42054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules

to the third element in the process, further consideration. We found that from the Nevada Fish and Wildlife which is to evaluate the population there is no area within the range of the Office (see ADDRESSES section). segment’s conservation status in relation Amargosa toad where the potential Author(s) to the Act’s standards for listing as an threat of development or groundwater endangered or threatened species. The withdrawal is significantly concentrated The primary authors of this notice are DPS evaluation in this finding concerns or may be substantially greater than in staff with the Nevada Fish and Wildlife the Amargosa toad that we were other portions of the range. Some sites Office, Las Vegas. petitioned to list as threatened or including Crystal and Lower Indian Authority endangered. Springs may become overgrown with The authority for this section is Discreteness vegetation and cause the site to become unsuitable and require rehabilitation. section 4 of the Endangered Species Act Under the DPS Policy, a population Cattle and feral burros may provide the of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et segment of a vertebrate taxon may be necessary disturbance to improve and seq.). considered discrete if it satisfies either maintain Amargosa toad habitat but may Dated: July 9, 2010 one of the following conditions: cause short-term overuse of some sites. Wendi Weber, (1) It is markedly separated from other Use by OHVs may cause localized Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. populations of the same taxon as a impacts but we do not anticipate these consequence of physical, physiological, [FR Doc. 2010–17647 Filed 7–19– 10; 8:45 am] effects to result in population declines. BILLING CODE S ecological, or behavioral factors. Although nonnative toad predators such Quantitative measures of genetic or as crayfish, bullfrogs, and mosquito fish morphological discontinuity may occur throughout much of the range of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR provide evidence of this separation. (2) the toad and likely impact the toad to It is delimited by international some extent, we have found that toads Fish and Wildlife Service governmental boundaries within which have, and will continue to coexist with differences in control of exploitation, these predators. There is no indication 50 CFR Part 17 management of habitat, conservation that stochastic events, climate change, status, or regulatory mechanisms exist [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0073] or environmental contaminants [92210–1117–0000–B4] that are significant in light of section differentially affect any given site. 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. On the basis of our review, we found RIN 1018–AW54 no areas within the species’ range where Markedly Separated From Other Endangered and Threatened Wildlife threats are geographically concentrated. Populations of the Taxon and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for The species is characterized by As described previously (see Species Brodiaea filifolia (Thread-leaved metapopulations across its range which Information above), the Amargosa toad Brodiaea) is characterized by metapopulations allows for an individual site to be across its range. Individual Amargosa extirpated and become repopulated AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, toads move among these from neighboring populations. The Interior. metapopulations, and there is no factors affecting the species are ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of indication that physical, physiological, essentially uniform throughout its comment period. ecological, or behavioral barriers exist range, indicating that no portion of the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and that would render any portions of the Amargosa toad’s range warrants further Wildlife Service (Service), announce the species’ range markedly separate from consideration of possible threatened or reopening of the public comment period other portions. Furthermore, we have no endangered status. on our December 8, 2009, proposed quantitative data such as genetic We do not find that the Amargosa revised designation of critical habitat for information to suggest any portions of toad is in danger of extinction now, nor Brodiaea filifolia (thread-leaved the species to be markedly separate from is it likely to become endangered within brodiaea) under the Endangered Species others. Therefore, we conclude there are the foreseeable future throughout all or Act of 1973, as amended. We also no portions of the species’ range that a significant portion of its range. announce the availability of a draft meet the discreteness criterion of the Therefore, listing the Amargosa toad as economic analysis (DEA) and an Service’s DPS policy. Since both threatened or endangered under the Act amended required determinations discreteness and significance are is not warranted throughout all or a section of the proposal. We are required to satisfy the DPS policy, we significant portion of its range at this reopening the comment period for an have determined that there are no time. additional 30 days to allow all populations of the Amargosa toad that We request that you submit any new interested parties an opportunity to qualify as a DPS under our policy. As information concerning the status of, or comment on all of the above. If you a result, no further analysis under the threats to, the Armargosa toad to our submitted comments previously, you do DPS policy is necessary. Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section) whenever it not need to resubmit them because we Significant Portion of the Range becomes available. New information have already incorporated them into the Having determined that the Amargosa will help us monitor the Amargosa toad public record and will fully consider toad does not meet the definition of a and encourage its conservation. If an them in our final determination. threatened or endangered species, we emergency situation develops for the DATES: We will consider public must next consider whether there are Amargosa toad, we will act to provide comments received on or before August any significant portions of the range immediate protection. 19, 2010. Any comments that we receive where the Amargosa toad is in danger of after the closing date may not be References Cited extinction or is likely to become considered in the final decision on this endangered in the foreseeable future. A complete list of references cited is action. We considered whether any portions available on the Internet at http:// ADDRESSES: You may submit comments of the Amargosa toad’s range warrant www.regulations.gov and upon request by one of the following methods:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 42055

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// conservation of B. filifolia that we designation that are not appropriately www.regulations.gov. Follow the should include in the final critical identified or considered in our instructions for submitting comments habitat designation and why. Include economic analysis. on Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0073. information on the distribution of these (9) The potential effects of climate U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public essential features and what special change on this species and its habitat Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R8– management considerations or and whether the critical habitat may ES–2009–0073; Division of Policy and protections may be required to maintain adequately account for these potential Directives Management; U.S. Fish and or enhance them. effects. Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, • Areas we proposed as revised (10) Whether we could improve or Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. critical habitat that do not contain the modify our approach to designating We will post all comments on http:// physical and biological features critical habitat in any way to provide for www.regulations.gov. This generally essential to the conservation of the greater public participation and means that we will post any personal species and that should therefore not be understanding, or to better information you provide us (see the designated as critical habitat. accommodate concerns and comments. Public Comments section below for • Areas not occupied at the time of If you submitted comments or more information). listing that are essential for the information on the proposed revised FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim conservation of the species and why. rule (74 FR 64930) during the initial Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and (3) Land use designations and current comment period from December 8, Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and or planned activities in the areas 2009, to February 8, 2010, please do not Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley occupied by the species, and their resubmit them. These comments are Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011; possible impacts on proposed revised included in the public record for this telephone (760) 431–9440; facsimile critical habitat. rulemaking, and we will fully consider (760) 431–5901. Persons who use a (4) How the proposed revised critical them in the preparation of our final telecommunications device for the deaf habitat boundaries could be refined to determination. Our final determination (TDD) may call the Federal Information more closely circumscribe landscapes concerning the revised critical habitat Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. identified as containing the physical for Brodiaea filifolia will take into SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and biological features essential to the consideration all written comments and conservation of the species. any additional information we receive Public Comments (5) Any foreseeable economic, during both comment periods. On the We intend that any final action national security, or other relevant basis of public comments, we may, resulting from the proposed rule is impacts that may result from during the development of our final based on the best scientific data designating particular areas as critical determination, find that areas within the available and will be accurate and as habitat, and, in particular, any impacts proposed revised critical habitat effective as possible. Therefore, we to small entities (e.g., small businesses designation do not meet the definition request comments or information from or small governments), and the benefits of critical habitat, that some other concerned government agencies, of including or excluding areas from the modifications to the described the scientific community, industry, or proposed revised designation that boundaries are appropriate, or that areas any other interested parties during this exhibit these impacts. may or may not be appropriate for reopened comment period on our (6) Whether any specific subunits exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the proposed rule to revise critical habitat being proposed as revised critical Act. for Brodiaea filifolia, which we habitat should be excluded under You may submit your comments and published in the Federal Register on section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether materials concerning our proposed rule, December 8, 2009 (74 FR 64930), the the benefits of potentially excluding any the associated DEA, and our amended DEA of the proposed designation, and particular area outweigh the benefits of required determinations section by one the amended required determinations including that area in critical habitat. of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES provided in this document. We are (7) The likelihood of adverse social section. particularly interested in comments reactions to the designation of critical If you submit a comment via http:// concerning: habitat, and how the consequences of www.regulations.gov, your entire (1) The reasons why we should or such reactions, if they occur, would submission—including any personal should not revise the critical habitat relate to the conservation of the species identifying information—will be posted under section 4 of the Endangered and regulatory benefits of the proposed on the website. If your submission is Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) revised critical habitat designation. made via a hard copy that includes (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including (8) Information on the extent to which personal identifying information, you whether there are threats to Brodiaea the description of potential economic may request at the top of your document filifolia from human activity, the type of impacts in the DEA is complete and that we withhold this information from human activity causing these threats, accurate, and specifically: public review. However, we cannot the degree of which can be expected to • Whether there are incremental costs guarantee that we will be able to do so. increase due to the designation, and of critical habitat designation (e.g., costs We will post all hard copy comments on whether that increase in threats attributable solely to the designation of http://www.regulations.gov. Please outweighs the benefit of designation, critical habitat for Brodiaea filifolia) that include sufficient information with your such that the designation of critical have not been appropriately identified comments to allow us to verify any habitat is not prudent. or considered in our economic analysis, scientific or commercial information (2) Specific information on: including costs associated with future you include. • Areas that provide habitat for administrative costs or project Comments and materials we receive, Brodiaea filifolia that we did not discuss modifications that may be required by as well as supporting documentation in our proposed revised critical habitat Federal agencies related to section 7 used to prepare this notice, will be rule (December 8, 2009; 74 FR 64930). consultation under the Act; and available for public inspection at http:// • Areas containing the physical and • Whether there are incremental www.regulations.gov, or by biological features essential to the economic benefits of critical habitat appointment, during normal business

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 42056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules

hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife conservation of the species. If the incremental impacts likely to occur if Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife proposed rule is made final, section 7 of we finalize the proposed revised critical Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION the Act will prohibit destruction or habitat. CONTACT). You may obtain copies of the adverse modification of critical habitat The 2010 DEA (made available with proposed revision of critical habitat (74 by any activity funded, authorized, or the publication of this notice and FR 64930) and the DEA on the Internet carried out by any Federal agency. referred to as the DEA throughout this at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Federal agencies proposing actions document unless otherwise noted) No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0073, or by mail affecting critical habitat must consult estimates the foreseeable economic from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife with us on the effects of their proposed impacts of the proposed revised critical Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION actions under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. habitat designation for Brodiaea filifolia. CONTACT). The economic analysis identifies Draft Economic Analysis potential incremental costs as a result of Background Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that the proposed revised critical habitat It is our intent to discuss only those we designate or revise critical habitat designation, which are those costs topics directly relevant to the proposed based upon the best scientific data attributed to critical habitat over and revised designation of critical habitat for available after taking into consideration above those baseline costs coextensive Brodiaea filifolia in this notice. For the economic impact, impact on with listing. It also discusses the more information on previous Federal national security, and any other relevant benefits of critical habitat designation. actions concerning B. filifolia, see the impact of specifying any particular area These benefits are primarily presented 2005 designation of critical habitat as critical habitat. in a qualitative manner. The DEA published in the Federal Register on We prepared a DEA (Industrial describes economic impacts of B. December 13, 2005 (70 FR 73820), see Economics, Incorporated (IEc) 2010) filifolia conservation efforts associated the proposed revised designation of that identifies and analyzes the with the following categories of activity: critical habitat published in the Federal potential impacts associated with the (1) Residential and commercial Register on December 8, 2009 (74 FR proposed revised designation of critical development; (2) transportation, utility, 64930), or contact the Carlsbad Fish and habitat for Brodiaea filifolia that we and flood control projects; and (3) Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER published in the Federal Register on public and conservancy lands INFORMATION CONTACT). December 8, 2009 (74 FR 64930). The management. The Center for Biological Diversity DEA looks retrospectively at costs Baseline economic costs are those that filed a complaint in the U.S. District incurred since the October 13, 1998 (63 result from listing and other Court for the Southern District of FR 54975), listing of B. filifolia as conservation efforts for Brodiaea California on December 19, 2007, threatened. The DEA quantifies the filifolia. The baseline costs are assuming challenging our designation of critical economic impacts of all potential a 7 percent discount rate and are habitat for Brodiaea filifolia and conservation efforts for B. filifolia; some identified in Appendix E of the DEA Navarretia fossalis (Center for Biological of these costs will likely be incurred (IEc 2010, Appendix E–1). Impacts Diversity v. United States Fish and regardless of whether or not we finalize associated with baseline protection for Wildlife Service et al., Case No. 07–CV– the revised critical habitat rule. The B. filifolia within the proposed revised 2379–W–NLS). This lawsuit challenged economic impact of the proposed critical habitat designation are estimated the validity of the information and revised critical habitat designation is to be $5.31 million to $8.16 million reasoning we used to exclude areas from analyzed by comparing a ‘‘without (approximately $486,000 to $720,000 the 2005 critical habitat designation for critical habitat’’ scenario with a ‘‘with annualized) over the next 20 years B. filifolia. We reached a settlement critical habitat’’ scenario. The ‘‘without (2011–2030). Baseline impacts to agreement on July 25, 2008, in which critical habitat’’ scenario represents the development are estimated to be $4.60 we agreed to reconsider critical habitat baseline for the analysis, considering million to $7.46 million. This represents designation for B. filifolia. The protections already in place for the approximately 83 to 89 percent of the settlement stipulated that we submit a species (for example, under the Federal total baseline impacts. Baseline impacts proposed revised critical habitat listing and other Federal, State, and to transportation, utility, and flood designation for B. filifolia to the Federal local regulations). The baseline, control activities are estimated to be Register for publication by December 1, therefore, represents the costs incurred $657,000. This represents 2009, and submit a final critical habitat regardless of whether critical habitat is approximately 8 to 12 percent of the designation to the Federal Register for designated. The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ total baseline impacts. Baseline impacts publication by December 1, 2010. We scenario describes the incremental to public and conservancy lands published the proposed revised critical impacts associated specifically with the management are estimated to be habitat designation in the Federal designation of critical habitat for the $49,500. This represents approximately Register on December 8, 2009 (74 FR species. The incremental conservation 0.6 to 0.9 percent of the total baseline 64930). efforts and associated impacts are those impacts. Section 3 of the Act defines critical not expected to occur absent the critical Incremental impacts associated with habitat as the specific areas within the habitat designation for B. filifolia. In the proposed revised critical habitat geographical area occupied by a species, other words, the incremental costs are designation are estimated to be $425,000 at the time it is listed in accordance those attributable solely to the to $529,000 (approximately $37,500 to with the Act, on which are found those designation of critical habitat above and $46,700 annualized), assuming a 7 physical or biological features essential beyond the baseline costs; these are the percent discount rate, over the next 20 to the conservation of the species and costs we may consider in the final years (2011–2030). These impacts are which may require special management designation of critical habitat relative to due to a reduction in land value considerations or protection, and areas that may be excluded under following the designation of critical specific areas outside the geographical section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The analysis habitat for Brodiaea filifolia and the cost area occupied by a species at the time looks retrospectively at baseline impacts of section 7 consultation for pipeline it is listed, upon a determination that incurred since the species was listed, maintenance activities (IEc 2010, p. ES– such areas are essential for the and forecasts both baseline and 9). Incremental impacts to development

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 42057

are estimated to be $207,000 to E.O. 12630 (Takings), and the Unfunded affected within particular types of $311,000. This represents Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et economic activities, such as residential approximately 49 to 59 percent of the seq.). and commercial development. In order total incremental impacts. No to determine whether it is appropriate Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 incremental costs related to public and for our agency to certify that the rule et seq.) conservancy lands management are would not have a significant economic expected from the designation (IEc Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act impact on a substantial number of small 2010, p. ES–10). (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the entities, we considered each industry or The DEA considers both economic Small Business Regulatory Enforcement category individually. efficiency and distributional effects. In Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), If we finalize the proposed revised the case of habitat conservation, whenever an agency is required to critical habitat designation, Federal efficiency effects generally reflect the publish a notice of rulemaking for any agencies must consult with us under ‘‘opportunity costs’’ associated with the proposed or final rule, it must prepare section 7 of the Act if their activities commitment of resources to comply and make available for public comment may affect designated critical habitat. with habitat protection measures (such a regulatory flexibility analysis that Incremental impacts to small entities as lost economic opportunities describes the effect of the rule on small may occur as a direct result of a associated with restrictions on land entities (i.e., small businesses, small required consultation under section 7 of use). The DEA also addresses how organizations, and small government the Act. Additionally, even in the potential economic impacts are likely to jurisdictions), as described below. absence of a Federal nexus, indirect be distributed, including an assessment However, no regulatory flexibility incremental impacts may still result of any local or regional impacts of analysis is required if the head of an because, for example, a city may request habitat conservation and the potential agency certifies the rule will not have a project modifications due to the effects of conservation activities on significant economic impact on a designation of critical habitat via its government agencies, private substantial number of small entities. review under the California businesses, and individuals. The DEA Based on our DEA of the proposed Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). measures lost economic efficiency revised designation, we provide the Consultations to avoid the destruction associated with residential and analysis for our determination whether or adverse modification of critical commercial development and public or not the proposed rule would result in habitat would be incorporated into the projects and activities, such as a significant economic impact on a existing consultation process because economic impacts on transportation, substantial number of small entities. Brodiaea filifolia is federally listed as a utility, flood control projects, Federal Based on comments we receive, we may threatened species under the Act. lands, small entities, and the energy revise this determination as part of a In the DEA, we evaluated the industry. Decisionmakers can use this final rulemaking. potential economic effects on small information to assess whether the effects According to the Small Business business entities resulting from of the revised designation might unduly Administration (SBA), small entities implementation of conservation actions burden a particular group or economic include small organizations, such as related to the proposed revision to sector. independent nonprofit organizations; critical habitat for Brodiaea filifolia (IEc small governmental jurisdictions, 2010, Appendix A, pp. 1–7). The Required Determinations–—Amended including school boards and city and analysis was based on the estimated In our proposed rule published in the town governments that serve fewer than incremental impacts associated with the Federal Register on December 8, 2009 50,000 residents; and small businesses proposed rulemaking as described in (74 FR 64930), we indicated that we (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses sections 3 through 5 of the DEA. The would defer our determination of include manufacturing and mining SBREFA analysis evaluated the compliance with several statutes and concerns with fewer than 500 potential for economic impacts related Executive Orders until the information employees, wholesale trade entities to several categories, including: (1) concerning potential economic impacts with fewer than 100 employees, retail Residential and commercial of the designation and potential effects and service businesses with less than $5 development; (2) transportation, utility, on landowners and stakeholders became million in annual sales, general and and flood control projects; and (3) available in the DEA. We have now heavy construction businesses with less management of public and conservation made use of the DEA to make these than $27.5 million in annual business, lands (IEc 2010, Appendix A, p. 4). determinations. special trade contractors doing less than The DEA found there are no In this document, we affirm the $11.5 million in annual business, and incremental impacts related to the information in our December 8, 2009, agricultural businesses with annual management of public and conservation proposed rule (74 FR 64930) concerning sales less than $750,000. To determine lands. Impacts to small entities are only Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 if potential economic impacts to these anticipated due to residential and (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. small entities are significant, we commercial development. No impacts 13132 (Federalism), E.O. 12988 (Civil considered the types of activities that are anticipated due to transportation, Justice Reform), the Paperwork might trigger regulatory impacts under utility, and flood control because the Reduction Act, the National this designation as well as types of incremental costs are associated with Environmental Policy Act, and the project modifications that may result. In activities conducted by the Metropolitan President’s memorandum of April 29, general, the term significant economic Water District of Southern California, 1994, ‘‘Government-to-Government impact is meant to apply to a typical which is not a small business or Relations with Native American Tribal small business firm’s business government as defined by the Small Governments’’ (59 FR 22951). However, operations. Business Administration (IEc 2010, based on the DEA data, we are To determine if the proposed revised Appendix A, p. 4). amending our required determinations designation of critical habitat for The DEA estimated that there will be concerning the Regulatory Flexibility Brodiaea filifolia would affect a approximately 23 landowners impacted Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), E.O. 13211 substantial number of small entities, we over the next 20 years with an (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use), considered the number of small entities incremental impact estimated to be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 42058 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules

$311,000 assuming a 7 percent discount finds that none of these outcomes are that receive Federal funding, assistance, rate. This impact is related to the possible in the context of this analysis or permits, or that otherwise require decrease in land value for areas (IEc 2010, Appendix A, pp. 7–8). The approval or authorization from a Federal designated as critical habitat and may be DEA concludes that no incremental agency for an action that may be borne by the current landowner in the impacts on the production, distribution, indirectly impacted by the designation form of percent of average value lost. In or use of energy are forecast associated of critical habirat. However, the legally a regional context, we looked at the specifically with this rulemaking (IEc binding duty to avoid destruction or number of homeowners in each county 2010, Appendix A, p. 7). Therefore, adverse modification of critical habitat as a representation of the total number designation of critical habitat is not rests squarely on the Federal agency. of property owners in Los Angeles, San expected to lead to any adverse Furthermore, to the extent that non- Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San outcomes (such as a reduction in Federal entities are indirectly impacted Diego Counties. There are electricity production or an increase in because they receive Federal assistance approximately 443,000 to over 1.6 the cost of energy production or or participate in a voluntary Federal aid million homeowners in these counties distribution), and a Statement of Energy program, the Unfunded Mandates (IEc 2010, Appendix A, p. 5). The 23 Effects is not required. Reform Act would not apply, nor would landowners that may be impacted Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 critical habitat shift the costs of the large represent approximately less than 1 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) entitlement programs listed above onto percent of the total number of State governments. landowners in Los Angeles, San In accordance with the Unfunded Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San Mandates Reform Act, the Service (b) As discussed in the DEA of the Diego Counties. We do not believe that makes the following findings: proposed revised designation of critical this represents a substantial number of (a) This rule will not produce a habitat for Brodiaea filifolia, we do not landowners. Additionally, we evaluated Federal mandate. In general, a Federal believe that this rule will significantly the decrease in property value by mandate is a provision in legislation, or uniquely affect small governments looking at the average parcel value by statute, or regulation that would impose because it will not produce a Federal county and the percent of the value lost. an enforceable duty upon State, local, or mandate of $100 million or greater in We found that the land value lost Tribal governments, or the private any year; that is, it is not a ‘‘significant ranged from 0.02 to 17.3 percent of the sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal regulatory action’’ under the Unfunded total value (IEc 2010, Appendix A, pp. intergovernmental mandates’’ and Mandates Reform Act. The DEA 5–6). To some individual property ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ concludes that incremental impacts may owners this may represent a significant These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. occur due to conservation costs impact, but on a regional scale we do 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental associated with residential and not believe an incremental impact of mandate’’ includes a regulation that commercial development, and with $311,000 in reduced land value ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty transportation, utility, and flood control represents a significant economic upon State, local, or Tribal projects; however, these are not impact. As a result of this analysis, we governments,’’ with two exceptions. expected to affect small governments find that the designation of critical First, it excludes ‘‘a condition of federal (IEc 2010, Appendix A, p. 4). habitat for Brodiaea filifolia will not assistance.’’ Second, it also excludes ‘‘a Incremental impacts associated with have a significant economic impact on duty arising from participation in a these activities are expected to be borne a substantial number of small entities. voluntary Federal program,’’ unless the by the Transportation Corridor Agencies In summary, we considered whether regulation ‘‘relates to a then-existing and San Diego Gas and Electric, which the proposed revised designation would Federal program under which are not considered small governments. result in a significant economic impact $500,000,000 or more is provided Consequently, we do not believe that on a substantial number of small annually to State, local, and Tribal the proposed revised critical habitat entities. For the above reasons and governments under entitlement designation would significantly or ’’ based on currently available authority, if the provision would uniquely affect small government ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of information, we certify that, if entities. As such, a Small Government assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or promulgated, the proposed revised Agency Plan is not required. critical habitat for Brodiaea filifolia will otherwise decrease, the Federal not have a significant economic impact Government’s responsibility to provide Executive Order 12630 — Takings on a substantial number of small funding’’ and the State, local, or Tribal entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust In accordance with E.O. 12630 flexibility analysis is not required. accordingly. ‘‘Federal private sector (‘‘Government Actions and Interference mandate’’ includes a regulation that with Constitutionally Protected Private Executive Order 13211—Energy Supply, ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty Property Rights’’), we analyzed the Distribution, and Use upon the private sector, except (i) a potential takings implications of On May 18, 2001, the President issued condition of Federal assistance; or (ii) a proposing revised critical habitat for E.O. 13211 on regulations that duty arising from participation in a Brodiaea filifolia in a takings significantly affect energy supply, voluntary Federal program.’’ implications assessment. Critical habitat distribution, and use. Executive Order Critical habitat designation does not designation does not affect landowner 13211 requires agencies to prepare impose a legally binding duty on non- actions that do not require Federal Statements of Energy Effects when Federal government entities or private funding or permits, nor does it preclude undertaking certain actions. The Office parties. The only regulatory effect is that development of habitat conservation of Management and Budget’s guidance under section 7 of the Act, which programs or issuance of incidental take for implementing this Executive Order requires that Federal agencies must permits to permit actions that do require outlines nine outcomes that may ensure that their actions do not destroy Federal funding or permits. The constitute ‘‘a significant adverse effect’’ or adversely modify critical habitat. proposed revised critical habitat for B. when compared to no regulatory action. Designation of critical habitat may filifolia does not pose significant takings As discussed in Appendix A, the DEA indirectly impact non-Federal entities implications for the above reasons.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 42059

References Cited Based on the status review, we will status review to be complete and based A complete list of all references we issue a 12–month finding on the on the best available scientific and cited in the proposed rule and in this petition, which will address whether commercial information, we request document is available on the Internet at the petitioned action is warranted, as information on the giant Palouse http://www.regulations.gov or by provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. earthworm (GPE) from governmental contacting the Carlsbad Fish and DATES: To allow us adequate time to agencies, Native American Tribes, the Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER conduct this review, we request that we scientific community, industry, and any INFORMATION CONTACT). receive information on or before other interested parties. We seek September 20, 2010. Please note that if information on: Authors you are using the Federal eRulemaking (1) The species’ biology, range, and The primary authors of this notice are Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below), population trends, including: staff members of the Carlsbad Fish and the deadline for submitting an (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER electronic comment is Eastern Time on breeding, and sheltering; INFORMATION CONTACT). this date. (b) Genetics and taxonomy; ADDRESSES: You may submit Authority (c) Historical and current range information by one of the following including distribution patterns; The authority for this action is the methods: (d) Historical and current population • Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// levels, and current and projected trends; amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). www.regulations.gov. In the box that and Dated: July 7, 2010 reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the (e) Past and ongoing conservation docket number for this notice, which is Eileen Sobeck, measures for the species and/or its docket number FWS–R1–ES–2010– habitat. Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 0023. Check the box that reads ‘‘Open Wildlife and Parks. (2) The factors that are the basis for for Comment/Submission,’’ and then making a listing determination for a [FR Doc. 2010–17708 Filed 7–19– 10; 8:45 am] click the Search button. You should species under section 4(a) of the BILLING CODE S then see an icon that reads ‘‘Submit a Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Comment.’’ Please ensure that you have amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), found the correct rulemaking before DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR which are: submitting your comment. • (a) The present or threatened Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R1– destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; 50 CFR Part 17 ES–2010–0023; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and (b) Overutilization for commercial, [Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2010–0023] Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, recreational, scientific, or educational [MO 92210–0–0008–B2] Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. purposes; We will post all information received (c) Disease or predation; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife on http://www.regulations.gov. This (d) The inadequacy of existing and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a generally means that we will post any regulatory mechanisms; or Petition To List the Giant Palouse personal information you provide us (e) Other natural or manmade factors Earthworm (Driloleirus americanus) as (see the Information Solicited section affecting its continued existence. Threatened or Endangered below for more details). (3) Information on grassland or other AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, After the date specified in DATES, natural habitats within the range of the Interior. you must submit information directly to species including distribution of known the Field Office (see FOR FURTHER ACTION: Notice of petition finding and or potential habitats; information on INFORMATION CONTACT section below). initiation of status review. ongoing or future activities in potential Please note that we might not be able to GPE habitat; information on life history SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and address or incorporate information that of the GPE and evidence supporting its Wildlife Service (Service), announce a we receive after the above requested endogeic (earthworms that live in 90–day finding on a petition to list the date. mineral soil and consume organic giant Palouse earthworm (Driloleirus FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken matter within the soil or at the soil-litter americanus) as threatened or Berg, Manager, Washington Fish and interface) or anecic (earthworms that endangered under the Endangered Wildlife Office, 510 Desmond Dr. SE, inhabit deep vertical burrows and Species Act of 1973, as amended, (Act) Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503; by emerge at night to consume relatively and to designate critical habitat. Based telephone (360–753–9440); or by fresh plant detritus on the surface) life- on our review, we find that the petition facsimile (360–753–9405). If you use a history mode; and information on other presents substantial scientific or telecommunications device for the deaf native or nonnative earthworm commercial information indicating that (TDD) please call the Federal distributions in the range of the species. listing the giant Palouse earthworm as Information Relay Service (FIRS) at If, after the status review, we threatened or endangered may be 800–877–8339. determine that listing the GPE is warranted. Therefore, with the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: warranted, we will propose critical publication of this notice, we are habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) initiating a review of the status of the Request for Information of the Act), under section 4 of the Act, species to determine if listing the giant When we make a finding that a to the maximum extent prudent and Palouse earthworm is warranted. To petition presents substantial determinable at the time we propose to ensure that this status review is information indicating that listing a list the species. Therefore, within the comprehensive, we are requesting species may be warranted, we are geographical range currently occupied scientific and commercial data and required to promptly review the status by the GPE, we request data and other information regarding this species. of the species (status review). For the information on:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:03 Jul 19, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM 20JYP1 wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1