Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules 51969

consistent with the requirements of the Register, EPA is incorporating 90–day finding on a petition to list corresponding onshore area (‘‘COA’’), as applicable provisions of 310 Code of oklahomensis ( mandated by the Clean Air Act (‘‘the Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 4.00: grass pink orchid) as endangered or Act’’). The portion of the OCS air Timely Action Schedule and Fee threatened under the Endangered regulations that is being updated Provisions, as amended through Act of 1973, as amended (Act). pertains to the requirements for OCS September 4, 2009 and 310 CMR 6.00: Based on our review, we find that the sources in the Commonwealth of Ambient Air Quality Standards for the petition presents substantial scientific Massachusetts. The intended effect of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 310 or commercial information indicating approving the OCS requirements for the CMR 7.00: Air Pollution Control, and that listing the species, C. Commonwealth of Massachusetts is to 310 CMR 8:00: The Prevention and/or oklahomensis, as endangered or regulate emissions from OCS sources in Abatement of Air Pollution Episode and threatened may be warranted. Therefore, accordance with the requirements Air Pollution Incident Emergencies, as with the publication of this notice, we onshore. The change to the existing amended through May 20, 2010 as a are initiating a review of the status of requirements discussed below is direct final rule without prior proposal the species to determine if listing C. incorporated by reference into the Code because the Agency views this as a oklahomensis as endangered or of Federal Regulations and is listed in noncontroversial submittal and threatened is warranted. To ensure that the appendix to the OCS air regulations. anticipates no adverse comments. A this status review is comprehensive, we DATES: Written comments must be detailed rationale for the approval is set are requesting scientific and commercial received on or before September 23, forth in the direct final rule. If no data and other information regarding 2010. adverse comments are received in this species. Based on the status review, response to this action rule, no further we will issue a 12–month finding on the ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, activity is contemplated. If EPA receives petition, which will address whether identified by Docket ID Number EPA– adverse comments, the direct final rule the petitioned action is warranted, as R01–OAR–2010–0442 by one of the will be withdrawn and all public provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. following methods: comments received will be addressed in 1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow DATES: To allow us adequate time to a subsequent final rule based on this the on-line instructions for submitting conduct this review, we request that we proposed rule. EPA will not institute a comments. receive information on or before October second comment period. Any parties 2. E-mail: [email protected]. 25, 2010. Please note that if you are interested in commenting on this action 3. Fax: (617) 918–0653. using the Federal eRulemaking Portal should do so at this time. Please note 4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification (see ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ section, below), the that if EPA receives adverse comment Number EPA–R01–OAR–2010–0442’’, deadline for submitting an electronic on an amendment, paragraph, or section Ida McDonnell, U.S. Environmental comment is midnight Eastern Standard of this rule and if that provision may be Protection Agency, EPA New England Time on this date. severed from the remainder of the rule, Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square— ADDRESSES: You may submit EPA may adopt as final those provisions Suite 100, (Mail Code OEP05–2), information by one of the following of the rule that are not the subject of an Boston, MA 02109–3912. methods: adverse comment. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// For additional information, see the your comments to: Ida McDonnell, Air www.regulations.gov. In the box that direct final rule which is located in the Permits, Toxics and Indoor Air Unit, reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the Rules Section of this Federal Register. Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. docket number for this finding, which is Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Dated: June 8, 2010. FWS-R3-ES-2010-0034. Check the box New England Regional Office, 5 Post H. Curtis Spalding, that reads ‘‘Open for Comment/ Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail Code Regional Administrator, EPA New England. Submission,’’ and then click the Search OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. [FR Doc. 2010–20726 Filed 8–23–10; 8:45 am] button. You should then see an icon that ‘‘ ’’ Such deliveries are only accepted BILLING CODE 6560–50–P reads Submit a Comment. Please during the Regional Office’s normal ensure that you have found the correct hours of operation. The Regional rulemaking before submitting your Office’s official hours of business are DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR comment. Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public excluding legal holidays. Fish and Wildlife Service Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R3- Please see the direct final rule which ES-2010-0034; Division of Policy and is located in the Rules Section of this 50 CFR Part 17 Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Federal Register for detailed Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, [Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2010-0034] instructions on how to submit Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. [MO 92201-0-0008] comments. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Ida generally means that we will post any and ; 90-Day Finding on a E. McDonnell, Air Permits, Toxics and personal information you provide us Petition to List the Oklahoma Grass Indoor Air Unit, U.S. Environmental (see the Request for Information section Pink Orchid as Endangered or Protection Agency, EPA New England below for more details). Threatened Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square– After the date specified above in Suite 100, (Mail Code OEP05–2), AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, DATES, you must submit information Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone Interior. directly to the Field Office (see FOR number (617) 918–1653, fax number FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section (617) 918–0653, e-mail ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review. below). Please note that we might not be [email protected]. able to address or incorporate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and information that we receive after the Final Rules Section of this Federal Wildlife Service (Service), announce a date noted above.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 51970 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: by C. oklahomensis, we request data and Background Janice C. Engle, Field Supervisor, information on: Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires Chicago, Ecological Services (1) What may constitute ‘‘physical or that we make a finding on whether a Field Office, 1250 South Grove, Suite biological features essential to the petition to list, delist, or reclassify a 103, Barrington, IL 60010, by telephone conservation of the species’’; species presents substantial scientific or (847–381–2243), or by facsimile (847– commercial information indicating that 381–2285). If you use a (2) Where these features are currently found; and the petitioned action may be warranted. telecommunications device for the deaf We are to base this finding on (3) Whether any of these features may (TDD), please call the Federal information provided in the petition, require special management Information Relay Service (FIRS) at supporting information submitted with considerations or protection, including 800–877–8339. the petition, and information otherwise managing for the potential effects of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: available in our files. To the maximum climate change. Request for Information extent practicable, we are to make this In addition, we request data and finding within 90 days of our receipt of When we make a finding that a information on ‘‘specific areas outside the petition and publish our notice of petition presents substantial the geographical area occupied by the the finding promptly in the Federal information indicating that listing a species’’ that are ‘‘essential to the Register. species may be warranted, we are conservation of the species.’’ Please Our standard for substantial scientific required to promptly review the status provide specific comments and or commercial information within the of the species (status review). For the information as to what, if any, critical Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with status review to be complete and based habitat you think we should propose for regard to a 90–day petition finding is on the best available scientific and designation if the species is proposed ‘‘that amount of information that would commercial information, we request for listing, and why such habitat meets lead a reasonable person to believe that information on Calopogon the requirements of section 4 of the Act. the measure proposed in the petition oklahomensis (Oklahoma grass pink Please include sufficient information may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). orchid) from governmental agencies, with your submission (such as scientific If we find that substantial scientific or Native American Tribes, the scientific journal articles or other publications) to commercial information was presented, community, industry, and any other allow us to verify any scientific or we are required to promptly commence interested parties. We seek information commercial information you include. a review of the status of the species, on: Submissions merely stating support which will be subsequently summarized (1) The species’ biology, range, and in our 12–month finding. population trends, including: for or opposition to the action under (a) Habitat requirements; consideration without providing Petition History supporting information, although noted, (b) Genetics and ; On May 28, 2008, we received a (c) Historical and current range, will not be considered in making a petition dated May 22, 2008, from Dr. including distribution patterns; determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Douglas Goldman of the Harvard (d) Historical and current population Act directs that determinations as to University Herbaria requesting that levels, and current and projected trends; whether any species is an endangered or Calopogon oklahomensis be listed as and threatened species must be made ‘‘solely endangered or threatened under the Act. (e) Past and ongoing conservation on the basis of the best scientific and The petition clearly identified itself as measures for the species, its habitat, or commercial data available.’’ both. such and included the requisite You may submit your information identification information for the (2) The factors that are the basis for concerning this status review by one of making a listing determination for a petitioner, as required by 50 CFR the methods listed in the ADDRESSES 424.14(a). In a September 15, 2008, species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 section. If you submit information via U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: letter to the petitioner, we responded http://www.regulations.gov, your entire that we reviewed the information (a) The present or threatened submission—including any personal destruction, modification, or presented in the petition and identifying information—will be posted determined that issuing an emergency curtailment of its habitat or range; on the website. If you submit a (b) Overutilization for commercial, regulation temporarily listing the hardcopy that includes personal recreational, scientific, or educational species as per section 4(b)(7) of the Act identifying information, you may purposes; was not warranted because the species request at the top of your document that (c) Disease or predation; has extant populations in several States (d) The inadequacy of existing we withhold this personal identifying and most of the threats mentioned in the regulatory mechanisms; or information from public review. petition are not immediate in nature, (e) Other natural or manmade factors However, we cannot guarantee that we but consist of ongoing issues (for affecting its continued existence. will be able to do so. We will post all example, fire suppression, overgrazing, (3) The potential effects of climate hardcopy submissions on http:// and unfavorable mowing regimes) that change on this species and its habitat. www.regulations.gov. may make areas less suitable for the If, after the status review, we Information and supporting species, but are not likely to cause determine that listing Calopogon documentation that we received and immediate extirpation. We also stated oklahomensis is warranted, we will used in preparing this finding will be that due to court orders and judicially propose critical habitat (see definition available for you to review at http:// approved settlement agreements for in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), in www.regulations.gov, or you may make other listing determinations under the accordance with section 4 of the Act, to an appointment during normal business Act that required nearly all of our listing the maximum extent prudent and hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife funding for fiscal year 2008, we would determinable at the time we propose to Service, Chicago, Illinois Ecological not be able to further address the list the species. Therefore, within the Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER petition at that time but would complete geographical range currently occupied INFORMATION CONTACT). the action when workload and funding

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules 51971

allowed. On December 14, 2009, we , , and Florida, curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) received a 60–day notice of intent to sue with a few scattered populations further overutilization for commercial, for violation of sections 4(b)(3)(A and B) east in , , and recreational, scientific, or educational of the Act, relating to late petition (Goldman 1995, p. 40; purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) findings for 140 species, including C. Goldman et al. 2004a, p. 707). C. the inadequacy of existing regulatory oklahomensis. On February 17, 2010, oklahomensis appears to prefer moist to mechanisms; or (E) other natural or we received a complaint for failure to seasonally dry-mesic prairies, prairie- manmade factors affecting its continued make timely petition findings on eight haymeadows, savannas and open existence. species, including C. oklahomensis. woodlands, avoiding the wetter habitats In considering what factors might This finding addresses the petition. preferred by other species of Calopogon constitute threats, we must look beyond (Goldman 1995, p. 40). This species Previous Federal Action the exposure of the species to a factor appears to thrive under a frequent to evaluate whether the species may There have been no previous Federal burning regime or haymeadow respond to the factor in a way that actions concerning this species. management where most or all of the causes actual impacts to the species. If Species Information above ground vegetation is effectively there is exposure to a factor and the removed once every 1 to 2 years, with species responds negatively, the factor Calopogon oklahomensis was subsequent flowering within a year after may be a threat and, during the described by D.H. Goldman as a new the last burn or haymowing. subsequent status review, we attempt to species in 1995 (Goldman 1995, p. 37). Goldman (1995, p. 41) based the range determine how significant a threat it is. Morphological and phenological of the species on collected specimens in The threat is significant, if it drives, or variation of the genus in the midwestern six States (, , Louisiana, contributes to, the risk of extinction of States was not previously recognized by , Oklahoma, and ) and the species such that the species may Correll (1978) or Luer (1975) (in hypothesized that it may have occurred warrant listing as threatened or Goldman 1995, p. 41). However, genetic historically in two additional States endangered as those terms are defined testing among the five species of the ( and Illinois). The petition states in the Act. However, the identification terrestrial orchid genus Calopogon for that, historically, the range covers 17 of factors that could impact a species genetic variation indicates that C. States (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, oklahomensis is the most genetically negatively may not be sufficient to Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, , Kansas, compel a finding that the information in distinct species out of the five species Louisiana, , Missouri, tested (Trapnell et al. 2004, p. 314). For the petition and our files is substantial. Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, The information must include evidence this reason, we accept the , Texas, and ) characterization of C. oklahomensis as a sufficient to suggest that these factors (Petition, p. 2). NatureServe identifies may be operative threats that act on the distinct species of Calopogon, with a the range of the species in only 12 States large geographic range, and many species to the point that the species may (Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, meet the definition of threatened or consistent morphological features Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, (Goldman 1995, p. 41). endangered under the Act. Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, In making this 90–day finding, we Calopogon oklahomensis has a forked and Wisconsin) (NatureServe 2009). corm (a modified underground stem), evaluate whether information regarding Information on the persistence and threats to Calopogon oklahomensis, as with the new corm at the base of the leaf status is lacking for many areas and the inflorescence (a branching stem presented in the petition and other historically occupied by Calopogon information available in our files, is with flowers) rapidly growing distally at oklahomensis. We are unaware of substantial, thereby indicating that the the time of anthesis (the period from specific information on population petitioned action may be warranted. Our flowering to fruiting) (Goldman 1995, p. abundance of this species. Other than evaluation of this information is 39). The leaf is almost always as long as the petition, we are unaware of any presented below. or longer than the inflorescence year-round or long-term monitoring data (Goldman 1995, p. 39). The flower buds on C. oklahomensis. Throughout its A. The Present or Threatened are deeply grooved longitudinally, waxy range, C. oklahomensis specimens have Destruction, Modification, or and shiny, with elongated acuminate historically been confused with C. Curtailment of the Species’ Habitat or apices (narrowing to a point at the tip). tuberosus, due to the difficulty in Range. The flowers are fragrant and open in distinguishing the two species Information Provided in the Petition succession (Goldman 1995, p. 39). The (Goldman 1995, pp. 37 – 41; Goldman labellum disk (portion of the lower petal et al. 2004b, pp. 37-38). For these The petition outlines several that is attached to the center of the reasons, the status of this species assertions regarding the present or flower) is pinkish with a basal region of remains unclear. threatened destruction, modification, or short to long yellow hairs, above which curtailment of Calopogon oklahomensis there is a triangular region of short, Evaluation of Information for This habitat or range, including: stout, pinkish hairs, which extends to Finding (1)The loss of native prairie, savanna, the labellum apex (terminal end of the Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and open woodland habitat throughout lower petal) (Goldman 1995, p. 39). The and its implementing regulations at 50 the range of the species as a result of stigma (part of the female reproductive CFR 424 set forth the procedures for expanding urbanization, agriculture, part of the flower) is flat against the adding a species to, or removing a and forestry land use; column surface (Goldman 1995, p. 40). species from, the Federal Lists of (2)Degradation of habitat due to fire Calopogon oklahomensis occupies Endangered and Threatened Wildlife suppression or infrequent burning; moist, loamy prairies, savannas, and and Plants. A species may be overgrazing; mowing without thatch sandy woodlands from central determined to be an endangered or removal, excessively frequent mowing, Minnesota southward to Texas, threatened species due to one or more or mowing during the growing season including the States of Wisconsin, Iowa, of the five factors described in section before the fruit ripens; severe drainage Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The present or of optimal habitat rendering mesic sites Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, threatened destruction, modification, or too dry to support the species; intense

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 51972 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules

soil disturbance and shading due to comm.). Arkansas has 18 herbarium habitat, mowing without thatch conversion to forestry plantations; and records of this species from 7 counties, removal, excessively frequent mowing, intensive trampling, deep local soil and Texas has herbarium records from and mowing during the growing season disturbance, and damage from vehicular 12 counties. Our files also indicate that before the fruit ripens. We had very traffic. Kansas (Freeman 2009, pers. comm.) little information in our files prior to The petitioner describes the decline of and Tennessee each have a single record receiving the petition; therefore, we do Calopogon oklahomensis range of this species, with Tennessee’s not have information in our files that compared to its historical range occurrence last observed in 1937 (Call further supports or refutes the (Petition, pp. 2-4). The petition 2009, pers. comm.). In Wisconsin, information provided in the petition. indicates that, based on 237 herbarium Calopogon oklahomensis is identified as We, therefore, conclude the petition specimen records, the species may be a species of ‘‘special concern’’ with presents substantial information to extirpated from nine States of historical historical occurrence in Wisconsin, indicate that the present or threatened occurrence (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, perhaps having not been verified in the destruction or modification of habitat Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, past 20 years, but suspected to still be may present a threat to C. oklahomensis. South Carolina, and Tennessee) extant (Carnes 2010, pers. comm.). We (Petition, p. 2). The petition also states do not have information in our files B. Overutilization for Commercial, that these same herbarium records regarding distribution in other States. Recreational, Scientific, or Educational indicate the species is believed to be Our files also indicate that population Purposes. extant in eight States; Arkansas, Illinois, numbers at particular sites fluctuate The petitioner provides no Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi, from year to year with the greatest information addressing this factor, and Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin numbers found in years following we have no information in our files (Petition, p. 2). However, 158 of those prescribed burns; however, the species indicating that listing of the species due records date prior to 1958 (prior to 50 is difficult to find if it is not in bloom to overutilization for commercial, years ago), and 183 date prior to 1978 and it appears to bloom for only a few recreational, scientific, or educational (prior to 30 years ago) (Petition, p. 2). days (Witsell 2009, pers. comm.). We purposes may be warranted. Based on According to the petition, of the 233 intend to fully assess the historic and our evaluation, we find that the petition records that give specific localities, only current records of Calopogon does not present substantial 25 to 35 populations may remain oklahomensis throughout its range information, and we do not have (Petition, p. 2). Of the States that still during the status review for the species. substantial information in our files, to contain the species, the two States According to information presented in indicate that listing Calopogon suffering the greatest population losses the petition, Calopogon oklahomensis oklahomensis as endangered or are Illinois (one remaining population has undergone a sharp decline as much threatened may be warranted due to from an original 42 records) and Texas of its habitat has been converted to other overutilization for commercial, (1–3 populations from an original 27 uses. Loss of native prairie, savanna, recreational, scientific, or educational records) (Petition, p. 2). and open woodland habitat throughout purposes. However, we will evaluate all the species’ range is indicated as one of Evaluation of Information Provided in factors, including threats from the major causes of decline (Petition, the Petition and Available in Service overutilization for commercial, pp. 2, 5). According to NatureServe Files recreational, scientific, or educational (2009), C. oklahomensis is ‘‘possibly purposes, when we conduct our status We have no information in our files extirpated’’ in Wisconsin and review. regarding the effects of expanding Tennessee; ‘‘critically imperiled’’ in urbanization, agricultural or forestry Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, and C. Disease or Predation. land use, fire suppression, infrequent Louisiana; ‘‘imperiled’’ in Arkansas; and Information Provided in the Petition burning, intensive trampling, deep local not ranked in Minnesota, Iowa, soil disturbance, damage from vehicular Missouri, Oklahoma, or Texas. In Iowa, The petitioner asserts that traffic, intense soil disturbance and only historical records exist for C. overgrazing, as well as, natural shading due to conversion to forestry oklahomensis with no extant sites biological predation by insects, rodents, plantations, severe drainage of optimal existing (Pearson 2009, pers. comm.). deer, or other herbivores, may threaten habitat, mowing without thatch Calopogon oklahomensis (Petition, p. removal, excessively frequent mowing, Summary of Factor A 10). and mowing during the growing season In summary, we find that the Evaluation of Information Provided in before the fruit ripens, and whether the information provided in the petition the Petition and Available in Service effects are destructive to Calopogon presents substantial information that Files oklahomensis habitat. listing Calopogon oklahomensis as The below information existed in the endangered or threatened may be We have no information in our files files of various Service offices warranted due to the present or indicating whether overgrazing or throughout the country at the time the threatened destruction, modification, or natural predation by insects, rodents, petition was received. That information curtailment of the species’ habitat or deer, or other herbivores, may threaten was transmitted to the author of this range. The petition identifies numerous Calopogon oklahomensis. The notice, through personal potential factors that may be affecting C. petitioners did not provide information communications, in 2009 and 2010. The oklahomensis, including habitat loss or list disease as a threat to C. citations reflect the date on which the and degradation due to expanding oklahomensis, and we do not have information was transmitted to the urbanization, agricultural or forestry substantial information in our files to author, and not the date the information land use, fire suppression, infrequent indicate that disease may be a threat to was received by the Service. burning, intensive trampling, deep local the species. Information in our files indicates that soil disturbance, damage from vehicular Based on our evaluation, we find that Oklahoma has 45 records of this species traffic, intense soil disturbance and the petition does not present substantial from 15 counties dating from 1934 shading due to conversion to forestry information, and we do not have through 2004 (Dikeman 2009, pers. plantations, severe drainage of optimal substantial information in our files, to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules 51973

indicate that listing Calopogon petitions about existing regulatory destroy the chance for the plant to oklahomensis as endangered or mechanisms beyond the two State reproduce that year. threatened may be warranted due to listings that could protect these species. Furthermore, according to disease or predation. However, we will We are also not aware of any regulatory information in the petition, Calopogon evaluate all factors, including threats mechanisms that address C. oklahomensis is drought tolerant, but from disease and predation when we oklahomensis. may still succumb to drought, even as conduct our status review. dormant corms (Petition, pp. 4–5). Summary of Factor D Historically, the species relied on a D. The Inadequacy of Existing widespread mosaic of large populations The petitioner did not provide any Regulatory Mechanisms. and abundant seed production (Petition, additional information about existing p. 5), and thus some populations were Information Provided in the Petition regulatory mechanisms other than the able to escape local or regional The petitioner asserts that Calopogon State listings in Illinois and Tennessee droughts, allowing the species to persist that could protect these species, and we oklahomensis is not listed as and recolonize the drought-affected have nothing in our files that describes endangered or threatened in the States areas. As described by the petitioner, any regulatory mechanisms that address of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, however, this species now consists of Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Calopogon oklahomensis. While smaller populations that are Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, South information presented by the petitioner geographically disconnected from each Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin indicates that threats to the petitioned other (Petition, p. 5). Existence in small, (Petition, pp. 5–9). The petitioner species may be posed by habitat isolated populations can render the asserts that this species is State listed as destruction and degradation due to species highly vulnerable to local, endangered in Illinois and Tennessee expanding urbanization, agricultural or regional, or widespread extirpation due (Petition, pp. 6, 9). The petitioner forestry land use, fire suppression, to uncontrollable natural forces, implies that the lack of State listing for infrequent burning, intensive trampling, including local or regional climate C. oklahomensis in 14 of 16 States poses deep local soil disturbance, damage perturbation such as drought. Such an a threat to the species. However, there from vehicular traffic, intense soil event could eliminate most or all of a was no specific information provided in disturbance and shading due to small population, and, if the population the petition about existing regulatory conversion to forestry plantations, is isolated from other populations of the mechanisms beyond the two State severe drainage of optimal habitat, species, a situation to which the species listings that could protect these species. mowing without thatch removal, is not adapted, there would be little excessively frequent mowing, and Evaluation of Information Provided in opportunity for recolonization (Petition, mowing during the growing season the Petition and Available in Service p. 5). before the fruit ripens, none of these Files threats are posed by an inadequacy of Evaluation of Information Provided in Calopogon oklahomensis is not listed regulatory mechanisms. We, therefore, the Petition and Available in Service as endangered or threatened in the find that the petition does not present Files States of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, substantial information indicating that We have no information in our files Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, the inadequacy of existing regulatory regarding the effects of the unique Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, mechanisms may present a threat to C. biology described by the petitioner for Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and oklahomensis. However, we will further Calopogon oklahomensis that may make Wisconsin (the States of Kansas and evaluate the adequacy of existing it more vulnerable to local extirpation. Louisiana do not list plant species as regulatory mechanisms for protecting C. We do have information in our files, threatened or endangered (Mizzi 2010, oklahomensis and its habitat during our however, indicating that the effects of pers. comm.)). Additional information status review. small population size may impact the in our files indicates that this species is viability of species populations. Species State-listed as endangered in Illinois E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors that are known from few, widely and Tennessee. An important provision Affecting the Species’ Continued dispersed locations are inherently more of the Illinois Endangered Species Existence. vulnerable to extinction than Protection Act is the consultation Information Provided in the Petition widespread species because of the provision, which requires State and higher risks from genetic bottlenecks, municipal agencies taking actions that The petitioner describes Calopogon random demographic fluctuations, and might affect State or federally listed species as having a unique biology that localized catastrophes such as species (including plants), to avoid, makes small or widely scattered hurricanes, landslides, and drought minimize, or mitigate impacts to the populations more vulnerable to (Lande 1988, p. 1,455; Mangel and Tier listed species (http://dnr.state.il.us/ extirpation (Petition, pp. 4–5). A 1994, p. 607; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757). INPC/VMG/Illinois Plant Translocation Calopogon corm contains only two These problems are further magnified Policy.pdf accessed on 05/12/2010). In growing points compared to other when populations are few and restricted Tennessee, the Rare Plant Protection vascular plants that have multiple tiny, to a limited geographic area, and the and Conservation Act requires persons dormant buds (Petition, pp. 4–5). number of individuals is very small. to obtain written permission from a Because Calopogon does not form new Populations with these characteristics landowner or manager before knowingly buds if one or both of these growing face an increased likelihood of removing or destroying State-listed points are damaged or destroyed, this stochastic extinction due to changes in endangered plant species and requires species has only two chances for demography, the environment, genetics, nursery farmers to be licensed in order success at perpetuating the plant or other factors, in a process described to sell State-listed endangered species through the next winter (Petition, pp. 4– as an ‘‘extinction vortex’’ by Gilpin and (http://www.state.tn.us/environment/ 5). Therefore, the species is particularly Soule (1986, pp. 24-25). Small, isolated na/nhp.shtmlaccessed on 05/12/2010). vulnerable to stochastic events, which, populations often exhibit a reduced However, as stated above, there was no if they occur at a certain time (when the level of genetic variability or genetic specific information provided in the buds have formed or are forming), may depression due to inbreeding, which

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 51974 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules

diminishes the species’ capacity to information that listing Calopogon oklahomensis may be at risk of adapt and respond to environmental oklahomensis as a threatened or extinction now or in the foreseeable changes, thereby lessening the endangered species may be warranted future and therefore listing under the probability of long-term persistence due to other natural or manmade Act may be warranted, we are initiating (Soule 1987, pp. 4-7). Inbreeding factors. Unique features of the species’ a status review to determine whether depression as the result of isolated, biology increase its vulnerability to listing C. oklahomensis under the Act is small populations can result in death, extirpation because it now exists in warranted. At the conclusion of the decreased fertility, smaller body size, small, isolated populations. status review, we will issue a 12–month loss of vigor, reduced fitness, and Specifically, because the species has finding in accordance with section various chromosome abnormalities only two growing points, which cannot 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether or (Smith 1974, p. 350). regenerate, and thus only two chances not the Service believes a proposal to Although changes in the environment to perpetuate the plant through the list C. oklahomensis is warranted. To may cause populations to fluctuate winter, this reduced reproductive ensure that the status review is naturally, small and low-density capacity further exacerbates the effects comprehensive, we request scientific populations are more likely to fluctuate and threats posed by the small and commercial information regarding below a minimum viable population population sizes and fragmented C. oklahomensis. (the minimum or threshold number of habitats in which the species now The ‘‘substantial information’’ individuals needed in a population to exists. persist in a viable state for a given standard for a 90–day finding differs ‘‘ interval) (Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp. 25- Finding from the Act’s best scientific and ’’ 33; Shaffer 1981, p. 131; Shaffer and On the basis of our evaluation of the commercial data standard that applies Samson 1985, pp. 148–150). The information presented under section to a status review to determine whether problems associated with small 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have a petitioned action is warranted. A 90– population size and vulnerability to determined that the petition presents day finding does not constitute a status random demographic fluctuations or substantial scientific or commercial review under the Act. In a 12–month natural catastrophes are further information indicating that listing finding, we will determine whether a magnified by synergistic interactions Calopogon oklahomensis may be petitioned action is warranted after we with other threats, such as those warranted. This finding is based on have completed a thorough status discussed above under Factor A. Despite information that indicates the continued review of the species, which is evolutionary adaptations for rarity, existence of this species may be affected conducted following a substantial 90– habitat loss and degradation increase a by destruction or modification of habitat day finding. Because the Act’s standards species’ vulnerability to extinction from expanding urbanization, for 90–day and 12–month findings are (Noss and Cooperrider 1994, pp. 58–62). agricultural or forestry land use, fire different, as described above, a Historically, Calopogon oklahomensis suppression, infrequent burning, substantial 90–day finding does not was more widespread. An important intensive trampling, deep local soil mean that the 12–month finding will benefit of this greater historical range disturbance, damage from vehicular result in a warranted finding. resulted in an advantage of redundancy: traffic, intense soil disturbance and References Cited additional populations separated by shading due to conversion to forestry some distance likely allowed some plantations, severe drainage of optimal A complete list of references cited is populations to be spared the impacts of habitat, mowing without thatch available on the Internet at http:// localized or more discrete catastrophic removal, excessively frequent mowing, www.regulations.gov and upon request events, such as drought. However, this and mowing during the growing season from the Chicago, Illinois Ecological advantage of redundancy has been lost before the fruit ripens (Factor A); and Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER with the great reduction in C. other natural or manmade factors such INFORMATION CONTACT). as small population size, and the unique oklahomensis range. Additionally, the Author unique biological features of C. features of the species’ biology (only oklahomensis described by the two opportunities for reproduction each The primary authors of this notice are petitioner (Petition, pp. 4–5), as year) that make it particularly the staff members of the Chicago, illustrated above, which limit vulnerable to the effects of small Illinois Ecological Services Field Office reproduction and the ability to population size (Factor E). The (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). petitioner does not present substantial recolonize, may make this species Authority: The authority for this action is particularly vulnerable to the effects of information that C. oklahomensis is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as small population sizes and fragmented threatened by overcollection (Factor B), amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). habitats. We will further assess this disease or predation (Factor C), or the Dated: July 22, 2010 potential impact during the status inadequacy of existing regulatory review for the species. mechanisms (Factor D) currently or in Wendi Weber, the future. Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Summary of Factor E Because we have found that the Service. Based on our evaluation, we find that petition presents substantial [FR Doc. 2010–20729 Filed 8–23–10; 8:45 am] the petition presents substantial information indicating that Calopogon BILLING CODE 4310–55–S

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:48 Aug 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1