Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Two Species, 44265-44267 [2020-15154]

Download as PDF 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 http://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: http:// 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 http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table 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 http://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 http://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 http://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 http:// 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 http:// 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 http://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: http://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 http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information 
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate 
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach 
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a 
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table 
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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov under the 
appropriate docket number.

                                              Table--Status Reviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               URL to docket on http://
               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 
http://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 
http://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