62450 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules

matter is resolved by treatment, if below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. (b) Genetics and ; possible. Eastern time on the closing date. We (c) Historical and current range, 8. Inadequate record of self- must receive requests for public including distribution patterns; monitoring of blood glucose; a driver hearings, in writing, at the address (d) Historical and current population should be disqualified for inadequate shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION levels, and current and projected trends; records until the driver can demonstrate CONTACT by October 24, 2016 and adequate evidence of glucose records ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (e) Past and ongoing conservation (minimum 1 month). by one of the following methods: (1) measures for the species, its habitat, or In addition, the MRB stated that, if a Electronically: Go to the Federal both. driver is medically disqualified due to eRulemaking Portal: http:// (2) Factors that may affect the not meeting the ITDM criteria listed www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, continued existence of the species, above, the driver should remain enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0099, which is which may include habitat modification disqualified for at least 6 months. the docket number for this rulemaking. or destruction, overutilization, disease, Then click on the Search button. On the Comments Requested predation, the inadequacy of existing resulting page, in the Search panel on regulatory mechanisms, or other natural Comments are requested on any and the left side of the screen, under the or manmade factors. all of the recommendations provided in Document Type heading, click on the the advisory final report from the Proposed Rules link to locate this (3) Biological, commercial trade, or Medical Review Board but only on those document. You may submit a comment other relevant data concerning any recommendations. To the extent by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ threats (or lack thereof) to this species possible, comments should include (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail and existing regulations that may be supporting materials, such as, for or hand-delivery to: Public Comments addressing those threats. example, data analyses, studies, reports, Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– Please include sufficient information or journal articles. FMCSA will consider 0099, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, with your submission (such as scientific these comments, in addition to the MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls journal articles or other publications) to comments submitted in response to the Church, VA 22041–3803. allow us to verify any scientific or NPRM, in determining how to proceed We request that you send comments commercial information you include. with this rulemaking. only by the methods described above. Please note that submissions merely We will post all comments on http:// Issued on: August 30, 2016. stating support for or opposition to the www.regulations.gov. This generally action under consideration without Larry W. Minor, means that we will post any personal providing supporting information, Associate Administrator for Policy. information you provide us (see Public although noted, will not be considered [FR Doc. 2016–21724 Filed 9–8–16; 8:45 am] Comments, below, for more in making a determination, as section BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P information). 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: seq.) directs that determinations as to Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S. whether any species is an endangered or DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin threatened species must be made Ecological Services Field Office, 10711 ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Fish and Wildlife Service Burnet Rd., Suite 200, Austin, TX and commercial data available.’’ 78758; telephone 512–490–0057; or You may submit your comments and 50 CFR Part 17 facsimile 512–490–0974. Persons who materials concerning this proposed rule [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0099; use a telecommunications device for the by one of the methods listed above in 4500030113] deaf (TDD) may call the Federal ADDRESSES. We request that you send Information Relay Service (FIRS) at comments only by the methods RIN 1018–BA74 800–877–8339. described in ADDRESSES. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you submit information via http:// www.regulations.gov, your entire and ; Endangered Species Information Requested Status for Guadalupe Fescue submission—including any personal Public Comments identifying information—will be posted AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, We intend that any final action on the Web site. If your submission is Interior. resulting from this proposed rule will be made via a hardcopy that includes ACTION: Proposed rule. based on the best available scientific personal identifying information, you and commercial data and will be as may request at the top of your document SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and accurate and as effective as possible. that we withhold this information from Wildlife Service (Service), propose to Therefore, we request comments or public review. However, we cannot list ligulata (Guadalupe fescue), information from other concerned guarantee that we will be able to do so. a species from the Chihuahuan governmental agencies, Native We will post all hardcopy submissions Desert of west Texas and Mexico, as an American tribes, the scientific on http://www.regulations.gov. endangered species under the community, industry, or any other Comments and materials we receive, Endangered Species Act of 1973, as interested parties concerning this as well as supporting documentation we amended (Act). If we finalize this rule proposed rule. We particularly seek used in preparing this proposed rule, as proposed, it would extend the Act’s comments concerning: will be available for public inspection protections to this species. (1) Guadalupe fescue’s biology, range, on http://www.regulations.gov, or by DATES: We will accept comments and population trends, including: appointment, during normal business received or postmarked on or before (a) Biological or ecological hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife November 8, 2016. Comments submitted requirements of the species, including Service, Austin Ecological Services electronically using the Federal habitat requirements for soils, Field Office (see FOR FURTHER eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, reproduction, and associated species; INFORMATION CONTACT).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules 62451

Public Hearing retained the Category 2 status for The SSA Report (Service 2016) is Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for Guadalupe fescue in updated notices of based on a thorough review of the one or more public hearings on this review of taxa on natural history, habitats, ecology, proposal, if requested. Requests must be September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), and populations, and range of Guadalupe fescue. The SSA Report analyzes received by the date specified above in February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184). In a individual, population, and species DATES. Such requests must be sent to the notice of review published on requirements; factors affecting the address shown in FOR FURTHER September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144), we species’ survival; and current conditions INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule revised the status of Guadalupe fescue to assess the species’ current and future public hearings on this proposal, if any to a Category 1 candidate, meaning that viability in terms of resiliency, are requested, and announce the dates, the Service had on file sufficient redundancy, and representation. We times, and places of those hearings, as information on biological vulnerability define viability as the ability of a well as how to obtain reasonable and threat(s) to support a proposal to species to maintain populations over a accommodations, in the Federal list it as an endangered or threatened species, but that a proposed rule had not defined period of time. Register and local newspapers at least Resiliency refers to the population 15 days before the hearing. yet been issued because this action was precluded at that time by other listing size necessary to endure stochastic Peer Review activities. The candidate notice of environmental variation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 308–310). Resilient In accordance with our joint policy on review published on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), eliminated categories populations are better able to recover peer review published in the Federal from losses caused by random variation, Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), within candidate species, and Guadalupe fescue was included as a such as fluctuations in recruitment we are seeking the expert opinions of (demographic stochasticity), variations three appropriate and independent candidate with a listing priority number of 8. The listing priority number was in rainfall (environmental stochasticity), specialists regarding this proposed rule. or changes in the frequency of wildfires. The purpose of peer review is to ensure revised to 11 on October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534), based on the commitment of Big Redundancy refers to the number and that our listing determination is based geographic distribution of populations on scientifically sound data, Bend National Park to manage habitat for the species through a candidate or sites necessary to endure catastrophic assumptions, and analyses. The peer events (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 308– reviewers have expertise in the natural conservation agreement (CCA). On May 4, 2004 (69 FR 24876), we indicated that 310). As defined here, catastrophic history, habitats, distribution, and events are rare occurrences, usually of ecology of Guadalupe fescue. The peer Guadalupe fescue remained a candidate following a re-submitted petition. We finite duration, that cause severe reviewers are currently reviewing the impacts to one or more populations. have retained the candidate status for Species Status Assessment (SSA Report) Examples of catastrophic events include Guadalupe fescue, with a listing priority for Guadalupe fescue, which will inform tropical storms, floods, prolonged number of 11, in all subsequent notices our determination. drought, and unusually intense wildfire. of review (70 FR 24870, May 11, 2005; Species that have multiple resilient Previous Federal Action 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR populations distributed over a larger 69034, December 6, 2007; 73 FR 75176, On January 9, 1975, as directed by the landscape are more likely to survive December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, Act, the Secretary for the Smithsonian catastrophic events, since not all November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, Institution submitted a report to populations would be affected. Congress on potential endangered and November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, Representation refers to the genetic threatened plant species of the United October 26, 2011; 77 FR 69994, diversity, both within and among States (Smithsonian 1975, entire). The November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, populations, necessary to conserve long- report identified more than 3,000 plant November 22, 2013; 79 FR 72450, term adaptive capability (Shaffer and species as potentially either endangered December 5, 2014; 80 FR 80584, Stein 2000, pp. 307–308). Species with or threatened, including Festuca December 24, 2015). greater genetic diversity are more able to ligulata (Guadalupe fescue). On July 1, Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal adapt to environmental changes and to 1975, we published in the Federal Register, we propose to designate colonize new sites. Register (40 FR 27824) our notification critical habitat for Guadalupe fescue that we considered this report to be a under the Act. Summary of Biological Status and Threats petition to list the identified plants as Background either endangered or threatened under Guadalupe fescue is a short-lived the Act. The 1975 notice solicited Staff of the Austin Ecological Services perennial grass species found only in a information from Federal and State Field Office developed the SSA Report few high mountains of the Chihuahuan agencies, and the public, on the status for Guadalupe fescue, which is an Desert, west of the Pecos River in Texas of the species. evaluation of the best available and in the State of Coahuila, Mexico. On December 15, 1980, we published scientific and commercial data on the These ‘‘sky island’’ habitats are conifer- a comprehensive notice of review of status of the species, including the past, oak woodlands above 1,800 meters (m) native plants (45 FR 82480) that present, and future threats to this (5,905 feet (ft)) elevation. The species included Guadalupe fescue as a species and the effect of conservation has been reported in only six sites. It Category 2 candidate species. Category 2 measures. The SSA Report and other was first collected in 1931, in the candidates were taxa for which materials related to this proposal are Guadalupe Mountains, Culberson information then in the possession of available online at http:// County, Texas, and in the Chisos the Service indicated that proposing to www.regulations.gov, under Docket No. Mountains, Brewster County, Texas; list as endangered or threatened species FWS–R2–ES–2016–0099, and on the these sites are now within Guadalupe was possibly appropriate, but for which Southwest Region Ecological Services Mountains National Park and Big Bend sufficient data on biological Web site at: https://www.fws.gov/ National Park, respectively. Guadalupe vulnerability and threats were not then southwest/es/AustinTexas/ESA_Our_ fescue was documented near Fraile, available to support proposed rules. We species.html. southern Coahuila, in 1941; in the Sierra

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 62452 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules

la Madera, central Coahuila, in 1977; chromosome number, or breeding Guadalupe fescue in 1998 and 2008. and at two sites in the Maderas del system. However, since grasses are The objectives of these 10-year Carmen Mountains of northern Coahuila wind-pollinated, small, widely-scattered agreements include monitoring and in 1973 and 2003. The last three sites populations produce few if any seeds surveys, seed and live plant banking, are now within protected natural areas from out-crossing (pollination by fire and invasive species management, (‘‘areas naturales protegidas’’ (ANP)) unrelated individuals). Many perennial trail management, staff and visitor designated by the Mexican federal grasses, including some Festuca species, education, establishment of an advisory government. are obligate out-crossers. If Guadalupe team of species experts, and cooperation In the United States, known fescue is an obligate out-crosser, the with Mexican agencies and researchers populations of Guadalupe fescue have sparse Chisos population would to conserve the known populations of experienced significant declines. produce few seeds; if it is not an Guadalupe fescue and search for new Guadalupe fescue was last observed in obligate out-crosser, it is probably ones. Research objectives include the Guadalupe Mountains in 1952; this highly inbred and may suffer from investigations of fire ecology, habitat population is presumed extirpated. inbreeding depression. Although the management, genetic structure, Researchers from Texas Parks and minimum viable population (MVP) size reproductive biology, and Wildlife Department and Big Bend has not yet been calculated for reintroduction. National Park have quantitatively Guadalupe fescue, we can estimate its Based on the best available monitored plots within the Chisos MVP by comparison to species with information, we know of only two Mountains population over a 22-year similar life histories (i.e., surrogates) for extant populations of Guadalupe fescue. period. Our analysis of these data which MVPs have been calculated, The Chisos Mountains population is far indicates that the population within the using the following guideline adapted smaller than our estimated MVP level, plots (about 25 to 50 percent of the total from Pavlik (1996, p. 137). Through this and despite protection, appropriate population) has decreased significantly comparison, we estimate that management, and periodic monitoring over time, from a high of 125 and 127 populations of Guadalupe fescue should by the National Park Service, it has individuals in 1993 and 1994, to 47 have at least 500 to 1,000 individuals for declined between 1993 and 2014. The individuals in 2013 and 2014. Little long-term population viability (SSA other extant population, at ANP information is available for the known Report, pp. 17–18). Maderas del Carmen in northern populations in Mexico. Valdes-Reyna One factor potentially negatively Coahuila, Mexico, may have exceeded (2009, pp. 13, 15) confirmed that one affecting the existing population in the our estimated MVP level as recently as population in the Maderas del Carmen Chisos Mountains is the loss of regular 2003, and the site is managed for natural mountains is extant. This population wildfires. Periodic wildfire and leaf resources conservation. Unfortunately, had several hundred individuals in litter reduction may be necessary for we possess very little information about 2003 (Big Bend National Park and long-term survival of Guadalupe fescue the current status of the species at Service 2008), and is protected within populations, although this has not been Maderas del Carmen and throughout ANP Maderas del Carmen. The status of investigated. Historically, wildfires Mexico. Our analysis revealed that a the other three Coahuilan populations occurred in the vicinity of the Chisos large amount of potential habitat exists remains unknown. population at least 10 times between in northern Mexico. Thus, it is possible To estimate the amount and 1770 and 1940 (Moir and Meents 1981, that other undiscovered populations of distribution of potential Guadalupe p. 7; Moir 1982, pp. 90–98; Poole 1989, Guadalupe fescue exist in northern fescue habitat, we created maps of p. 8; Camp et al. 2006, pp. 3–6, 14–23, Mexico, and that the overall status of conifer-oak forests in the Chihuahuan 59–61). However, the last major fire the species is more secure than we now Desert at elevations greater than 1,800 there was more than 70 years ago, due know. Nonetheless, the Service has to m. Since larger habitat areas may be to fire suppression within the National make a determination based on the best more suitable, we restricted this model Park. The long absence of fire and the available scientific data, which to areas greater than 200 hectares (ha) resulting accumulation of fuels also currently confirm only one extant (494 acres (ac)). This model reveals that increase the risk of more intense population in Mexico. northern Mexico has 283 areas of wildfire, which could result in the loss potential habitat totaling 537,998 ha of the remaining Guadalupe fescue Determination (over 1.3 million ac), compared to 20 population in the United States. Standard for Review such areas totaling 27,881 ha (68,894 ac) Other factors that may affect the in Texas. Thus, about 95 percent of the continued survival of Guadalupe fescue Section 4 of the Act, and its potential habitat is in Mexico. However, include the genetic and demographic implementing regulations at 50 CFR part we do not have information confirming consequences of small population sizes 424, set forth the procedures for adding that any of these areas actually contain and isolation of its known populations; species to the Federal Lists of Guadalupe fescue. livestock grazing; trail runoff; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Monitoring suggests that the Chisos competition from invasive species; and Plants. Under section 4(b)(1)(a) of Mountains population has decreased in effects of climate change, such as higher the Act, the Secretary is to make size; however the data indicate that temperatures and changes in the amount endangered or threatened survival rates within this monitored and seasonal pattern of rainfall; and determinations required by section population have increased. These fungal infection of seeds. Big Bend 4(a)(1) solely on the basis of the best inverse trends may be explained by a National Park has minimized the scientific and commercial data available recruitment rate (establishment of new potential threat of trampling from to her after conducting a review of the individuals) that is too low to sustain humans and pack animals by restricting status of the species and after taking the population. We do not know why visitors and trail maintenance crews to into account conservation efforts by the recruitment rate at the Chisos established trails and through visitor States or foreign nations. The standards population is low. We have no outreach. for determining whether a species is information about the species’ genetic The Service, Big Bend National Park, endangered or threatened are provided viability, within-population and within- and Guadalupe Mountains National in section 3 of the Act. An endangered species genetic differentiation, Park established CCAs for the species is any species that is ‘‘in danger

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules 62453

of extinction throughout all or a from invasive species (Factor A); grazing representation. However, if there are significant portion of its range.’’ A by livestock and feral animals of additional extant populations in threatened species is any species that is Guadalupe fescue plants (Factor C); and Mexico, we would expect the ‘‘likely to become an endangered the genetic and demographic redundancy and representation of the species within the foreseeable future consequences of small population sizes, species would be greater. Based on the throughout all or a significant portion of isolation of its known populations, and best available information, therefore, the its range.’’ Per section 4(a)(1) of the Act, potential impacts of climate changes, species’ overall risk of extinction is such in reviewing the status of the species to such as higher temperatures and that we find it meets the definition of an determine if it meets the definition of changes in the amount and seasonal endangered species. Therefore, on the endangered or of threatened, we pattern of rainfall (Factor E). Although basis of the best available scientific and determine whether any species is an trampling, trail runoff, invasive species, commercial information, we propose endangered species or a threatened and grazing are likely to be ameliorated listing the Guadalupe fescue as an species because of any of the following by ongoing and future conservation endangered species in accordance with five factors: (A) The present or efforts on Federal lands in the United sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We threatened destruction, modification, or States, the effects of small population find that a threatened species status is curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) size, geographic isolation, and climate not appropriate for Guadalupe fescue overutilization for commercial, change are all rangewide threats and because of the immediacy of threats recreational, scientific, or educational expected to continue into the facing the species with only two known purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) foreseeable future. There is limited populations, one of which is declining the inadequacy of existing regulatory information available regarding the in abundance. mechanisms; and (E) other natural or known populations of Guadalupe fescue Under the Act and our implementing manmade factors affecting its continued in Mexico; however, most of the above regulations, a species may warrant existence. Our determination must also factors are likely to be widespread and listing if it is endangered or threatened consider certain conservation measures ongoing threats throughout the potential throughout all or a significant portion of for the species. habitats in Mexico (Service 2016). its range. We have determined that The fundamental question before the Guadalupe fescue is endangered The Act defines an endangered Service is whether the species warrants throughout all of its range, so an species as any species that is ‘‘in danger protection as endangered or threatened evaluation of any ‘‘significant’’ portion of extinction throughout all or a under the Act. To make this of the range is unnecessary. See the determination, we evaluated the significant portion of its range’’ and a Final Policy on Interpretation of the projections of extinction risk, described threatened species as any species ‘‘that Phrase ‘‘Significant Portion of Its in terms of the condition of current and is likely to become endangered Range’’ in the Endangered Species Act’s future populations and their throughout all or a significant portion of Definitions of ‘‘Endangered Species’’ distribution (taking into account the risk its range within the foreseeable future.’’ and ‘‘Threatened Species’’ (79 FR factors and their effects on those We find that Guadalupe fescue is 37578; July 1, 2014). populations). For any species, as currently in danger of extinction Available Conservation Measures population condition declines and throughout all of its range, and therefore distribution shrinks, the species’ warrants a determination that it is an Conservation measures provided to extinction risk increases and overall endangered species. There are only two species listed as endangered or viability declines. known extant populations of Guadalupe threatened species under the Act fescue, one each in Texas and in include recognition, recovery actions, Summary of Analysis Coahuila, Mexico. We have no recent requirements for Federal protection, and We documented in our SSA Report observations of three additional prohibitions against certain practices. that only two extant populations of populations reported from Mexico, and Recognition through listing results in Guadalupe fescue are currently known. their statuses are unknown. A second public awareness, as well as The only extant population in the population reported from the United conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, United States, in the Chisos Mountains States has not been seen in more than and local agencies; private at Big Bend National Park, has declined 60 years, despite extensive surveys, and organizations; and individuals. The Act in abundance since 1993. Only 47 is presumed extirpated. Based on encourages cooperation with the States individuals were observed there in monitoring conducted in 2013 and and other countries, and calls for 2014, which is far less than an estimated 2014, the Chisos Mountains population recovery actions to be carried out for MVP size of 500 to 1,000 individuals in the United States is estimated to have listed species. The protection required based on species with similar life in the range of about 100 and 200 by Federal agencies and the prohibitions histories. The other extant population, individuals, well below the estimated against certain activities are discussed, in the ANP Maderas del Carmen in MVP of 500 to 1,000 individuals, and in part, below. Coahuila, had several hundred the monitored population has declined The primary purpose of the Act is the individuals in 2003, and was confirmed from 127 individuals in 1993, to 47 conservation of endangered and extant in 2009 with no population individuals in 2014 (Service 2016, threatened species and the ecosystems estimate. Three other historically known Appendix B). Therefore, this population upon which they depend. The ultimate populations in remote areas of Coahuila, is considered to have low resiliency. goal of such conservation efforts is the Mexico, have not been monitored in at The Maderas del Carmen population in recovery of these listed species, so that least 39 years, and their statuses remain Mexico may have held the estimated they no longer need the protective unknown. MVP as recently as 2003, but the current measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of We find that several factors reduce the population status is unknown, and thus the Act calls for the Service to develop viability of Guadalupe fescue, the population is considered to have and implement recovery plans for the including: Changes in the wildfire cycle limited resilience (Service 2016). With conservation of endangered and and vegetation structure of its habitats, only two known populations, both with threatened species. The recovery trampling from humans and pack limited resiliency, the species has planning process involves the animals, trail runoff, and competition extremely low redundancy and identification of actions that are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 62454 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules

necessary to halt or reverse the species’ for Federal funds to implement knowing violation of any State law or decline by addressing the threats to its management actions that promote the regulation, or in the course of any survival and recovery. The goal of this protection or recovery of Guadalupe violation of a State criminal trespass process is to restore listed species to a fescue. Information on our grant law. Exceptions to these prohibitions point where they are secure, self- programs that are available to aid are outlined in 50 CFR 17.62. sustaining, and functioning components species recovery can be found at: http:// We may issue permits to carry out of their ecosystems. www.fws.gov/grants. otherwise prohibited activities Recovery planning includes the Although Guadalupe fescue is only involving endangered plants under development of a recovery outline proposed for listing under the Act at certain circumstances. Regulations shortly after a species is listed and this time, please let us know if you are governing permits are codified at 50 preparation of a draft and final recovery interested in participating in recovery CFR 17.62. With regard to endangered plan. The recovery outline guides the efforts for this species. Additionally, we plants, the Service may issue a permit immediate implementation of urgent invite you to submit any new authorizing any activity otherwise recovery actions and describes the information on this species whenever it prohibited by 50 CFR 17.61 for scientific process to be used to develop a recovery becomes available and any information purposes or for enhancing the plan. Revisions of the plan may be done you may have for recovery planning propagation or survival of endangered to address continuing or new threats to purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION plants. the species, as new substantive CONTACT). It is our policy, as published in the information becomes available. The Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR recovery plan also identifies recovery Federal agencies to evaluate their 34272), to identify to the maximum criteria for review of when a species actions with respect to any species that extent practicable at the time a species may be ready for downlisting or is proposed or listed as an endangered is listed, those activities that would or delisting, and methods for monitoring or threatened species and with respect would not constitute a violation of recovery progress. Recovery plans also to its critical habitat, if any is section 9 of the Act. The intent of this establish a framework for agencies to designated. Regulations implementing policy is to increase public awareness of coordinate their recovery efforts and this interagency cooperation provision the effect of a proposed listing on provide estimates of the cost of of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part proposed and ongoing activities within implementing recovery tasks. Recovery 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires the range of the species proposed for Federal agencies to confer with the teams (composed of species experts, listing. Based on the best available Service on any action that is likely to Federal and State agencies, information, the following actions are jeopardize the continued existence of a nongovernmental organizations, and unlikely to result in a violation of species proposed for listing or result in stakeholders) are often established to section 9, if these activities are carried destruction or adverse modification of develop recovery plans. Should the out in accordance with existing proposed critical habitat. If a species is Guadalupe fescue be listed as an regulations and permit requirements; listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of endangered or a threatened species in a this list is not comprehensive: final rule, the completed recovery the Act requires Federal agencies to (1) Normal agricultural and outline, draft recovery plan, and the ensure that activities they authorize, silvicultural practices conducted on final recovery plan will be available on fund, or carry out are not likely to privately owned lands, including our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ jeopardize the continued existence of herbicide and pesticide use, which are endangered), or from our Austin the species or destroy or adversely carried out in accordance with any Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR modify its critical habitat. If a Federal existing regulations, permit and label FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). action may affect a listed species or its Implementation of recovery actions critical habitat, the responsible Federal requirements, and best management generally requires the participation of a agency must enter into consultation practices; broad range of partners, including other with the Service. (2) Recreation and management at Federal agencies, States, Tribes, Federal agency actions within the National Parks that is conducted in nongovernmental organizations, species’ habitat that may require accordance with existing National Park businesses, and private landowners. conference or consultation or both as Service regulations and policies; and Examples of recovery actions include described in the preceding paragraph (3) Normal residential landscape habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of are limited to the land management activities. native vegetation), research, captive activities by the National Park Service Based on the best available propagation and reintroduction, and within Big Bend National Park. information, the following activities outreach and education. The recovery of With respect to endangered plants, may potentially result in a violation of many listed species cannot be prohibitions outlined at 50 CFR 17.61 section 9 of the Act; this list is not accomplished solely on Federal lands make it illegal for any person subject to comprehensive: because their range may occur primarily the jurisdiction of the United States to (1) Unauthorized damage or collection or solely on non-Federal lands. To import or export, transport in interstate of Guadalupe fescue from lands under achieve recovery of these species or foreign commerce in the course of a Federal jurisdiction; requires cooperative conservation efforts commercial activity, sell or offer for sale (2) Destruction or degradation of the on private, State, and Tribal lands. If in interstate or foreign commerce, or to species’ habitat on lands under Federal this species is listed, funding for remove and reduce to possession any jurisdiction, including the intentional recovery actions could be available from such plant species from areas under introduction of nonnative organisms a variety of sources, including Federal Federal jurisdiction. In addition, for that compete with, consume, or harm budgets, State programs, and cost share endangered plants, the Act prohibits Guadalupe fescue; grants for non-Federal landowners, the malicious damage or destruction of any (3) Livestock grazing on lands under academic community, and such species on any area under Federal Federal jurisdiction; and nongovernmental organizations. In jurisdiction, and the removal, cutting, (4) Pesticide applications on lands addition, pursuant to section 6 of the digging up, or damaging or destroying of under Federal jurisdiction in violation Act, the State of Texas would be eligible any such species on any other area in of label restrictions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:27 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 175 / Friday, September 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules 62455

Questions regarding whether specific which sections or sentences are too List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 activities would constitute a violation of long, the sections where you feel lists or section 9 of the Act should be directed tables would be useful, etc. Endangered and threatened species, to the Austin Ecological Services Field Exports, Imports, Reporting and National Environmental Policy Act (42 Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION recordkeeping requirements, U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) CONTACT). Transportation. We have determined that Required Determinations Proposed Regulation Promulgation environmental assessments and Clarity of the Rule environmental impact statements, as Accordingly, we propose to amend We are required by Executive Orders defined under the authority of the part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 12866 and 12988 and by the National Environmental Policy Act 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Presidential Memorandum of June 1, (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not as set forth below: 1998, to write all rules in plain be prepared in connection with listing language. This means that each rule we a species as an endangered or PART 17—ENDANGERED AND publish must: threatened species under the THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (1) Be logically organized; Endangered Species Act. We published (2) Use the active voice to address a notice outlining our reasons for this ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 readers directly; determination in the Federal Register continues to read as follows: (3) Use clear language rather than on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). jargon; Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– (4) Be divided into short sections and References Cited 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise sentences; and A complete list of references cited in noted. (5) Use lists and tables wherever this rulemaking is available on the ■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by adding an possible. Internet at http://www.regulations.gov entry for ‘‘Festuca ligulata’’ to the List If you feel that we have not met these and upon request from the Austin of Endangered and Threatened Plants in requirements, send us comments by one Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). alphabetical order under FLOWERING better help us revise the rule, your PLANTS to read as follows: Authors comments should be as specific as § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. possible. For example, you should tell The primary authors of this proposed us the numbers of the sections or rule are the staff members of the Austin * * * * * paragraphs that are unclearly written, Ecological Services Field Office. (h) * * *

Listing citations and Scientific name Common name Where listed Status applicable rules

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Festuca ligulata ...... Guadalupe fescue ...... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation of the final rule]

*******

Dated: August 18, 2016. ACTION: Proposed rule. eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, Stephen Guertin, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Eastern Time on the closing date. We Service. Wildlife Service (Service), propose to must receive requests for public [FR Doc. 2016–21588 Filed 9–8–16; 8:45 am] designate critical habitat for Festuca hearings, in writing, at the address BILLING CODE 4333–15–P ligulata (Guadalupe fescue) under the shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Endangered Species Act of 1973, as CONTACT by October 24, 2016. amended (Act). In total, approximately DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 7,815 acres (3,163 hectares) in Brewster ADDRESSES: You may submit comments County, Texas, located entirely in Big on the proposed rule or DEA by one of Fish and Wildlife Service Bend National Park, fall within the the following methods: boundaries of the proposed critical (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 50 CFR Part 17 habitat designation. If we finalize this eRulemaking Portal: http:// rule as proposed, it would extend the www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0100; Act’s protections to this species’ critical box, enter Docket No. FWS–R2–ES– 4500030113] habitat. We also announce the 2016–0100, which is the docket number availability of a draft economic analysis for this rulemaking. Then click on the RIN 1018–BA75 (DEA) of the proposed designation of Search button. On the resulting page, in critical habitat for Guadalupe fescue. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the Search panel on the left side of the and Plants; Designation of Critical DATES: We will accept comments on the screen, under the Document Type Habitat for Guadalupe Fescue proposed rule or DEA that are received heading, click on the Proposed Rules or postmarked on or before November 8, link to locate this document. You may AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 2016. Comments submitted submit a comment by clicking on Interior. electronically using the Federal ‘‘Comment Now!’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Sep 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09SEP1.SGM 09SEP1 ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS