU–09 (including surface water,
sediment, soil, and groundwater) and
OU–12 (soil including sediment) meet
all of the site completion requirements
as specified in Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response Directive 9320.2–
22, Close Out Procedures for National
Priorities List Sites. The EPA has
followed NPL deletion procedures
required by NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(e).
Soil and groundwater associated with
OU–09 were proposed for NFA in the
CERCLA 1999 OU–09 RI Report. The
2000 ROD selected NFA for OU–09.
MSFC, ADEM, and the EPA concurred
that additional remedial actions are not
required at OU–09 to protect of human
health and the environment and
approved the ROD.
All cleanup actions specified in the
OU–12 ROD have been implemented,
and the Site has achieved the degree of
cleanup or protection specified in the
ROD and met ROD remedial action
objectives. The soil (including
sediment) area proposed for partial
deletion has been cleaned up to
residential risk levels for soil exposure
pathways. The RAOs and associated
cleanup goals are consistent with
agency policy and guidance.
Groundwater beneath OU–12 (OU–21
for Redstone Arsenal) is being
investigated by NASA under the FFA as
part of OU–3 Site-wide Groundwater
and, therefore, is not included in this
proposed deletion action.
The EPA has determined that no
further Superfund response is necessary
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44265
at OU–09 and OU–12 -to protect human
health and the environment and
supports the partial deletion of these
operable units from the MSFC portion of
the Redstone Arsenal (USARMY/NASA)
Superfund Site.
The NCP (40 CFR Section 300.425(e))
states that a site may be deleted from the
NPL when no further response action is
appropriate. The EPA, in consultation
with the State of Alabama, has
determined that all required response
actions have been implemented and no
further response action by the
responsible parties is appropriate for
these identified OUs at the MSFC.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251et seq.
Dated: June 26, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator EPA R4.
[FR Doc. 2020–14429 Filed 7–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000201]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Two
Species
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition findings and
initiation of status reviews.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90day findings on two petitions to add
species to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Based on our review, we
find that the petitions present
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned actions may be warranted.
Therefore, with the publication of this
document, we announce that we plan to
initiate status reviews of the Las Vegas
bearpoppy (Arctomecon californica) and
Tiehm’s buckwheat (Eriogonum tiehmii)
to determine whether the petitioned
actions are warranted. To ensure that
the status reviews are comprehensive,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
44266
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
we are requesting scientific and
commercial data and other information
regarding the species and factors that
may affect their status. Based on the
status reviews, we will issue 12-month
petition findings, which will address
whether or not the petitioned actions
are warranted, in accordance with the
Act.
DATES: These findings were made on
July 22, 2020. As we commence our
status reviews, we seek any new
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the species or their habitats.
Any information we receive during the
course of our status reviews will be
considered.
ADDRESSES: Supporting documents:
Summaries of the basis for the petition
findings contained in this document are
available on https://www.regulations.gov
under the appropriate docket number
(see table under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION). In addition, this
supporting information is available for
public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours by
contacting the appropriate person, as
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Status reviews: If you have new
scientific or commercial data or other
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the species for which we are
initiating status reviews, please provide
those data or information by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter the appropriate docket number
(see table under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION). Then, click on the
‘‘Search’’ button. After finding the
correct document, you may submit
information by clicking on ‘‘Comment
Now!’’ If your information will fit in the
provided comment box, please use this
Species common name
Contact person
Las Vegas bearpoppy .........................................
Tiehm’s buckwheat .............................................
jbell on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf, please call the
Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and its implementing regulations in title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth the
procedures for adding species to,
removing species from, or reclassifying
species on the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part
17. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
that we make a finding on whether a
petition to add a species to the List (i.e.,
‘‘list’’ a species), remove a species from
the List (i.e., ‘‘delist’’ a species), or
change a listed species’ status from
endangered to threatened or from
threatened to endangered (i.e.,
‘‘reclassify’’ a species) presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are
to make this finding within 90 days of
our receipt of the petition and publish
the finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our regulations establish that
substantial scientific or commercial
information with regard to a 90-day
petition finding refers to ‘‘credible
scientific or commercial information in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Jul 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as
it is most compatible with our
information review procedures. If you
attach your information as a separate
document, our preferred file format is
Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple
comments (such as form letters), our
preferred format is a spreadsheet in
Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate
docket number; see table under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, MS: JAO/1N, 5275
Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We request that you send information
only by the methods described above.
We will post all information we receive
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Glen Knowles, 702–515–5230; glen_knowles@fws.gov.
Lee Ann Carranza, 775–861–6300; lee ann_carranza@fws.gov.
support of the petition’s claims such
that a reasonable person conducting an
impartial scientific review would
conclude that the action proposed in the
petition may be warranted’’ (50 CFR
424.14(h)(1)(i)).
A species may be determined to be an
endangered species or a threatened
species because of one or more of the
five factors described in section 4(a)(1)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The
five factors are:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range
(Factor A);
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes (Factor B);
(c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); and
(e) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (Factor
E).
These factors represent broad
categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an
effect on a species’ continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and
conditions, we look for those that may
have a negative effect on individuals of
the species, as well as other actions or
conditions that may ameliorate any
negative effects or may have positive
effects.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in
general to actions or conditions that are
known to, or are reasonably likely to,
affect individuals of a species
negatively. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes
actions or conditions that have a direct
impact on individuals (direct impacts),
as well as those that affect individuals
through alteration of their habitat or
required resources (stressors). The term
‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either
together or separately—the source of the
action or condition, or the action or
condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) may not
be sufficient to compel a finding that the
information in the petition is substantial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. The
information presented in the petition
must include evidence sufficient to
suggest that these threats may be
affecting the species to the point that the
species may meet the definition of an
endangered species or threatened
species under the Act.
If we find that a petition presents
such information, our subsequent status
review will evaluate all identified
threats by considering the individual-,
population-, and species-level effects
and the expected response by the
species. We will evaluate individual
threats and their expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative
effect of the threats on the species as a
whole. We also consider the cumulative
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
effect of the threats in light of those
actions and conditions that are expected
to have positive effects on the species—
such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts that
may ameliorate threats. It is only after
conducting this cumulative analysis of
threats and the actions that may
ameliorate them, and the expected effect
on the species now and in the
foreseeable future, that we can
determine whether the species meets
the definition of an endangered species
or threatened species under the Act. If
we find that a petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted, the
Act requires that we promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species, and we will subsequently
complete a status review in accordance
44267
with our prioritization methodology for
12-month findings (81 FR 49248; July
27, 2016).
Summaries of Petition Findings
The petition findings contained in
this document are listed in the table
below, and the basis for each finding,
along with supporting information, is
available on https://www.regulations.gov
under the appropriate docket number.
TABLE—STATUS REVIEWS
Common name
Las Vegas bearpoppy .........
Tiehm’s buckwheat ..............
Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2020–0016
FWS–R8–ES–2020–0017
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016.
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016.
Evaluation of a Petition To List the Las
Vegas Bearpoppy
Evaluation of a Petition To List Tiehm’s
Buckwheat
Species and Range
Species and Range
Las Vegas bearpoppy (Arctomecon
californica); Clark County, Nevada, and
Mohave County, Arizona.
Petition History
On August 14, 2019, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity requesting that the Las Vegas
bearpoppy be listed as endangered and
that critical habitat be designated for
this species under the Act. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, as
required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
jbell on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
URL to docket on https://www.regulations.gov
Based on our review of the petition
and sources cited in the petition, we
find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating the petitioned
action may be warranted for the Las
Vegas bearpoppy due to potential
threats associated with the following:
Urbanization, mining, grazing, and
recreation (Factor A); and nonnative
bees (including Africanized) and
climate change (Factor E). The petition
also presented substantial information
that the existing regulatory mechanisms
may be inadequate to address impacts of
these threats (Factor D).
The basis for our finding on this
petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can
be found as an appendix at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2020–0016 under the
Supporting Documents section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Jul 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
Tiehm’s buckwheat (Eriogonum
tiehmii); Esmeralda County, Nevada.
Petition History
On October 7, 2019, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity, requesting that Tiehm’s
buckwheat be emergency listed as
threatened or endangered and critical
habitat be designated for this species
under the Act. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included
the requisite identification information
for the petitioner, as required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). The Act does not provide for
a process to petition emergency listing;
therefore, we are evaluating this petition
under the normal process of
determining if it presents substantial
scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned action
may be warranted. This finding
addresses the petition.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition
and sources cited in the petition, and
other readily available information, we
find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted for
Tiehm’s buckwheat due to the potential
destruction of habitat from mining
(Factor A). The petitioners also
presented information suggesting
invasive species, off-road vehicles,
wildfires, climate change, and grazing
may be threats to Tiehm’s buckwheat.
We will fully evaluate these potential
threats during our 12-month status
review, pursuant to the Act’s
requirement to consider the best
available scientific information when
making that finding.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
The basis for our finding on this
petition, and other information
regarding our review of this petition,
can be found as an appendix at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2020–0017 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the
information presented in the petitions
under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and
4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we have
determined that the petitions
summarized above for the Las Vegas
bearpoppy and Tiehm’s buckwheat
present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned actions may be
warranted. We are, therefore, initiating
status reviews of these species to
determine whether the actions are
warranted under the Act. At the
conclusion of the status reviews, we
will issue findings, in accordance with
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to
whether the petitioned actions are not
warranted, warranted, or warranted but
precluded by pending proposals to
determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened
species.
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff members of the Ecological
Services Program, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for these actions is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Aurelia Skipwith,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–15154 Filed 7–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 141 (Wednesday, July 22, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44265-44267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15154]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000201]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings
for Two Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition findings and initiation of status reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on two petitions to add species to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions present
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of
this document, we announce that we plan to initiate status reviews of
the Las Vegas bearpoppy (Arctomecon californica) and Tiehm's buckwheat
(Eriogonum tiehmii) to determine whether the petitioned actions are
warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are comprehensive,
[[Page 44266]]
we are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information
regarding the species and factors that may affect their status. Based
on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition findings, which
will address whether or not the petitioned actions are warranted, in
accordance with the Act.
DATES: These findings were made on July 22, 2020. As we commence our
status reviews, we seek any new information concerning the status of,
or threats to, the species or their habitats. Any information we
receive during the course of our status reviews will be considered.
ADDRESSES: Supporting documents: Summaries of the basis for the
petition findings contained in this document are available on https://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see table
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In addition, this supporting
information is available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours by contacting the appropriate person, as
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the species
for which we are initiating status reviews, please provide those data
or information by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket
number (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on the
``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may submit
information by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your information will
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS:
JAO/1N, 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send information only by the methods described
above. We will post all information we receive on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species common name Contact person
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Las Vegas bearpoppy.......... Glen Knowles, 702-515-5230;
[email protected].
Tiehm's buckwheat............ Lee Ann Carranza, 775-861-6300; lee
[email protected].
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call
the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part 17.
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to add a species to the List (i.e., ``list'' a
species), remove a species from the List (i.e., ``delist'' a species),
or change a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or
from threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable,
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to
``credible scientific or commercial information in support of the
petition's claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial
scientific review would conclude that the action proposed in the
petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i)).
A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors
are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes (Factor B);
(c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D);
and
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence (Factor E).
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to, or are reasonably likely to, affect
individuals of a species negatively. The term ``threat'' includes
actions or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition, or the action or condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) may not be sufficient to compel a
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information
presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest
that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the
species may meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened
species under the Act.
If we find that a petition presents such information, our
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by
considering the individual-, population-, and species-level effects and
the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the
cumulative effect of the threats on the species as a whole. We also
consider the cumulative
[[Page 44267]]
effect of the threats in light of those actions and conditions that are
expected to have positive effects on the species--such as any existing
regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts that may ameliorate
threats. It is only after conducting this cumulative analysis of
threats and the actions that may ameliorate them, and the expected
effect on the species now and in the foreseeable future, that we can
determine whether the species meets the definition of an endangered
species or threatened species under the Act. If we find that a petition
presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted, the Act requires that we
promptly commence a review of the status of the species, and we will
subsequently complete a status review in accordance with our
prioritization methodology for 12-month findings (81 FR 49248; July 27,
2016).
Summaries of Petition Findings
The petition findings contained in this document are listed in the
table below, and the basis for each finding, along with supporting
information, is available on https://www.regulations.gov under the
appropriate docket number.
Table--Status Reviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL to docket on https://
Common name Docket No. www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Las Vegas bearpoppy...................... FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016.
Tiehm's buckwheat........................ FWS-R8-ES-2020-0017 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of a Petition To List the Las Vegas Bearpoppy
Species and Range
Las Vegas bearpoppy (Arctomecon californica); Clark County, Nevada,
and Mohave County, Arizona.
Petition History
On August 14, 2019, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity requesting that the Las Vegas bearpoppy be listed
as endangered and that critical habitat be designated for this species
under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification information for the petitioner,
as required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating the petitioned action may be
warranted for the Las Vegas bearpoppy due to potential threats
associated with the following: Urbanization, mining, grazing, and
recreation (Factor A); and nonnative bees (including Africanized) and
climate change (Factor E). The petition also presented substantial
information that the existing regulatory mechanisms may be inadequate
to address impacts of these threats (Factor D).
The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2020-0016 under
the Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Tiehm's Buckwheat
Species and Range
Tiehm's buckwheat (Eriogonum tiehmii); Esmeralda County, Nevada.
Petition History
On October 7, 2019, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity, requesting that Tiehm's buckwheat be emergency
listed as threatened or endangered and critical habitat be designated
for this species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself
as such and included the requisite identification information for the
petitioner, as required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). The Act does not provide
for a process to petition emergency listing; therefore, we are
evaluating this petition under the normal process of determining if it
presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted. This finding addresses the
petition.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, and other readily available information, we find that the
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for Tiehm's
buckwheat due to the potential destruction of habitat from mining
(Factor A). The petitioners also presented information suggesting
invasive species, off-road vehicles, wildfires, climate change, and
grazing may be threats to Tiehm's buckwheat. We will fully evaluate
these potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to
the Act's requirement to consider the best available scientific
information when making that finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information
regarding our review of this petition, can be found as an appendix at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2020-0017 under
the Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the
petitions under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we
have determined that the petitions summarized above for the Las Vegas
bearpoppy and Tiehm's buckwheat present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be
warranted. We are, therefore, initiating status reviews of these
species to determine whether the actions are warranted under the Act.
At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue findings, in
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether the
petitioned actions are not warranted, warranted, or warranted but
precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are staff members of the
Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Aurelia Skipwith,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-15154 Filed 7-21-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
