Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1657

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail including any additional population or hand-delivery to: Public Comments locations, and; Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– (3) New information regarding 0119; Division of Policy, Performance, gypsophilum life history, 50 CFR Part 17 and Management Programs; U.S. Fish ecology and habitat use. and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Please note that submissions merely [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119; Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA stating support for, or opposition to, the FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] 220411–3803. action being considered, without We request that you send comments providing supporting information, RIN 1018–BB87 only by the methods described above. although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as the Act Endangered and Threatened Wildlife We will post all comments on http:// (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) section and ; Removing Eriogonum www.regulations.gov. This generally 4(b)(1)(A) directs that determinations as gypsophilum From the Federal List of means that we will post any personal to whether any species is an endangered Endangered and Threatened Plants information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more or threatened species must be made AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information). ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Interior. Copies of Documents: This proposed and commercial data available.’’ Prior to issuing a final rule on this ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month rule and supporting documents are proposed action, we will consider all petition finding; request for comments. available on http://www.regulations.gov. In addition, the supporting file for this comments and any additional SUMMARY: Under the authority of the proposed rule will be available for information we receive. Such Endangered Species Act of 1973, as public inspection, by appointment, information may lead to a final rule that amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and during normal business hours, at the differs from this proposal. All comments Wildlife Service (Service), propose to New Mexico Ecological Services Field and recommendations, including names remove Eriogonum gypsophilum Office, 2105 Osuna Road NE., and addresses, will become part of the (gypsum wild-buckwheat) from the Albuquerque, NM 87113; telephone administrative record. Federal List of Endangered and 505–346–2525. You may submit your comments and Threatened Plants (List) due to recovery. materials concerning this proposed rule FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: by one of the methods listed in This determination is based on Wally Murphy, Field Supervisor, New thoroughly reviewing the best scientific ADDRESSES. We will not consider Mexico Ecological Services Field Office comments sent by email, fax, or to an and commercial data available, which (see ADDRESSES); telephone 505–346– indicates the species has recovered and address not listed in ADDRESSES. If you 2525; facsimile 505–346–2542. If you submit information via http:// no longer meets the Act’s endangered or use a telecommunications device for the threatened definitions. We are seeking www.regulations.gov, your entire deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Relay submission—including any personal information, data and public comments Service at 800–877–8339. on this proposed rule. This document identifying information—will be posted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: also serves as our 12-month finding on on the Web site. Please note that a petition to remove Eriogonum Information Requested comments posted to this Web site are gypsophilum (gypsum wild-buckwheat) not immediately viewable. When you Any final action resulting from this submit a comment, the system receives from the Federal List of Endangered and proposed rule will be based on the best Threatened Plants. it immediately. However, the comment scientific and commercial data available will not be publicly viewable until we DATES: To ensure we can consider your and will be as accurate as possible. post it, which might not occur until comments on this proposed rule, they Therefore, we request comments or several days after submission. must be received or postmarked on or information from other concerned If you mail or hand-deliver hardcopy before March 7, 2017. Please note that governmental agencies, Native comments that include personal if you are using the Federal American Tribes, the scientific identifying information, you may eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES), community, industry, or other request at the top of your document that the deadline for submitting an interested parties concerning this we withhold this information from electronic comment is 11:59 p.m. proposed rule. The comments that will public review. However, we cannot Eastern Time on this date. We must be most useful and likely to influence guarantee that we will be able to do so. receive requests for public hearings, in our decisions are those supported by To ensure that the electronic docket for FOR writing, at the address shown in the data or peer-reviewed studies and those this rulemaking is complete and all FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section that include citations to, and analyses comments we receive are publicly by February 21, 2017. of, applicable laws and regulations. available, we will post all hardcopy ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Please make your comments as specific submissions on http:// by one of the following methods: as possible and explain their basis. In www.regulations.gov. (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal addition, please include sufficient In addition, comments and materials eRulemaking Portal: http:// information with your comments to we receive, as well as supporting www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, allow us to authenticate any scientific or documentation we used in preparing enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119, which is commercial data you reference or this proposed rule, will be available for the docket number for this rulemaking. provide. In particular, we seek public inspection in two ways: Then, click on the Search button. On the comments concerning the following: (1) You can view them on http:// resulting page, in the Search panel on (1) New information concerning www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, the left side of the screen, under the Eriogonum gypsophilum’s general enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119, which is Document Type heading, click on the conservation status; the docket number for this rulemaking. Proposed Rules link to locate this (2) New information on historical and (2) You can make an appointment, document. You may submit a comment current Eriogonum gypsophilum status, during normal business hours, to view by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ range, distribution, and population size, the comments and materials in person at

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 1658 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s was listed, an area that covered 95 year review, which also recommended New Mexico Ecological Services Field percent of the only known population, delisting due to recovery. The 2016 five- Office (see ADDRESSES). now known as the Seven Rivers Hills year review supports this proposed rule. population, was designated as critical The review concluded that the threats Public Hearing habitat (46 FR 5730; January 19, 1981). identified at the time of listing and in The Act, Section 4(b)(5)(E) enables The written critical habitat description the recovery plan are no longer deemed one or more public hearings on this listed two section numbers in the significant. In addition, two new proposed rule, if requested. We must correct township but incorrect ranges. populations have been discovered since receive requests for public hearings, in The accompanying map correctly the listing, thus exceeding the recovery writing, at the address shown in FOR demonstrated the designated lands. On plan’s population goals. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by the December 21, 1984, we published a date shown in DATES. We will schedule correction to the written critical habitat Species Information public hearings on this proposal, if any description (49 FR 49639). However, Species Description are requested, and hearing locations, as that correction was also incorrect Eriogonum gypsophilum is a rare, well as how to obtain reasonable because the range descriptions did not regionally endemic species accommodations, in the Federal accurately describe the designated presently known to occur in three Register at least 15 days before the first critical habitat displayed on the populations in Eddy County in hearing. accompanying map. The correct written southeastern New Mexico. Eriogonum description should read T20S R25E Background gypsophilum was first collected by Section 24: N1⁄2 NE1⁄4, N1⁄2 S1⁄2 NE1⁄4, Section 4(b)(3)(B) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 1 1 1 1 1 Wooten and Standley in 1909, on a hill NE ⁄4 NW ⁄4, N ⁄2 SE ⁄4 NW ⁄4;; and southwest of Lakewood, New Mexico seq.) of the Act requires that any T20S R26E Section 19: N1⁄2, N1⁄2 NE1⁄4 (Wooten and Standley, 1913). It is a petition to revise the Federal Lists of SE1⁄4, N1⁄2 NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4; gypsum soils. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife On February 2, 2005, we initiated a small, erect herbaceous perennial, a and Plants must contain substantial Eriogonum gypsophilum 5-year review member of the knotweed family, and scientific or commercial information (70 FR 5460). On November 9, 2007, we measures about 8 inches high. that the petitioned action may be completed a 5-year review, which Distribution warranted. We must make a finding recommended Eriogonum gypsophilum within 12 months of petition receipt. In be delisted. The 2007 5-year review Three Eriogonum gypsophilum this finding, we will determine that the noted that Eriogonum gypsophilum populations are known and all are petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted, threats identified at the time of listing located in Eddy County, southeastern (2) warranted, or (3) warranted, but and in the recovery plan were no longer New Mexico. Only one population immediate regulation proposal deemed significant and that two new (Seven Rivers Hills) was known at the implementing the petitioned action is populations, of between 11,000 and time of listing and recovery plan precluded by other pending proposals to 18,000 plants each, were discovered. development. After Eriogonum determine whether species are On July 16, 2012, we received a gypsophilum was listed as threatened, endangered or threatened, and petition dated July 12, 2012, from New other suitable habitats were surveyed expeditious progress is being made to Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association, Jim and two additional populations were add or remove qualified species from Chilton, New Mexico Farm and found in 1985. Eriogonum gypsophilum the Federal Lists of Endangered and Livestock Bureau, New Mexico Federal distribution within its populations is Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Lands Council, and Texas Farm Bureau patchy and follows suitable gypsum Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires requesting that we delist Eriogonum outcrops geographic patterns, which are that we treat a petition for which the gypsophilum and other species, under generally elongated and narrow. The requested action is found to be the Act. The petitioners’ request to occupied outcrops are approximately warranted but precluded as though delist Eriogonum gypsophilum was 2.7 kilometers (km) (1.7 miles (mi)) long resubmitted on the date of such finding, based entirely upon the scientific and for the Seven Rivers Hills population, that is, requiring a subsequent finding to commercial information contained 1.6 km (1 mi) long for the Black River be made within 12 months. We must within our 2007 5-year review. population, and 3.5 km (2.2 mi) long for publish these 12-month findings in the On May 31, 2013, we received a the Ben Slaughter Draw population. Federal Register. This document: (1) complaint from the same petitioners Eriogonum gypsophilum patches within Serves as our 12-month warranted alleging we failed to make a 90-day populations are also relatively small. finding on a July 16, 2012, petition finding on the petition. The occupied habitat is only 16.3 dated July 12, 2012, from New Mexico On September 9, 2013, we published hectares (ha) (40.3 acres (ac)) at Seven Cattle Growers’ Association, Jim a 90-day finding (78 FR 55046) that Rivers Hills, little more than 11.9 ha Chilton, New Mexico Farm and delisting Eriogonum gypsophilum may (29.5 ac) at Black River, and 66.4 ha Livestock Bureau, New Mexico Federal be warranted. This 90-day finding also (164.1 acres) at Ben Slaughter Draw Lands Council, and Texas Farm Bureau announced our initiation of an (including Hay Hollow). Therefore, this requesting that we ‘‘delist’’ Eriogonum Eriogonum gypsophilum 5-year review. species occupies an approximate total gypsophilum (that is, remove Eriogonum Following this 90-day finding, the range wide habitat of 94.7 ha (233.9 ac) gypsophilum from the List of parties agreed to a stipulated dismissal (Sivinski 2005, p. 6; Sivinski 2013, p. 1). Endangered and Threatened Plants of the pending lawsuit. A population of Eriogonum (List)) under the Act; and (2) proposes On November 20, 2015, the gypsophilum was previously reported to remove Eriogonum gypsophilum from petitioners filed a second lawsuit. This near Hay Hollow by Knight (1993, p. 34) the List due to recovery. lawsuit sought to compel the Service to and then discounted following negative complete a 12-month finding regarding surveys (Sivinski 2000; pp. 2–3). In Previous Federal Actions Eriogonum gypsophilum, and other 2013, Sivinski rediscovered this Eriogonum gypsophilum was listed on species. population, considered an extension of January 19, 1981, as a threatened On November 4, 2016, we completed the Ben Slaughter population, and he species (46 FR 5730). When the species our second Eriogonum gypsophilum 5- estimated 1,000 to 1,500 plants across

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1659

less than 4 ha (10 ac) (Sivinski 2013, the best available scientific and redundancy, combined with the Federal p. 1). commercial data indicate the species is resource management practices neither endangered nor threatened for implemented since the time of listing Habitat the following reasons: (see discussion below), the threats Eriogonum gypsophilum occupies (1) The species is extinct; identified at the time of listing and in Permian-age Castile Formation gypsum (2) The species has recovered and is the recovery plan are no longer soils and gypsum outcrops. These no longer endangered or threatened; or considered significant for Eriogonum habitats are dry and nearly barren (3) The original scientific data used at gypsophilum. except for common of gypsophilic the time the species was classified were (gypsum-loving) plant species, erroneous. Factor A. The Present or Threatened including Eriogonum gypsophilum, In making this finding, Eriogonum Habitat or Range Destruction, Modification or Curtailment hairy crinklemat (Tiquilia hispidissima), gypsophilum five factors information gypsum blazingstar (Mentzelia humilis), provided in the Act, Section 4(a)(1), is All Eriogonum gypsophilum habitat and Pecos gypsum ringstem discussed below. In considering what occurs in areas with high potential for (Anulocaulis leiosolenus var. factors might constitute threats, we must mineral extraction and associated gypsogenus) (NMRPTC 2015, http:// look beyond mere species exposure to development, especially oil and gas. nmrareplants.unm.edu). the factor to determine whether the Although the three populations of species responds to the factor in a way Eriogonum gypsophilum comprise a Biology that causes actual species impacts. If small geographic area, making the Eriogonum gypsophilum is a there is exposure to a factor, but no species vulnerable to such land use perennial species that reproduces both response, or only a positive response, changes, the majority of remaining by producing and asexually by that factor is not a threat. If there is suitable habitat is located on Federal producing clone rosettes from exposure and the species responds lands managed by the Bureau of Land or root-sprouts. Seed production has negatively, the factor may be a threat Management (BLM), and significant been observed (Spellenberg 1977, p. 22), and we then attempt to determine if that portions of each Eriogonum but seedlings are rarely seen and most factor rises to threat level, meaning that gypsophilum population have been propagation occurs by asexual it may drive or contribute to species designated by BLM as Special reproduction, or during infrequent extinction risk such that the species Management Areas (SMAs). By climatic episodes suitable for seed warrants listing as an endangered or definition, SMAs are areas where and seedling establishment threatened species as the Act defines specific management attention is (Spellenberg 1977, p. 31; Knight 1993, those terms. This does not necessarily required and can be designated to p. 25). Densities within Eriogonum require empirical threat proof. protect important resources, including gypsophilum patches range from 0.03 to Combining exposure and some special status species like Eriogonum 2.04 individual rosettes per square corroborating evidence indicating how gypsophilum. The Seven Rivers Hills meter (m2) (0.003 to 0.19 per square feet the species is likely impacted could SMA includes 95 percent of the Seven (ft2)) (Knight 1993, pp. 28–32). Plant suffice. Merely identifying factors that River Hills population of Eriogonum densities within three monitoring plots could impact a species negatively is not gypsophilum, the Black River SMA at the Seven Rivers Hills population sufficient to compel a finding that includes 50 percent of the Black River indicated a slight increase from 1987 to listing is appropriate; we require population, and the Ben Slaughter SMA 1993 (Knight 1993, p. 28). evidence that these factors are operative includes 50 percent of the Ben Slaughter threats that act on the species to the population. Potential threats to Five Factors Information Summary point that the species meets the Eriogonum gypsophilum as a result of Section 4 (16 U.S.C. 1533) of the Act definition of an endangered or mineral extraction and oil and gas and implementing regulations (50 CFR threatened species under the Act. associated development, such as part 424) set forth procedures to add In making our 12-month finding on directly removing occupied habitat species to, removing species from, or the petition, we considered and during construction or pipeline leaks reclassifying species on the Federal evaluated the best available scientific impacts, have been offset by BLM’s Lists of Endangered and Threatened and commercial information. designation of significant portions of Wildlife and Plants. Under Section The 1981 Eriogonum gypsophilum each Eriogonum gypsophilum 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be threatened status listing determination population as an SMA. Specifically, determined endangered or threatened (46 FR 5730; January 19, 1981) cited off- these SMAs provide management based on any of the following five road vehicles (ORVs), grazing, and guidance, and in the case of Eriogonum factors, acting alone or in combination: Brantley Dam project impacts as gypsophilum, do not allow surface (A) The present or threatened habitat potential species threats. At the time of occupancy for most surface-disturbing or range destruction, modification or listing, the Seven Rivers Hills activities. The Bureau of Land curtailment; population was the only known Management has committed to keeping (B) Commercial, recreational, Eriogonum gypsophilum population. similar protections for special status scientific, or educational Losing any plants or habitat from the species and sensitive soil outcrops overutilization; only known population would have through a revised resource management (C) Disease or predation; been considered a significant loss at that plan, which will include specific land (D) Inadequate regulatory time, making the species vulnerable to designations and the implementation of mechanisms; or extinction in the near future. However, best management practices. The Service (E) Other natural or manmade factors two additional Eriogonum gypsophilum has participated in the development of affecting its continued existence. populations have since been this resource management plan, and When delisting a species, we must documented at Black River and Ben will continue to work closely with BLM consider both these five factors and how Slaughter Draw, and have been included throughout the implementation phase. conservation actions have removed or in this species reassessment. With the A final resource management plan is reduced the threats. We may delist a discovery of two additional populations expected to be signed by BLM in 2017. species according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if and subsequent increase in species As a BLM special status species,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 1660 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules

conservation of Eriogonum gypsophilum Mineral Extraction and Related Seven Rivers Hills habitat, and is expected to continue into the Activities approximately 50 percent of Ben foreseeable future as BLM manual 6840, All Eriogonum gypsophilum habitats Slaughter Draw habitats are protected by titled Special Status Species are within areas with high potential for the BLM SMAs ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ Management, directs. BLM special fluid minerals leasing and extraction. stipulation (Sivinski 2005, p. 6). Oil and status species are federally listed or Oil and gas well pads, roads, and gas may be leased on these lands, but proposed and Bureau sensitive species, pipelines are proliferating in this region must be extracted by directional drilling which include both Federal candidate of New Mexico. The BLM SMA where from outside the SMAs. Directional species and delisted species (BLM 2008, the Seven Rivers Hills population’s drilling allows a company to develop entire). designated critical habitat occurs fluid minerals without being directly The area designated as Eriogonum presently eliminates this threat by above (vertical of) the target, meaning gypsophilum critical habitat at Seven requiring ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ for this technology affords greater Rivers Hills was given BLM SMA status mineral leases within the designated avoidance options to conserve sensitive in 1988 (BLM 1988, p. C–2) and protects critical habitat. If the critical habitat habitats. The SMAs require that road about 95 percent of the habitat this designation were removed, no land use and pipeline rights-of-way associated population occupies. A few hectares of change is expected to occur as BLM has with oil and gas development must also occupied habitat fall outside the SMA committed to continue protecting avoid SMA disturbance. The Seven Rivers Hills and Ben boundaries on adjacent BLM and sensitive gypsum soils and the special Slaughter Draw SMAs also withdrew Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) lands. The status species that occur there, 1988 BLM Resource Management Plan minerals, such as gypsum, sulfur, and including Eriogonum gypsophilum. salts, from claim and mine also created a Springs Riparian Habitat Roads and pipelines associated with SMA to restrict land use in critical development, but mineral claims are not mineral development also must avoid specifically withdrawn from the Black riparian habitat within the Chihuahuan this area. The Seven Rivers Hills SMA Desert Ecosystem. This SMA includes River SMA. Chemical analysis found the protects about 95 percent of the gypsum outcrops Eriogonum lands occupied by the Ben Slaughter occupied habitat from this land use. Draw Eriogonum gypsophilum gypsophilum occupied to be from the SMAs with ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ Castile Formation, composed of 85 population (BLM 1988, p. C–14). The stipulations for oil and gas leases were 1997 BLM Resource Management Plan percent hydric gypsum, which is also administratively placed on BLM suitable quality for mining (Weber and Amendment included the Black River jurisdictions containing Eriogonum SMA that covers the Black River Kottlowski 1959, p. 52; Knight 1993, p. gypsophilum habitats at the Black River 42). However, gypsum mining potential Eriogonum gypsophilum population and Ben Slaughter Draw populations in (BLM 1997, pp. AP4:9, AP4:15–17). for the Castile formation is low because 1997 (BLM 1988, pp. C–15; BLM 1997, of large deposits of higher quality SMA management prescriptions at the pp. AP4:9, AP4:15–17). These SMAs three populations on public lands gypsum presently being mined protect approximately 50 percent of the elsewhere in New Mexico (Knight 1993, include: total habitat at Black River and Ben • p. 42). Apply no surface occupancy Slaughter Draw from oil and gas Other potential impacts to the Seven stipulation to all future oil and gas development (Sivinski 2005, p. 6). Rivers Hills Eriogonum gypsophilum leases. Approximately 65 percent of total • population have not occurred, partly Avoid future right-of-way actions habitat area in all three Eriogonum due to the Act’s protections. Due to the through SMA area. gypsophilum populations is presently • species occurring in three Withdraw from mining claim protected from surface impacts geographically separate populations, location, and close to mineral material associated with oil and gas development there is a lesser potential of a single disposal and solid material leasing. and these impacts would be avoided project affecting the entire population of • Complete limited ORV designation into the foreseeable future under BLM Eriogonum gypsophilum. For example, and implementation plan to restrict manual 6840 direction. U.S. Highway 285 widening was vehicles to designated routes. Knight (1993, p. 57) concluded that accomplished without impacting the • Restrict fire suppression and oil and gas mineral development, and plants in or near this right-of-way geophysical operations to comply with possibly gypsum, were the only serious (Sivinski 2000, pp. 1–2) and would have ORV designation. potential threats to Eriogonum only affected one of the three • Restrict surface disturbance, gypsophilum. At this time, surface populations. Common land use including plant collections and camping disturbance associated with Federal activities, such as mineral development within the area. mineral development is very unlikely to or livestock grazing, are addressed in Proposed actions related to lease occur on Eriogonum gypsophilum the BLM resource management plan and rights acquired prior to the SMA habitats within the BLM SMAs. Mineral would be managed through the BLM designations are analyzed for impacts development could potentially affect permitting process, which considers all and designed to reduce or remove the nearly 50 percent of the Black River sensitive species and their habitats. impacts under BLM Manual 6840 population that occurs on private or directions, and using conditions-of- State lands. In fact, there is presently an Reservoir Development and Flooding approval on the permit. SMA guidance active gas well established within 0.4 The populations at Black River and can also affect actions that cross both km (0.25 mi) of Eriogonum gypsophilum Ben Slaughter Draw are not near any public lands and adjacent non-Federal habitat on the State trust land portion of existing or proposed reservoirs and, lands (e.g., pipelines, power lines), due this population (Sivinski 2000, p. 2). therefore, are not threatened by to the actions being connected through The private land portion, approximately flooding. At the time of listing, we a Federal nexus, thus affording species 20 percent of the Black River considered the possibility of flooding to conservation. The occupied habitats are population, could also be impacted by the Seven Rivers Hills population from relatively small in acreage and can future minerals development. However, the Brantley Reservoir. However, this typically be avoided by surface approximately 50 percent of the Black impact has not occurred because the disturbing activities. River habitat, about 95 percent of the dam spillway does not allow the water

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1661

level to rise to the level necessary to ORV violations, but severe impacts from smaller rosettes than plants not affected, flood populations (BOR 2009, p. 2). The frequent ORV use will not likely be thus shifting that population portion spillway elevation is 993.5 meters (m) tolerated by BLM. These protections are towards higher juvenile form (3,259.5 feet (ft)) mean sea level. Water likely to continue into the future due to percentages. The Bureau of Land level peaked on March 29, 2015 (U.S. protections described in the resource Management has partly mitigated this Geological Survey 2016, http:// management plan and BLM manual impact by erecting a livestock-proof waterdata.usgs.gov), at approximately 6840, which is the principal policy fence that encloses 8 ha (20 ac) around 4.0 m (13 ft) above the spillway at 997.5 instrument detailing BLM management Ben Slaughter Spring, including a few m (3,272.5 ft) elevation. Even at this of special status species (BLM 2008, hectares of Eriogonum gypsophilum highest level, the pool remained east of entire). To prevent unauthorized ORV habitat with several hundred plants. U.S. Highway 285 and the Eriogonum traffic, in 2010, BLM installed pipe-rail This fenced enclosure occurs within the gypsophilum population. Knight (1993, fencing along portions of existing roads 146-ha (360-ac) BLM SMA that protects pp. 53–54) analyzed potential Brantley and trails at all three known the spring and surrounding upland from Reservoir impacts reaching the populations, which will continue to be land-use surface occupancy. The Bureau maximum flood pool with the maintained as a condition of the revised of Land Management enclosure gate is assumption that the water level would resource management plan (BLM 2010, not always closed to livestock entry rise similarly across U.S. Highway 285. entire). Fencing was not installed at the (Sivinski 2000, p. 2), but does give the Under this assumption, the maximum Ben Slaughter Draw population Hay opportunity to manage grazing effects. flood event pool in Brantley Reservoir Hollow portion, but there are no easy All three Eriogonum gypsophilum could temporarily flood a few hectares access routes to this area (Chopp 2016, populations occur near, or within a few of Eriogonum gypsophilum habitat. He p. 1). Therefore, there is little to no ORV kilometers, of permanent natural waters found eight Eriogonum gypsophilum threat at this site now or in the sources. Therefore, the habitats at these plants at or below the 1,002.8 m (3,290 foreseeable future. populations have experienced more ft) level on the west side of U.S. than a century of livestock use that, at Livestock Grazing Highway 285. The soils in this area times, could have been very intense and would become saturated for a time after Livestock grazing is the predominant aggressive. In fact, the recent heavy a flood and could potentially be invaded land use in all Eriogonum gypsophilum livestock concentrations within the Ben by salt cedar (Tamarix spp.), an invasive habitats. Cattle will not usually eat Slaughter Draw population have not tree that often lines reservoir banks. Eriogonum gypsophilum plants, and likely exceeded the livestock amounts Knight (1993, pp. 53–54) surveyed grazing does not appear to have a concentrated in this area for many another 6 m (20 ft) vertical up to the negative effect (Sivinski 2000, p. 2). decades. These gypsum outcrop habitats 1,009 m (3,310 ft) level where salt cedar Forage production on these gypsum may have been modified by this long might become established and located outcrops is relatively low and does not history of livestock use, but continue to an additional 44 Eriogonum attract or concentrate livestock. The support large species populations. More gypsophilum plants. In 1993, 52 plants Eriogonum gypsophilum recovery plan than 75 percent of the Eriogonum were in the hypothetical maximum did not identify livestock grazing as a gypsophilum habitats occur on BLM flood impact zone. A flood event could serious potential designated critical lands. Currently, BLM livestock potentially impact about 100 plants in habitat threat at Seven Rivers Hills stocking rates appear to have little, or this population of several thousand (Service 1984, entire). no, impact on the Seven Rivers Hills plants. However, at the highest water Livestock using the habitat in the and Black River populations. It is also level recorded in 2015, which was at the Black River population has little effect evident that heavy livestock maximum safe flood control level, the on Eriogonum gypsophilum, and the concentrations at Ben Slaughter Draw water did not reach U.S. Highway 285 river is remote enough from the gypsum have not caused the population to and Eriogonum gypsophilum was not outcrop to preclude concentrated decline. It is unlikely that livestock impacted. Therefore, flooding from the livestock activity (Knight 1993, p. 52; grazing will become a serious species Brantley Reservoir is not a significant Sivinski 2000, p. 2). threat in most of its habitats, especially threat to Eriogonum gypsophilum. The Brantley Dam conservation pool at the Seven Rivers Hills and Black was anticipated to be in close proximity River populations, now or in the Off-road Vehicle (ORV) Use to the Seven Rivers Hills Eriogonum foreseeable future. ORV traffic is not presently an gypsophilum population such that it Eriogonum gypsophilum threat. Little to was expected to concentrate livestock Factor B. Commercial, Recreational, no ORV traffic evidence has been that could trample plants and make Scientific, or Educational observed in recent years in any of the erosion-prone trails through this habitat. Overutilization three Eriogonum gypsophilum Over the past 30 years, the actual There are no immediate threats from populations (Knight 1993, pp. 52–53; conservation pool has remained more commercial or recreational Eriogonum Sivinski 2000, p. 2; Chopp 2016, p. 1). than 1.6 km (1 mi) away from this gypsophilum collection . The species ORV traffic absence at the Black River population, and livestock have not has no recreational value, and it is not and Ben Slaughter Draw SMAs may be concentrated in this habitat. offered for sale within the horticultural attributed to their remote locations and The Ben Slaughter population is market at this time. It is a handsome stands of thorny mesquite shrubs immediately adjacent to Ben Slaughter plant, with early-season green stems surrounding the Eriogonum Spring and Jumping Spring, which are that turn dark red after hoisting bright gypsophilum populations (Knight 1993, water sources that concentrate livestock yellow flowers, which could attract rock p. 53). BLM has established SMA use. Livestock trailing and trampling garden hobbyists, but may not be restrictions for ORV traffic that protect Eriogonum gypsophilum plants in this suitable for non-gypseous garden soils. 95 percent of the Seven Rivers Hills population has been reported by Knight Scientific collection permits have been habitat and 50 percent of the Ben (1993, p. 52), especially in the Ben confined to a few vouchered specimens Slaughter Draw habitat from this Slaughter Spring immediate vicinity. to document new species locations. potential impact. These SMA Knight (1993, p. 54) observed that plants In addition to alleviating threats, restrictions cannot eliminate occasional trampled by livestock tended to produce positive steps have been taken to inform

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 1662 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules

and educate the public about Eriogonum BLM Resource Management Plan will for Eriogonum gypsophilum would gypsophilum. The New Mexico Rare remain in effect for the life of that plan remain in place until the state decides Plants Web site was established in 1998 and are likely to continue for any future to remove the plant from the list of state by the New Mexico Rare Plant amendments. endangered species. Technical Council (NMRPTC) to The Carlsbad Resource Management Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade provide information to the public on Plan does not clearly state that future Factors Affecting Its Continued rare, threatened and endangered plant plan revisions shall continue to Existence species (NMRPTC 2015, http:// maintain Eriogonum gypsophilum SMA nmrareplants.unm.edu). This Web site restrictions if this species is removed Our previous reviews did not analyze prominently displays descriptive from the List. However, due to the climate change as a factor affecting the Eriogonum gypsophilum information species only occurring in gypsum species. Based on the unequivocal and illustrations. This effort has helped outcrops, which are regarded as a evidence the earth’s climate is warming fulfill the intent to provide information unique resource by BLM, it is expected from observing increasing average global to the public and foster Eriogonum that BLM would continue to protect this air and ocean temperatures, widespread gypsophilum conservation support. habitat and, therefore, Eriogonum glacier and polar ice cap melting, and gypsophilum in their new resource rising sea levels recorded by the Factor C. Disease or Predation management plan (BLM 2015, p. 1). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate There are no known documented or A few hectares of Eriogonum Change (IPCC) Report (IPCC 2007a, anecdotal Eriogonum gypsophilum gypsophilum habitat in the Seven Rivers entire; 2013, entire), climate change is disease or predation reports. Hills population occur on BLM land now a factor in all Federal agency outside the designated SMA and on decision-making (Government Factor D. Inadequate Existing Federal land in BOR jurisdiction, which Accounting Office 2007, entire). The Regulatory Mechanisms is also not within the SMA. Land uses Service has incorporated climate change Federal regulatory mechanisms have that may affect Eriogonum gypsophilum into its decision-making under the Act been effective in removing or managing on these lands must presently be (Service 2010, entire). Global climate many Eriogonum gypsophilum threats reviewed by the Service. Protections information has been downscaled to our that could threaten extinction now or in afforded by this review would cease if region of interest, and projected into the the foreseeable future. The previously Eriogonum gypsophilum is removed future under two different scenarios of identified threats are nearly identical from the List. However, BLM’s current possible emissions of greenhouse gases between the three populations, and all resource management plan would (Alder and Hostetler 2014: 2). Climate three populations include Federal and continue to provide species protections. predictions for the Eriogonum non-Federal lands. The SMAs afford The Bureau of Land Management has gypsophilum area include a 5 to 6 conservation on Federal lands and committed to continuing these land use percent increase in maximum adjacent non-Federal lands for linear restrictions in its revised resource temperature (up to 4 °C (7.2 °F)), 11 projects such as roads and pipelines. management plan to provide species percent decrease in precipitation, and a Using the SMA designations, BLM has and habitat conservation in the 25 percent increase in evaporative successfully protected the designated foreseeable future. deficit over the next 25 years (National critical habitat at Seven Rivers Hills There are no regulatory protections Climate Change Viewer, Eddy County from mineral development and ORV for federally listed endangered and Data http://www2.usgs.gov/climate_ traffic. BLM also regulates and manages threatened plant species from surface- landuse/clu_rd/nccv/viewer.asp, livestock grazing on significant portions disturbing land uses on private or State- accessed May 15, 2016). In 11 of the last of all three of the known populations. owned lands, unless the activity is 15 years, moderate to severe drought These areas will continue to be authorized, funded, or carried out by a conditions existed in the Eriogonum conserved through implementation of Federal agency. Approximately 50 gypsophilum occupied area, with 11 BLM’s revised resource management percent of the Eriogonum gypsophilum percent of the time in exceptional plan. gypsum habitats at the Black River drought (National Drought Mitigation ORV traffic prohibitions are difficult population occurs on private and State- Center 2015, Eddy County Data) with no to enforce because of sign vandalism, for owned land. About 10 percent of the obvious negative effects on the species. which law enforcement officers cannot occupied habitat in the Ben Slaughter Eriogonum is a highly derived taxon keep a continuous watch. However, Draw population is on private and State- that has undergone rapid evolution in BLM SMA restrictions on ORV traffic at owned land (Sivinski 2005, p. 6). The arid western North American regions the Seven Rivers Hills designated New Mexico State Land Office is aware (Reveal 2005, p. 1). We expect that due critical habitat area and Ben Slaughter of the Eriogonum gypsophilum habitats to its observable resistance to severe Draw appear to be effective at on its State trust lands, and Section 75– drought periods over the past 30 years, diminishing ORV impacts. BLM further 6–1 (New Mexico Statutes Annotated Eriogonum gypsophilum is adaptable to committed its authority by restricting 1978 of the New Mexico Administrative climate change, and there is no access to the occupied Eriogonum Code directs New Mexico’s Energy, information to indicate that climate gypsophilum habitat by installing Minerals and Natural Resources change will have a detrimental effect on protective pipe-rail fences above and Department to investigate all plant the species. beyond the SMA description’s land use species in the state for the purpose of restrictions. establishing a list of State endangered Factors A through E Cumulative Effects The Bureau of Land Management plant species. It also authorizes that Eriogonum gypsophilum was known SMA at the Black River population department to prohibit state endangered from only a single population on the requires a ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ species take, with the exception of Seven Rivers Hills when it was listed as stipulation for all oil and gas leases, but permitted scientific collections or a threatened species (46 FR 5730; does not have prescriptions to protect propagation and transplantation January 19, 1981). An area covering 95 this area from mineral claims or ORV activities that enhance endangered percent of this population was traffic. All three Eriogonum species survival. Should this rule be designated as critical habitat at the time gypsophilum SMA designations in the finalized as proposed, state protections of listing. Population monitoring at this

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1663

site from 1987 to 2005 did not reveal gas development, there are no longer implementing regulations at 50 CFR part any significant increase or decrease in any threats that are expected to cause 424, set forth the procedures for listing, plant numbers since the recovery plan Eriogonum gypsophilum to be in danger reclassifying or removing species from was finalized in 1984. No surface- of extinction now or in the foreseeable the Federal Lists of Endangered and disturbing activities have occurred in future. Threatened Wildlife and Plants. The Act the designated critical habitat since Finding defines ‘‘species’’ as including any 1984, and this habitat remains species or subspecies of fish or wildlife unchanged. The Seven Rivers Hills site As required by the Act, we considered or plants, and any distinct vertebrate remained as the only known extant the 5 factors in assessing whether fish or wildlife population segment that population until 1984. The recovery Eriogonum gypsophilum is endangered interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. plan concluded that this threatened or threatened throughout all of its range. 1532(16)). Once the ‘‘species’’ is species could be delisted (due to We examined the best scientific and determined, we then evaluate whether recovery) when the designated critical commercial information available that species may be endangered or habitat area was designated an area of regarding the past, present, and future threatened because of one or more of the critical ecological concern (ACEC), or threats facing Eriogonum gypsophilum. five factors described in Section 4(a)(1) was provided a similar special use We reviewed the petition, information of the Act. We must consider these same designation. The Bureau of Land available in our files, and other five factors in reclassifying or delisting Management designated the critical available published and unpublished a species. For species that are already habitat as a SMA in 1988, thus fulfilling information, in addition to consulting listed as endangered or threatened, the this recovery plan criterion. with recognized Eriogonum threat analysis must evaluate both the Two additional populations were gypsophilum experts and other Federal, threats currently facing the species and documented in Eddy County since this State, and tribal agencies. Threats the threats that are reasonably likely to plant was listed in 1981. Plant numbers identified at the time of listing and in affect the species in the foreseeable in those populations also appear the recovery plan are no longer future following the delisting or relatively unchanged since their 1985 significant, which can largely be downlisting (i.e., reclassifying a species discovery; the Black River population attributed to current BLM land-use from endangered to threatened) and has a minimum of 16,660 plants, and restrictions in occupied Eriogonum removing or reducing the Act’s the Ben Slaughter Draw population is gypsophilum habitat. In addition, two protections. We may delist a species estimated at around 18,270 plants. new populations were discovered since according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best Additionally, an estimated 1,000 to the original listing decision. Each of available scientific and commercial data 1,500 plants in the Ben Slaughter Draw these populations adds between 16,000 indicate the species is neither population were observed in 2013, at and 18,000 plants to the overall endangered or threatened for the the nearby Hay Hollow location. These population estimate. following reasons: (1) The species is Based on our reviewing the best numbers are estimates, as it is difficult extinct; (2) the species has recovered available scientific and commercial to estimate plant numbers in each and is no longer endangered or information pertaining to the 5 factors, population due to variable density and threatened; and/or (3) the original we find that the petitioned action to patchy distribution across occupied scientific data used at the time the delist Eriogonum gypsophilum is gypsum outcrops. All previous and species was classified were erroneous. warranted. There is sufficient evidence current plant numbers estimates lack We determine that Eriogonum to indicate that, with ongoing BLM precision, but adequately demonstrate gypsophilum should be delisted due to substantial populations at the three land-use restrictions to avoid and recovery. known locations. No Eriogonum minimize surface-disturbing activities in gypsophilum population extirpations or occupied Eriogonum gypsophilum We have determined that none of the obvious declines were reported since it habitat on public lands, which are existing or potential threats is likely was listed as a threatened species in expected to continue into the causing Eriogonum gypsophilum to be 1981. foreseeable future, and no information in danger of extinction throughout all or Based on extensive survey efforts in to indicate that there are threats a significant portion of its range, nor is New Mexico, it is unlikely that other occurring now or in the future on it likely to become endangered within new populations will be discovered. private and State-owned lands, the foreseeable future throughout all or Potentially suitable habitat exists in Eriogonum gypsophilum should be a significant portion of its range. We Texas on private land, but no surveys removed from the Federal List of published a final policy interpreting the have been conducted. Endangered and Threatened Plants. phrase ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ Eriogonum gypsophilum is currently In making this finding, we have (SPR) (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014). The listed as threatened with designated followed the procedures set forth in final policy states that: (1) If a species critical habitat. Threats identified at the section 4(a)(1) of the Act and our is found to be endangered or threatened time of listing and in the recovery plan regulations at 50 CFR part 424. We throughout a significant portion of its are no longer deemed significant. In intend that any Eriogonum gypsophilum range, the entire species is listed as addition, two new populations have action be as accurate as possible. endangered or threatened, respectively, been discovered which contain between Therefore, we will continue to accept and the Act’s protections apply to all 16,000 and 18,000 Eriogonum additional information and comments individuals of the species wherever gypsophilum plants each. The entire from all concerned governmental found; (2) a portion of the range of a known occupied habitat is distributed agencies, the scientific community, species is ‘‘significant’’ if the species is among three populations totaling 94 ha Native American Tribes, industry, or not currently endangered or threatened (239 ac). Because BLM’s existing any other interested party concerning throughout all of its range, but the resource management plan provides this finding. portion’s contribution to the viability of protections for significant portions of all the species is so important that, without populations, that are expected to be Delisting Proposal the members in that portion, the species extended in future versions, lessening As noted earlier in this document, would be in danger of extinction, or the future threat of mineral and oil and Section 4 of the Act and its likely to become so in the foreseeable

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 1664 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules

future, throughout all of its range; (3) its range, we do not need to determine should be reinstated, we can initiate the range of a species is considered to if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ In listing procedures, including, if be the general geographical area within practice, a key part of the determination appropriate, emergency listing. which that species can be found at the that a species is in danger of extinction We will coordinate with other Federal time the Service makes any particular in a significant portion of its range is agencies, State resource agencies, status determination; and (4) if a whether the threats are geographically interested scientific organizations, and vertebrate species is endangered or concentrated in some way. If the threats others as appropriate to develop and threatened throughout a significant to the species are affecting it uniformly portion of its range, and the population throughout its range, no portion is likely implement an effective Eriogonum in that significant portion is a valid to have a greater risk of extinction, and gypsophilum post-delisting monitoring distinct population segment (DPS), we thus would not warrant further (PDM) plan. will list the DPS rather than the entire consideration. Moreover, if any The PDM plan will build upon taxonomic species or subspecies. concentration of threats apply only to current monitoring practices. The PDM The procedure for analyzing whether portions of the range that clearly do not plan outlines the monitoring needed to any portion is an SPR is similar, meet the biologically based definition of verify that a species delisted due to regardless of the type of status ‘‘significant’’ (i.e., the loss of that recovery remains secure from extinction determination we are making. The first portion clearly would not be expected to after the protections of the Act no longer step in our analysis of the status of a increase the vulnerability to extinction apply. The goals of this PDM plan are species is to determine its status of the entire species), those portions to: (1) Outline the monitoring plan for throughout all of its range. If we would not warrant further species abundance and threats; and (2) determine that the species is in danger consideration. Our analysis indicates identify circumstances that will trigger of extinction, or likely to become that there is no significant geographic increased monitoring, or to identify endangered in the foreseeable future, portion of the range that is in danger of when there are no longer concerns for throughout all of its range, we list the extinction or likely to become so in the Eriogonum gypsophilum and the PDM species as an endangered species or foreseeable future. Therefore, based on plan requirements have been fulfilled. threatened species, and no SPR analysis the best scientific and commercial data The draft PDM plan will be made will be required. If the species is neither available, no portion warrants further available for public comment in a in danger of extinction, nor likely to consideration to determine whether the Federal Register notice no later than become so throughout all of its range, as species may be endangered or June 30, 2017, and will be finalized we have found here, we next determine threatened in a significant portion of its concurrently with the final rule should whether the species is in danger of range. extinction or likely to become so On the basis of our evaluation, we we delist the species. throughout a significant portion of its propose to remove Eriogonum Peer Review range. If it is, we will continue to list the gypsophilum from the Federal List of species as an endangered species or Endangered and Threatened Plants (50 In accordance with our joint peer threatened species, respectively; if it is CFR 17.12(h)). review policy with the National Marine not, we conclude that listing the species Fisheries Service, ‘‘Notice of Effects of This Proposed Rule is no longer warranted. Interagency Cooperative Policy for Peer When we conduct an SPR analysis, This proposal, if made final, would Review in Endangered Species Act we first identify any portions of the revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) by removing Activities,’’ was published in the species’ range that warrant further Eriogonum gypsophilum from the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR consideration. The range of a species Federal List of Endangered and 34270), and the Office of Management can theoretically be divided into Threatened Plants. The Act’s and Budget’s Final Information Quality portions in an infinite number of ways. prohibitions and conservation measures, Bulletin for Peer Review, dated However, there is no purpose in particularly through sections 7 and 9, December 16, 2004, we will seek expert analyzing portions of the range that would no longer apply to this species. opinions from at least three appropriate have no reasonable potential to be Federal agencies would no longer be independent specialists regarding this significant or in analyzing portions of required to consult with the Service proposed rule’s science. Peer review’s the range in which there is no under section 7 of the Act, in the event purpose is to ensure that our delisting reasonable potential for the species to be that activities they authorize, fund or decision is based on scientifically sound endangered or threatened. To identify carry out may affect Eriogonum data, assumptions and analyses. We will only those portions that warrant further gypsophilum. Critical habitat for the send copies of this proposed rule to the consideration, we determine whether species is designated; therefore, if made peer reviewers immediately following substantial information indicates that: final, this rule would also remove this publication in the Federal Register. We (1) The portions may be ‘‘significant’’; plant’s critical habitat designation at 50 will invite these peer reviewers to and (2) the species may be in danger of CFR 17.96(a). extinction there or likely to become so comment, during the public comment within the foreseeable future. Post-Delisting Monitoring period, on the specific assumptions and Depending on the biology of the species, Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us, conclusions in this proposed Eriogonum its range, and the threats it faces, it in cooperation with the States, to gypsophilum delisting. We will might be more efficient for us to address implement a monitoring program for not summarize the opinions of these the significance question first or the less than 5 years for all species that have reviewers in the final decision status question first. Thus, if we been recovered and delisted. This document, and we will consider their determine that a portion of the range is requirement is to develop a program input and any additional information not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to that detects delisted species failures to we received as part of our final determine whether the species is sustain itself without the Act’s decision-making process for this endangered or threatened there; if we protective measures. If, at any time proposal. Such communication may determine that the species is not during the monitoring period, data lead to a final decision that differs from endangered or threatened in a portion of indicate that protective Act status this proposal.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1665

Required Determinations PART 17—ENDANGERED AND March 7, 2017. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Clarity of the Rule THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Portal (see ADDRESSES), the deadline for We are required by Executive Orders ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 submitting an electronic comment is 12866 and 12988 and by the continues to read as follows: 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– We must receive requests for public 1998, to write all rules in plain 1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. hearings, in writing, at the address language. This means that each rule we ■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION publish must: entry for ‘‘Eriogonum gypsophilum’’ CONTACT section below by February 21, (1) Be logically organized; 2017. (2) Use the active voice to address from the List of Endangered and readers directly; Threatened Plants. ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may ■ (3) Use clear language rather than 3. Amend § 17.96(a) by removing the submit comments by one of the jargon; critical habitat entry for ‘‘Family following methods: (4) Be divided into short sections and : Eriogonum gypsophilum (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal sentences; and (Gypsum Wild Buckwheat).’’ eRulemaking Portal: http:// (5) Use lists and tables wherever Dated: December 22, 2016. www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, possible. Daniel M. Ashe, enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0138, which is If you feel that we have not met these Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. the docket number for this rulemaking. requirements, send us comments by one Then, click on the Search button. On the [FR Doc. 2016–31764 Filed 1–5–17; 8:45 am] of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To resulting page, in the Search panel on better help us revise the rule, your BILLING CODE 4333–15–P the left side of the screen, under the comments should be as specific as Document Type heading, click on the possible. For example, you should tell DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Proposed Rules link to locate this us the section or paragraph numbers document. You may submit a comment that are unclearly written, which Fish and Wildlife Service by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ sections or sentences are too long, the (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail sections where you feel lists or tables 50 CFR Part 17 or hand-delivery to: Public Comments would be useful, etc. Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0138; 0138, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Environmental Policy Act FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls We have determined that RIN 1018–BB91 Church, VA 22041–3803. environmental assessments and We request that you send comments environmental impact statements, as Endangered and Threatened Wildlife only by the methods described above. defined under the National and Plants; Removal of the Lesser We will post all comments on http:// Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Long-Nosed Bat From the Federal List www.regulations.gov. This generally U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) authority, need not of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife means that we will post any personal be prepared in connection with AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information you provide us (see Public regulations pursuant to the Act, Section Interior. Comments, below, for more 4(a). We published a notice outlining ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month information). our reasons for this determination in the petition finding; request for comments. Copies of documents: This proposed Federal Register on October 25, 1983 rule and supporting documents, (48 FR 49244). SUMMARY: Under the authority of the including the Species Status References Cited Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Assessment, are available on http:// amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and www.regulations.gov. In addition, the A complete list of all references cited Wildlife Service (Service), propose to supporting file for this proposed rule in this final rule is available at http:// remove the lesser long-nosed bat will be available for public inspection, www.regulations.gov at Docket No. (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae) by appointment, during normal business FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119, or upon from the Federal List of Endangered and hours, at the Arizona Ecological request from the New Mexico Ecological Threatened Wildlife (List) due to Services Field Office, 2321 W. Royal Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES). recovery. This determination is based Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ Authors on a thorough review of the best 85021. available scientific and commercial The primary authors of this notice are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information, which indicates that the the staff members of the New Mexico Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S. threats to this subspecies have been Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona eliminated or reduced to the point that Fish and Wildlife Service (see Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 the subspecies has recovered and no ADDRESSES). W. Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, longer meets the definition of Phoenix, AZ 85021; by telephone (602– List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 endangered or threatened under the Act. 242–0210); or by facsimile (602–242– This document also serves as the 12- Endangered and threatened species, 2513). If you use a telecommunications month finding on a petition to reclassify Exports, Imports, Reporting and device for the deaf (TDD), call the this subspecies from endangered to recordkeeping requirements, Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. Transportation. threatened on the List. We are seeking information, data, and comments from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Regulation Promulgation the public on the proposed rule to Information Requested Accordingly, we propose to amend remove the lesser long-nosed bat from part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title the List. Public Comments 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, DATES: We will accept comments Any final action resulting from this as set forth below: received or postmarked on or before proposed rule will be based on the best

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS