Vol. 78 Tuesday, No. 161 August 20, 2013

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Austin Blind and Jollyville Plateau Salamanders; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51328 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR by telephone 512–490–0057; or by Previous Federal Actions facsimile 512–490–0974. Persons who These actions are described in the Fish and Wildlife Service use a telecommunications device for the Previous Federal Actions section of the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal final listing rule published elsewhere in 50 CFR Part 17 Information Relay Service (FIRS) at today’s Federal Register. 800–877–8339. [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001; Background 4500030113] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For background information on the RIN 1018–AZ24 Executive Summary biology, taxonomy, distribution, and habitat of the Austin blind and Jollyville Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Why we need to publish a rule. Under and Plants; Designation of Critical Plateau salamanders, see the the Endangered Species Act, any species Background section of the final listing Habitat for the Austin Blind and that is determined to be a threatened or Jollyville Plateau Salamanders rule published on elsewhere in today’s endangered species requires critical Federal Register. habitat to be designated, to the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Summary of Comments and Interior. maximum extent prudent and determinable. Designations and Recommendations ACTION: Final rule. revisions of critical habitat can only be We requested written comments from SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and completed by issuing a rule. the public on the proposed designation Wildlife Service, designate critical This rule will designate 4,451 ac of critical habitat for the Austin blind habitat for the Austin blind salamander (1,801 ha) of critical habitat for the salamander and Jollyville Plateau (Eurycea waterlooensis) and Jollyville Austin blind salamander and Jollyville salamander during two comment Plateau salamander (Eurycea tonkawae) Plateau salamander. The critical habitat periods. The first comment period under the Endangered Species Act. In is located across 33 units within Travis associated with the publication of the total, approximately 4,451 acres (ac) and Williamson Counties, Texas. We are proposed rule (77 FR 50768) opened on (1,801 hectares (ha)) in Travis and designating the following amount of August 22, 2012, and closed on October Williamson Counties, Texas, fall within critical habitat for these two 22, 2012. We also requested comments the boundaries of the critical habitat salamanders: on the proposed critical habitat designation. The effect of this regulation • designation and associated draft Austin Blind salamander: 120 ac (49 economic analysis during a second is to conserve the Austin blind and ha) in 1 unit Jollyville Plateau salamanders’ habitat comment period that opened January • under the Endangered Species Act. Jollyville Plateau salamander: 4,331 25, 2013, and closed on March 11, 2013 ac (1,753 ha) in 32 units DATES: This rule becomes effective on (78 FR 5385). We held public meetings September 19, 2013. We have prepared an economic and hearings on September 5 and 6, 2012, in Round Rock and Austin, Texas, ADDRESSES: This final rule and final analysis of the designation of critical respectively. We also contacted economic analysis are available on the habitat. In order to consider economic appropriate Federal, State, and local Internet at http://www.regulations.gov impacts, we have prepared an analysis agencies; scientific organizations; and and http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ of the economic impacts of the critical other interested parties and invited AustinTexas/ at Docket No. FWS–R2– habitat designations and related factors. them to comment on the proposed rule ES–2013–0001. Comments and We announced the availability of the and draft economic analysis during materials received, as well as supporting draft economic analysis (DEA) in the Federal Register on January 15, 2013 these comment periods. documentation used in preparing this We received a total of approximately (78 FR 5385), allowing the public to final rule, are available for public 416 comments during the public provide comments on our analysis. We inspection, by appointment, during comment periods for the proposed have incorporated the comments and normal business hours, at U.S. Fish and listing rule, proposed critical habitat have completed the final economic Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological rule, and associated documents. All analysis (FEA) concurrently with this Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER substantive information provided final determination. INFORMATION CONTACT). during the comment periods has either The coordinates, plot points, or both, Peer review and public comment. We been incorporated directly into the final from which the maps are generated, are sought comments from independent critical habitat rule or addressed below. included in the administrative record specialists to ensure that our Comments from peer reviewers and for this critical habitat designation and designation is based on scientifically state agencies are grouped separately are available at http://www.fws.gov/ sound data and analyses. We obtained below. All other substantial public southwest/es/AustinTexas/, and opinions from 22 knowledgeable comments are grouped into general www.regulations.gov at Docket No. individuals with scientific expertise to issues specifically relating to the FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001, and at the review our technical assumptions, proposed critical habitat designation for Austin Ecological Services Field Office analysis, and whether or not we had these two salamander species. Beyond (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). used the best available information. the comments addressed below, several Any additional tools or supporting These peer reviewers generally commenters submitted additional information that we may develop for concurred with our methods and reports and references for our this critical habitat designation will also conclusions and provided additional consideration, which were reviewed be available at the three locations stated information, clarifications, and and incorporated into the critical habitat above. suggestions to improve this final rule. final rule as appropriate. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information we received from peer Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S. review is incorporated in this final Peer Review Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin revised designation. We also considered In accordance with our peer review Ecological Services Field Office, 10711 all comments and information received policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR Burnet Rd, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; during the comment periods. 34270), we solicited expert opinions

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51329

during the first comment period from 22 (2) Comment: One peer reviewer required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, knowledgeable individuals with stated that the 984-foot (ft) (300-meter we used the best scientific data scientific expertise with the hydrology, (m)) extent of salamander populations available to designate critical habitat. If taxonomy, and ecology that is important within the subsurface could be additional data become available in the to these salamander species. We increased to 3,281 ft (1,000 m), because future, the Secretary can revise the received responses from 13 of the peer this is the distance that larval Eurycea designation under the authority of reviewers. lucifiga (a related species) were found section 4(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act, as During the first comment period, we from a cave entrance. Another reviewer appropriate. received public comments that were in stated this distance could be increased (3) Comment: One reviewer provided disagreement with our proposed rule, to 20,013 ft (6,100 m) because this is the site-specific hydrologic information on and we also developed new information distance across which E. tridentifera Wheless Spring and Buttercup Creek- related to the listing decision. Therefore, (another related species) were observed area caves that they believed should be we conducted a second peer review on in the subsurface. Two reviewers stated considered when delineating subsurface (1) salamander demographics and (2) that using one distance for all sites is critical habitat. urban development and stream habitat. flawed because this distance does not Our Response: We have reviewed the During this second peer review, we consider site-specific hydrogeological information and determined that there solicited expert opinions from conditions and may greatly is not enough information to modify our knowledgeable individuals with underestimate or overestimate the true original 984-ft (300-m) circular expertise in the two areas identified amount of subsurface habitat. One subsurface designation for these sites above. We received responses from eight reviewer stated that the Service should without further long-term study. For peer reviewers. contract a basic hydrogeological study example, knowing a general Aside from the specific comments for each site. This study should include groundwater flow path of Wheless addressed below, peer reviewers from examination and analysis of Spring or Buttercup Creek caves does both comment periods generally agreed hydrogeological factors such as not preclude the flow of groundwater that the best available scientific lithology, fractures, morphologic and movement of salamanders in other information was used to develop the features, related karst features, flow directions to and from the site, and our proposed rule and the U.S. Fish and rates and behavior, cave maps, and the circular subsurface designation captures Wildlife Service’s (Service) analysis of development of a conceptual model of this possibility. the available information was the origin of each locality’s groundwater Comments From States scientifically sound. drainage system. Additionally the Section 4(i) of the Act states, ‘‘the Peer Reviewer Comments results of any groundwater tracer Secretary shall submit to the State (1) Comment: Several peer reviewers studies should be included. agency a written justification for his stated that there should be larger Our Response: The Northern Segment failure to adopt regulations consistent subsurface areas designated as critical of the Edwards Aquifer is poorly with the agency’s comments or habitat considering that these species studied and site-specific petition.’’ Comments received from the heavily rely upon subterranean habitat. hydrogeological information does not State regarding the proposal to designate One suggested that more emphasis be exist for most of the salamander sites. critical habitat for the Austin blind and placed on the Barton Springs and the However, we have reviewed the Jollyville Plateau salamanders are Northern Edwards segments of the available hydrogeological information addressed below. Edwards Aquifer because the recharge and determined that there is not enough (4) Comment: State Representative zones that allow water to enter these information to modify our original 984- Tony Dale, Texas Comptroller of Public segments of the aquifer support habitat ft (300-m) circular subsurface Accounts Susan Combs, United States for these species. Another suggested that designation without further long-term Senator John Cornyn, and United States the recharge and contributing zones of study. We acknowledge that related Representative John Carter all stated the aquifers be included in critical salamander species in Texas have that the draft economic analysis (DEA) habitat. subterranean populations that extend underestimates the economic impact of Our Response: In accordance with further than our designation. However, the listing and critical habitat section 3(5)(A) of the Endangered we are delineating the 984-ft (300-m) designation. These comments reference Species Act (Act), we are designating distance based upon the population impacts including increased cost of critical habitat in specific areas within extent of the Austin blind salamander. development, increased cost of the geographic area occupied by the We believe this species is the best transportation projects, increased traffic species at the time of listing that contain representation of the subterranean congestion, and decreased tax revenue the physical and biological features habits of the Jollyville Plateau as being omitted from the DEA. essential for the conservation of the salamander due to its genetic Our Response: As described in species and which may require special relatedness and geographic proximity to Chapter 2 of the DEA, the analysis management. We acknowledge that the the Jollyville Plateau salamander. Due to qualitatively describes the baseline recharge zone of the aquifers supporting time constraints and limited fiscal protections accorded the Austin blind salamander locations is very important resources, we are not able to conduct a and Jollyville Plateau salamanders to the conservation of the species. hydrogeological study for each site. absent critical habitat designation However, our goal with this critical Fully understanding all of the (including the listing of these species) habitat designation is to delineate the subsurface flow patterns and and monetizes the potential incremental habitat that is physically occupied and connections for every salamander site impacts precipitated specifically by the used by the species rather than will require numerous years of research. critical habitat designation. The Service delineate all land or aquatic areas that In addition, peer reviewers agreed that does not anticipate requesting influence the species. There is no it is acceptable to use and apply additional project modifications to evidence to support that the entire ecological information on closely avoid adverse modification of critical recharge zone of the aquifers is related species if species-specific habitat beyond those requested to avoid occupied by the salamander species. information is lacking. Therefore, as jeopardy to the species. Therefore,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51330 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

incremental impacts associated with the (8) Comment: The Texas Comptroller are considered to contain features designation of critical habitat are of Public Accounts states that the DEA essential to the conservation of these expected to be limited to administrative does not include a reasonable species. If additional data become costs of section 7 consultation and do comparison of costs and benefits. The available in the future, the Secretary can not include impacts, such as increased DEA should use existing studies and revise the designation under the cost of development, increased cost of procedures to describe biological authority of section 4(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the transportation, and decreased tax benefits in monetary terms. Act, as appropriate. Please see our revenue. Our Response: The primary purpose response to Comment 2 above. of this critical habitat designation is to (5) Comment: The Texas Comptroller Public Comments of Public Accounts stated that the DEA support the conservation of the Austin should consider the impact of regulatory blind and Jollyville Plateau salamander Critical Habitat Designation species. As described in Chapter 5 of the uncertainty. (11) Comment: Salamander critical DEA, quantification and monetization of Our Response: Chapter 2 of the DEA habitat is not determinable. The this conservation benefit requires notes that indirect impacts due to information sufficient to perform regulatory uncertainty may occur. The information on the incremental change in the probability of conservation required analyses of the impacts of the types of data necessary for quantifying designation is lacking and the biological costs associated with regulatory resulting from the critical habitat designation. Such information is not needs of the species are not sufficiently uncertainty, such as information linking well known to permit identification of public perceptions of regulation to available, and as a result, monetization of the primary benefit of critical habitat an area as critical habitat. The Service economic choices, are unavailable. As a makes numerous admissions that it does result, potential impacts due to designation is not possible. (9) Comment: The Texas Comptroller not understand the surface and regulatory uncertainty are described subsurface habitat needs of the qualitatively but cannot be monetized in of Public Accounts states that the DEA is unclear about whether the proposed salamanders, lacks specific ecological the DEA. critical habitat designation will result in and hydrogeological data, fails to (6) Comment: The Texas Comptroller any conservation benefit to the understand the biological needs of the of Public Accounts stated that the DEA salamanders. species, and repeatedly requests should use a lower discount rate to Our Response: The DEA discusses information on how the critical habitat reflect changes in the economy over the only economic benefits of the critical designation can be improved for the last decade. habitat designation. Conservation final rule. Also, the Service does not Our Response: In accordance with benefits of the critical habitat have enough species-specific OMB Circular A–4, the DEA evaluates designation, such as Federal regulatory information to determine what the incremental impacts using two discount protection and public education, are needs of each of the salamanders are rates. The body of the report presents described in the Exclusions section of and improperly uses other salamanders, results using a 7 percent discount rate. this final critical habitat rule. amphibians, and Eurycea species to Appendix B presents results using a 3 (10) Comment: The Texas Parks and determine critical habitat. percent discount rate for comparison. Wildlife Department (TPWD) Our Response: While we recognize (7) Comment: The Texas Department commented that the 984-ft (300-m) area the uncertainty inherent in identifying of Transportation asserts that the DEA proposed for subsurface critical habitat subsurface habitat boundaries for these underestimates costs associated with and the 164-ft (50-m) area proposed for two salamander species, we used the future transportation projects within surface habitat may not accurately best available scientific evidence at the critical habitat. Projects that occur represent the needs of the species. The time of this final rule to designate within critical habitat typically require methods of delineation described in the critical habitat, as required by the Act. significant engineering to avoid adverse proposed rule may over-represent Making a not determinable finding for modification of critical habitat. As an habitat in some case while under- critical habitat only delays the decision example, one 2008 project in Bexar representing it in others. Factors that for 1 year, after which we still have to County, Texas, resulted in incremental must be appropriately considered designate critical habitat, per the Act. project modification costs of include ground water recharge, drainage Fully understanding all of the approximately $2.3 million for the basins, flow routes, and springsheds subsurface flow patterns and construction of a 400-ft (122-m) section directly relevant to salamanders’ known connections for every salamander site of road. The DEA does not estimate life history. This analysis will likely will require numerous years of research. impacts associated with such costs. require evaluation of information In addition, peer reviewers agreed that Our Response: The Service does not derived from GIS analysis of surface it is acceptable to use and apply anticipate requesting additional project topography, potentiometric studies, dye ecological information on closely modifications to avoid adverse tracing, and data from the Texas related species if species-specific modification of critical habitat above Speleological Survey database information is lacking. those to avoid jeopardy to these species. (primarily cave maps). Methods for the (12) Comment: One commenter stated As a result, any project modification delineation of hydrogeologic areas in that because the Austin blind costs incurred for future transportation karst of the Edwards Aquifer can be salamander is unlike the Jollyville projects are assumed to occur in the found in Veni (2003). Plateau salamander in its exclusive use baseline and are not quantified in the Our Response: Due to time constraints of deep aquifer habitat it is analysis. However, text has been added and our limited fiscal resources, we are inappropriate to use Austin blind to Section 4.4 of the final economic not able to conduct a hydrogeological salamander ecological habits for the analysis (FEA) noting the potential for evaluation for each site. Based on our delineation of all the proposed critical large incremental costs if additional review, the critical habitat areas habitat units for the Jollyville Plateau engineering is required to avoid adverse constitute our best assessment at this salamander. modification of critical habitat by time of areas that are within the Our Response: We disagree that the transportation projects beyond that to geographical range occupied by at least Austin blind salamander is unlike the avoid jeopardy. one of the two salamander species and Jollyville Plateau salamander,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51331

considering that this species has cave (15) Comment: It is improper and, in actually say what size rock is needed or populations that live exclusively in fact, damaging to both the Service and how many such rocks are needed and in subterranean habitats. Furthermore, the Act for the Service to cast critical what configuration. peer reviewers agreed that it is habitat designation over age-restricted, Our Response: Our description of the acceptable to use and apply ecological residential homes and then narratively PCEs has been updated in the final information on closely related species if state that those homes are excluded critical habitat rule, and we believe that species-specific information is lacking. from critical habitat. If the Service does they are accurate and sufficiently (13) Comment: The Service has not not intend to include improvements and detailed. While we have specified rock demonstrated that salamanders actually developed areas in critical habitat, it size needed by these species, the occupy the entirety of critical habitat should draw them out on properly changes we made do not address what units. Except where the Service has scaled maps. water quality levels actually exert lethal actual data on downstream occupation, Our Response: Removing developed or sublethal effects on the salamanders the only area it can designate as critical areas from our critical habitat maps is or the number or configuration of rocks habitat is the occupied spring outlet. not practical with current mapping because this information is unknown. There is no evidence of the extent of technologies. Because we are unable to (18) Comment: The proposed rule occupied subterranean habitat. This delineate specific stream segments on improperly designates critical habitat approach is legally insufficient and the map due to the small size of the units in heavily developed areas that the arbitrary because it circumvents the streams, we drew a circle with a 262-ft Service acknowledges do not contain Service’s obligation to identify critical (80-m) radius representing the extent the necessary elements for the habitat that is occupied at the time a the surface critical habitat of the site conservation of both salamanders. The species is listed. exists upstream and downstream. Any Service acknowledges that some critical Our Response: We believe the such lands left inside surface critical habitat units contain only some proposed and final critical habitat rules habitat boundaries shown on the maps elements of the physical or biological are legally sufficient. Based on the best of this final rule have been excluded by features necessary to support Austin available scientific evidence at the time text in the final rule and are not blind and Jollyville Plateau of this final rule, the surface critical designated as critical habitat. Therefore, salamanders. It is legally improper for habitat component was delineated by a Federal action involving these lands the Service to designate areas that do starting with the spring point locations would not trigger section 7 consultation not contain the PCEs as critical habitat that are occupied by the salamanders with respect to critical habitat and the at time of designation. and extending a line upstream and requirement of no adverse modification Our Response: Occupied critical downstream 262 ft (80 m), because this unless the specific action would affect habitat always contains at least one or is the farthest a salamander has been the physical or biological features in the more of the physical or biological observed from a spring outlet. The underground or surface critical habitat features that provide for some life- subsurface critical habitat was (see the Application of the ‘‘Adverse history needs of the listed species. delineated based on evidence that Modification’’ Standard section of the However, an area of critical habitat may suggests the salamander population can final critical habitat rule). In addition, be in a degraded condition and not extend at least 984 ft (300 m) from the most of our critical habitat is a contain all physical and biological spring opening through underground subsurface designation and only features or PCEs at the time it is conduits. We defined an area as includes the physical area beneath any designated, or those features or elements occupied based upon the reliable buildings on the surface. may be present but in a degraded or less observation of a salamander species by (16) Comment: A study by the City of than optimal condition. In the case of a a knowledgeable scientist. Although we Austin suggests that obvious, discrete highly urbanized salamander site, some do not have data for every site spring orifices are not the sole habitat of PCEs such as rocky substrate and access indicating that a salamander was the Jollyville Plateau salamander. These to the subsurface habitat may be observed 262 ft (80 m) downstream, we salamanders have been documented to present, even if the water quality PCE is believe it is reasonable to consider the move at least 262 ft (80 m) upstream and not. Salamander populations at downstream habitat occupied based on downstream from a spring opening, degraded sites, such as these, have the dispersal capabilities observed in which is significantly farther than lower probabilities of persistence than individuals of the same species or very reported in the proposed rule. However, undeveloped sites; however, their similar species. See the Criteria Used To this 262-ft (80-m) distance is likely an probabilities of persistence may increase Identify Critical Habitat section in the underestimate of the dispersal where the ability exists to develop, final critical habitat rule for more capabilities of these salamanders. restore, or improve functionality of information. Our Response: We have incorporated certain PCEs. We consider these sites to (14) Comment: The proposed rule this new information into our final meet the definition of critical habitat does not name the scientist who surface critical habitat designation. See because they are occupied at the time of identified salamanders at each site or the Criteria Used To Identify Critical listing and contain those physical or the date that the observations were Habitat section in the final critical biological features essential to the made. habitat rule for more information. conservation of the species, which may Our Response: We do not believe that require special management this level of detail is needed in the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) considerations or protections. rulemaking. However, all materials used (17) Comment: The Service has (19) Comment: By drawing a circle in preparation of this rule are available improperly identified the physical or with a radius of 984 feet (300 m) around for inspection, by appointment, during biological features essential to the springs, the Service appears to be taking normal business hours, at U.S. Fish and conservation of the species. PCE 1 is the position that urban areas that Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological meaningless and legally insufficient contain 55 percent or more impervious Services Field Office,10711 Burnet Rd, because there are no parameters cover are beneficial and are essential for Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; by describing what water quality levels the conservation of the species. This is telephone 512–490–0057; or by actually exert lethal or sublethal effects in direct conflict with the threats facsimile 512–490–0974. on the salamanders. PCE 2 does not analysis performed by the Service. If a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51332 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

highly urbanized area that has been language accordingly in the final listing not to remove threats for the species, but developed for 30 to 40 years and has and critical habitat rules. is instead to identify those areas more than 55 percent impervious cover (22) Comment: Water temperatures for occupied by the species at the time it is with no water quality controls is Jollyville Plateau salamander sites have listed on which are found those considered to contain features essential a greater range than presented in the physical or biological features essential for the conservation of the Jollyville proposed rule. For example, one to the conservation of the species and Plateau salamander, then it is pretty undeveloped Jollyville Plateau which may require special management clear that this area does not require salamander spring (Cistern) has a or protection. While our designation of special management considerations or temperature range from 66.4 to 73.4 critical habitat does not remove the protection. degrees Fahrenheit (F) (19.1 to 23.0 threat from urban development, for Our Response: Please see our degrees Celsius (C)). example, it does identify those areas response to Comment 18 above. Special Our Response: The PCEs for the that are critical to the conservation of management considerations or Jollyville Plateau salamander have been the species, which provides awareness protection may be needed for highly updated to incorporate this broader about occupied sites to nearby urbanized areas in order to develop, temperature range. landowners and land managers, and it restore, or improve functionality of (23) Comment: On pg. 50809, the informs them that they should consider certain PCEs. proposed rule stipulates: ‘‘During their impacts on those sites. A critical (20) Comment: The proposed rule periods of drought or dewatering on the habitat designation does not signal that does not list or describe the PCEs for surface in and around spring sites, areas outside the designated area is subterranean critical habitat. Further, it access to the subsurface water table unimportant or may not need to be does not describe how subterranean must exist to provide shelter and managed or conserved for recovery of critical habitat might be adversely protection.’’ The Austin blind the species. We acknowledge that areas modified or identify the potential salamander is an almost entirely outside our critical habitat designations, threats to the subterranean critical subterranean species so subterranean such as the recharge zone of the aquifers habitat. habitat is critically important, regardless supporting salamander locations, are Our Response: The PCEs have been of whether drought conditions exist or very important to the conservation of clarified in this final rule to reflect not. However, we also believe this to be the species. However, our goal with this different PCEs for the surface and true for all proposed species, that the critical habitat designation is to subsurface habitats. A description of subterranean habitat is a critical delineate the habitat that is physically how critical habitat may be adversely component necessary for survival of occupied and used by the species rather modified is found in the Application of each species. All central Texas Eurycea, than delineate all land or aquatic areas the ‘‘Adverse Modification’’ Standard with the possible exception of that influence the species. (26) Comment: Some commenters section of the final critical habitat rule. Typholomolge (E. rathbuni, E. pointed out that dye trace studies Regarding threats to the subsurface waterlooensis, E. robusta; Hillis et al. 2001), depend heavily on both surface conducted by the City of Austin indicate habitat, we described different scenarios subsurface flow in the Jollyville Plateau under which subsurface habitat could and subsurface habitat. This dependency is evidenced by natural area is generally to the north, east, and be destroyed or degraded under Factor northeast. Another dye trace study A: The Present or Threatened history observations such as (1) absence of eggs laid in surface habitat (Nathan conducted by the City of Austin Destruction, Modification, or indicates that groundwater flow is Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range in Bendik and Laurie Dries, City of Austin, personal observation), (2) use of strongly influenced by the regional dip. the final listing rule that published By the nature of water flow, elevations elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. subterranean habitat as refugia (Bendik and Gluesenkamp 2012, entire), as well lower than the elevation of a spring (21) Comment: The Jollyville Plateau outlet in this area cannot recharge the salamander is not confined to springs as the distribution of numerous ‘‘surface’’ species (i.e., have well- spring. Furthermore, no activities discharging from only the Edwards downgradient or downstream of a spring formation. There is at least one developed eyes and pigmentation) occurring in both springs and caves can adversely impact that spring. significant Jollyville Plateau salamander Therefore, critical habitat should not be site in a spring that discharges from the (Chippindale et al. 2000). Our Response: These comments were designated below the elevation of a Walnut formation (Ribelin Spring), incorporated in the final critical habitat spring outlet. another in the Glen Rose (Pit Spring), rule. Our Response: We are designating and another that appears to be alluvial subsurface areas that may be occupied (Lanier Spring). Additionally, water Uniform Critical Habitat Designations by the salamander species, and we from the Trinity aquifer and Blanco (24) Comment: Several commenters assume salamanders are capable of River contribute to the Barton Springs stated that we did not take site-specific moving upgradient (against subsurface segment discharge (Johnson et al. 2012), hydrogeologic features into account flow) just as they move upstream on the highlighting the importance of these when delineating critical habitat. surface. In general, we agree that it is water sources as well. Tritium data Our Response: Please see our less likely that downgradient activities documents that groundwater at the response to Comment 2 above. would adversely change water quality or Edwards/Walnut contact is pre-modern (25) Comment: Several commenters quantity in a spring compared to in age (recharged prior to about 1950) stated that our critical habitat upgradient activities. However, because whereas the springs and creeks designations were not sufficiently large the subsurface is karst, the exact extent generally contain modern water enough to protect the species from of groundwater recharge areas is (recharged after about 1950). This threats that could impact habitat from difficult to predict without extensive suggests that many springs are not outside critical habitat boundaries, such long-term studies. In the absence of directly connected to the shallow as urban development in the watershed. these types of studies, we cannot be groundwater table. Our Response: See our response to certain that an area a short distance Our Response: We agree with this Comment 1 above. In addition, the downgradient does not contain assessment and have edited the purpose of designating critical habitat is subsurface habitat connected to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51333

spring in some way. It is possible that Buttercup Creek, Grandview Hills, and coverage. For more on the weighing of activities downgradient of a spring Ribelin Ranch HCPs by the HCP permit the benefits of inclusion with the could impact that spring. For example, holders. benefits of exclusion for these areas, see a pumping well on one side of a Our Response: See the Exclusions the Exclusions section in the final drainage, if pumped long enough, or at Based on Other Relevant Impacts critical habitat rule. a sufficiently high rate (or a section in the final critical habitat rule (30) Comment: The City of Austin combination of these), can draw down for our discussion related to areas stated that there is no benefit to the water table causing a spring on the excluded under the Four Points, excluding critical habitat for the Austin opposite side of a drainage to go dry or Buttercup Creek, and Grandview Hills blind salamander based on the plan area flow at a lower rate. HCPs. Regarding the Ribelin Ranch of the City of Austin’s Barton Springs (27) Comment: Krienke Springs has an HCP, the permittee permanently HCP. additional recharge feature located preserved golden-cheeked warbler Our Response: We agree with this downstream, outside of the critical (Setophaga chrysoparia) habitat onsite, assessment. At the time of the proposed habitat Unit 1. We recommend which includes Jollyville Plateau rule, we proposed critical habitat for the extending Jollyville Plateau salamander salamander occupied springs. The Austin blind salamander in this area, critical habitat Unit 1 downstream to permittee committed to xeriscaping and but considered excluding lands under include this recharge feature. replanting developed areas with native the Barton Springs HCP. However, in Our Response: Please see our vegetation, installing fences between accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the response to Comment 1 regarding why developed areas and preserves, and Act, we have determined not to exclude we are not designating critical habitat in restricting access to the preserves to lands under the Barton Springs HCP and areas that are both not occupied by the authorized personnel only. However, to designate critical habitat for the species and do not contain the physical the Ribelin Ranch HCP does not include Austin blind salamander in this area in and biological features essential for the the Jollyville Plateau salamander as a the final critical habitat rule. conservation of the species. covered species and states that: (1) (31) Comment: One commenter stormwater runoff from developed areas requested exclusion of the Knox Tract in Exclusions will enter Bull Creek and West Bull Jollyville Plateau salamander critical (28) Comment: Several requests for Creek (Section 3.5); (2) some habitat Unit 30 because it is not exclusion and comments were made degradation of water quality may occur essential to the conservation of the about specific habitat conservation due to runoff, which may negatively species due to the amount of plans (HCPs): impact the salamander (Sections 5.1.1.2, development in the area, and the (1) Four Points has voluntarily 5.1.1.9, 5.1.2.7, 5.1.2.9); and (3) benefits of exclusion outweigh the addressed the Jollyville Plateau increased impervious cover may result benefits of inclusion. The benefits of salamander in their HCP and employs in a decrease in spring flows in Bull and exclusion include avoiding financial measures to avoid, minimize, and West Bull creek drainages (Section impacts to a small developer. mitigate for potential impacts to the 5.1.1.7, 5.1.2.7). Additionally, the Our Response: We have evidence that Jollyville Plateau salamander that may commenter stated that the high school some of the PCEs are present at this site, occur on the property, thereby satisfying upstream of the spring will be such as rocky substrate and access to permit issuance criteria under section expanding in the future. Because the subsurface habitat. Special management 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act if the species were Jollyville Plateau salamander is not a is needed to protect the PCEs that are to become listed in the future; covered species under the Ribelin present within this unit. Regarding (2) the Buttercup Creek HCP is stated Ranch HCP and the conservation whether or not Unit 30 is essential to as not covering the Jollyville Plateau measures do not significantly benefit the the conservation of Jollyville Plateau salamander when in fact it does and species, we determined that the benefits salamanders, salamander populations at with ‘‘no surprises’’ assurances. Along of excluding Ribelin Ranch from critical degraded sites such as these have lower with development of the Buttercup habitat do not outweigh the benefits of probabilities of persistence than Creek HCP, the Service and Forestar including this area. undeveloped sites. The commenter did entered into a Permit Implementing and (29) Comment: The Service ignores not specify the benefits of including the Preserve Management Agreement, most HCPs already in place. Those areas unit in our critical habitat designation. which fulfills the criteria in the protected by HCPs, management plans, We think those benefits include proposed rule to ameliorate threats to and water quality programs do not educational and regulatory benefits the Jollyville Plateau salamander; require special management or afforded to all of our critical habitat (3) the Grandview Hills HCP covers protection because water quality designations (see comment 28 above). land within critical habitat Unit 14, programs and other HCPs within the We conducted a final economic analysis which contains three springs that are area provide substantial management that considered how small businesses occupied by the Jollyville Plateau considerations and protection. might be affected by the critical habitat salamander, which are covered under Our Response: In designating critical designation. Based on the expected the Tomen-Parke Associates, LTD habitat, we identified areas, per the number of consultations, this analysis 10(a)(1)(B) permit with ‘‘no surprises’’ definition of critical habitat in the Act, estimated the cost per small developer assurances for the Jollyville Plateau occupied by one of these species of ranges from 0.05 to 0.09 percent of the salamander; and salamander on which are found annual revenue of the average small (4) Ribelin Ranch HCP covers a physical or biological features (a) developer ($4.6 million). Therefore, we substantial portion of critical habitat essential to their conservation, and (b) concluded that the final critical habitat Unit 17, and although the Jollyville which may require special management rule would not result in a significant Plateau salamander is not a covered considerations or protection. We did economic impact on small developers. species under this HCP, it does provide consider and exclude all HCPs that More specifically, our analysis numerous conservation measures that specifically covered the Austin blind or estimated the incremental impact to significantly benefit the species. Jollyville Plateau salamanders in their Unit 30 could be $940,000 over the next Requests for exclusion from critical HCP and for which the Service issued 23 years, due to the administrative cost habitat were made for Four Points, a permit and provided ‘‘No Surprises’’ of consultation (Industrial Economics

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51334 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

2013, p. 4–14). Furthermore, the Our Response: At the time the in areas downstream of proposed designation of critical habitat does not proposed rule was published for the critical habitat. Text has been added to impose a legally binding duty on non- four central Texas salamanders on Chapter 4 of the FEA clarifying the Federal government entities or private August 22, 2012, we lacked the uncertainty associated with this parties. Under the Act, the only available economic information assumption. regulatory effect is that Federal agencies necessary to complete the draft For the purposes of assessing impacts must ensure that their actions do not economic analysis. However, upon to the sites from impervious cover, the destroy or adversely modify critical completion of the draft economic Service did revise the surface habitat under section 7 consultation. analysis, we published a notice of watersheds that were presented in the While non-Federal entities that receive availability of the draft economic proposed rule. The revised surface Federal funding, assistance, or permits, analysis for the designation of critical watersheds were delineated to capture or that otherwise require approval or habitat for these species on January 25, only the area draining directly into the authorization from a Federal agency for 2013 (78 FR 5385) and reopened the surface habitat of specific sites (Service an action, may be indirectly impacted public comment period for the proposed 2013). by the designation of critical habitat, the designation. The draft economic (36) Comment: One commenter legally binding duty to avoid analysis was available for public review believes that the DEA contradicts itself destruction or adverse modification of and comment for 45 days, beginning on by first indicating that water critical habitat rests squarely on the January 25, 2013, and ending on March management activities are not a threat to Federal agency. 11, 2013. the Jollyville Plateau salamander but are (32) Comment: Several commenters Our current regulation at 50 CFR a threat to the Austin blind salamander requested exclusion of critical habitat 424.19 states: ‘‘The Secretary shall (paragraph 26 of the DEA), then stating units (Units 3, 14, 17, and 31 for the identify any significant activities that that water management activities are a Jollyville Plateau salamander) due to would either affect an area considered threat later (paragraph 135). significant economic impacts, stating for designation as critical habitat or be Our Response: Paragraph 26 of the that these economic costs will far likely to be affected by the designation, DEA states that ‘‘Construction of dams exceed any limited educational and and shall, after proposing designation of and impoundments alter the natural regulatory benefits. such an area, consider the probable hydrological regime and may negatively economic and other impacts of the Our Response: We have considered affect salamander habitat. In particular, designation upon proposed or ongoing the economic impacts of designation to the entire range of the Austin blind activities.’’ The Service interprets ’after all parties through an economic analysis salamander has been affected by the proposing’ to mean after publication of and have determined that this construction of impoundments for the proposed critical habitat rule. While designation will not result in significant recreational purposes in the Barton we have proposed a revision to these economic impacts. According to our Springs system.’’ Providing this regulations to change the timing of the draft economic analysis, the total example for the Austin blind economic analysis, we still follow our economic cost of designating critical salamander was not meant to downplay current practice until such regulation the significance of water management as habitat Units 3 and 14 was estimated to revision is finalized. be $3.4 million and $120,000, (35) Comment: Some commenters a threat to the Jollyville Plateau respectively, over the next 23 years. The stated that the surface watersheds salamander. Clarifying language has total economic cost of designating draining into critical habitat areas were been added to the FEA. critical habitat Unit 17 was estimated to not delineated correctly in the DEA. The (37) Comment: One commenter states be $380,000 over the next 23 years. The DEA includes areas a great distance that the DEA does not correctly identify total economic cost of designating downgradient of salamander habitat that the watersheds associated with critical habitat Unit 31 was estimated to are extremely unlikely to impact habitat. proposed critical habitat. In particular, be $930,000 over the next 23 years. All Our Response: As described in the the proposed unit for the Austin blind of these costs are administrative in proposed rule, activities occurring salamander should be associated with nature and result from the consideration upstream of salamander habitat may the Barton Creek watershed rather than of adverse modification in section 7 result in increased flow rates, the Lake Austin watershed. consultations (Industrial Economics sedimentation, contamination, changes Our Response: The DEA verifies 2013, Exhibit 4–5). In addition, we in stream morphology and water information provided in the proposed concluded that the critical habitat final chemistry, and decreased groundwater rule using GIS data for HUC–12 rule would not result in a significant recharge. Therefore, economic activity watersheds. According to GIS data, the economic impact on a substantial may affect proposed critical habitat for proposed unit for the Austin blind number of small entities (see Regulatory the salamanders even if the activity salamander is located within the Lake Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) occurs beyond the boundary of the Austin HUC–12 watershed. section in the final critical habitat rule). proposed designation. The (38) Comment: One commenter notes (33) Comment: Clarify if a Four Points identification of upstream areas requires that the DEA refers to the Town Lake HCP exclusion includes the location of detailed analysis of hydrologic and watershed, which has since been the Four Points shaft. geographic information. This type of renamed the Lady Bird Lake watershed. Our Response: The Four Points HCP analysis is beyond the scope of the DEA. Our Response: A footnote has been exclusion does not include the Four However, to avoid understating impacts, added to the FEA indicating that Town Points shaft location because the shaft is the DEA makes the simplifying Lake was renamed Lady Bird Lake by not located within the area that was assumption that activities occurring the City of Austin City Council on July proposed as critical habitat. throughout the entire watershed 26, 2007. associated with each proposed critical (39) Comment: One commenter notes Draft Economic Analysis (DEA) habitat unit may affect the salamanders that the DEA refers to the entire range (34) Comment: The DEA should have and their habitat. This assumption may of the Austin blind salamander as being been published at the same time as the overstate impacts in cases where affected by impoundment construction; proposed rule. significant economic activity is forecast however, the subterranean range is not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51335

known. This comment suggests referring part of the Edwards Aquifer Protection records and interviews with field office instead to ‘‘the entire known range.’’ Program may provide some benefit to staff); telephone interviews with action Our Response: The text of the FEA the Jollyville Plateau salamander and its agency staff (for example, the Bureau of has been changed as suggested. habitat. The information provided in the Land Management, Forest Service, U.S. (40) Comment: One commenter comment is consistent with this Army Corps of Engineers); and provides clarification that the City of statement. Additional clarification has telephone interviews with private Austin has submitted an amended been added to the FEA to indicate that consultants who perform work in Barton Springs HCP to the Service that not all areas occupied by the Jollyville support of permittees. In the case of includes the Austin blind salamander as Plateau salamander will benefit from Service and other Federal agency a covered species. this program. contacts, we determined the typical Our Response: Chapters 2 and 3 of the (45) Comment: One commenter states level of effort (hours or days of work) DEA note that the Barton Springs Pool that the DEA incorrectly claims that the required to complete several different HCP is currently undergoing revision to Jollyville Plateau salamander is not a types of consultations, as well as the add the Austin blind salamander as a covered species under the Buttercup typical Government Service (GS) level covered species. Creek HCP. of the staff member performing this (41) Comment: One commenter Our Response: The Jollyville Plateau work. In the case of private consultants, provides new information about the salamander is identified as ‘‘Eurycea we interviewed representatives of firms Water Quality Protection Lands program new species’’ in the Buttercup Creek in California and New England to overseen by the Wildlands Conservation HCP and was later identified as the determine the typical cost charged to Division of the Austin Water Utility. Jollyville Plateau salamander. This clients for these efforts (for example, This program provides baseline correction has been made in the biological survey, preparation of protection to the Austin blind description of baseline protections in materials to support a Biological salamander by purchasing open space the FEA. Assessment). The model is periodically within the Barton Springs Zone. (46) Comment: One commenter states updated with new information received Our Response: Text has been added to that the claim made in paragraph 92 of in the course of data collection efforts Chapter 3 of the FEA describing this the DEA that ‘‘there are currently no supporting economic analyses and conservation program. known local statutes or regulations that public comment on more recent critical (42) Comment: One commenter states directly protect the species’’ is habitat rules. In particular, the that the DEA should not include costs inaccurate and contradicted later in administrative costs used in the DEA to protect the Austin blind salamander Section 3.3 of the DEA. were updated based on information Our Response: This statement is and its habitat that result from provided in the Service’s incremental meant to convey the fact that at the time protection of the co-occurring Barton memorandum, included as Appendix C the DEA was written, we were not aware Springs salamander under the Barton of the DEA. In addition, the GS rates of any statutes or regulations with the Springs Pool HCP. have been updated annually. Our Response: Costs associated with primary purpose of protecting the (49) Comment: One commenter states baseline conservation, such as that Austin blind or Jollyville Plateau that formal section 7 consultations will provided by the Barton Springs Pool salamanders. However, many local take up to 4 years to complete and HCP, are not quantified in the DEA. To measures provide ancillary protection to involve multiple rounds of project clarify, the DEA estimates present-value the species. This sentence has been review and revision, resulting in higher incremental impacts of approximately removed from the FEA. $43,000 in the area currently covered by (47) Comment: Multiple comments consultation costs than those applied in the Barton Springs Pool HCP. Of this express concern that the DEA overstates the DEA. cost, approximately $42,000 is incremental costs associated with Our Response: The length of the associated with the ongoing critical habitat designation by formal consultation process is specified programmatic reinitiation of forecasting reinitiations of section 7 under the Act. In particular, the Federal consultation for the Barton Springs Pool consultations for existing HCPs. action agency has 180 days to complete HCP. The remainder of forecast impacts Our Response: The DEA the biological assessment, the Service is associated with formal consultation conservatively assumes that has 90 days to formulate their biological on a small number of residential consultations on HCPs will be opinion and incidental take statement, development projects. reinitiated to avoid underestimating and both parties have 45 days to review (43) Comment: The DEA mistakenly costs associated with the proposed and finalize the biological opinion. referred to Schlumberger, Ltd. as the designation. In some cases, HCP Therefore, in total we do not anticipate current permittee of the Concordia HCP. permittees may not decide to amend the formal consultation process lasting Our Response: The most recent their permits, thus not requiring the longer than approximately 11 months. amendment to this HCP issued the Service to reinitiate consultation to (50) Comment: One commenter permit to Concordia University Texas at include coverage of the salamanders and asserts that the DEA underestimates the Austin, as noted in the comment. The their associated critical habitat. portion of the cost of section 7 FEA has been revised accordingly. Language has been added to the FEA consultation attributable to the (44) Comment: One commenter notes indicating this possibility. designation of critical habitat (that is, that the Edwards Aquifer Protection (48) Comment: Multiple commenters the incremental cost). The commenter Program established by the Texas state that the DEA understates the cost states that critical habitat designation Commission on Environmental Quality of section 7 consultation. will substantially increase the time and does not cover the Jollyville Plateau Our Response: The DEA relies on the effort involved in section 7 consultation. salamander’s entire habitat. In best available information on The commenter bases this assertion on particular, the majority of the Bull Creek administrative costs. As described in the fact that it is relatively simple to watershed is not protected by this Exhibit 2–1 of the DEA, the consultation arrive at a non-jeopardy opinion for program. cost model is based on: data gathered projects affecting salamanders at only Our Response: The DEA states that from three Service field offices one or two locations, but any action conservation measures implemented as (including a review of consultation involving impacts to critical habitat

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51336 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

would likely result in a finding of designation of critical habitat will result results in a forecast that assumes more adverse modification. in negative impacts to existing and land being developed by 2035. Our Response: While the comment is future development through the (55) Comment: One commenter takes noted by the Service, we do not believe imposition of burdensome Federal issue with the use of the City of Austin’s that the designation of critical habitat regulation. The commenters assert that data on site plan cases in the will substantially increase the time and these regulations could potentially development analysis. The commenter effort involved in section 7 consultation. reduce the number of homes and states that site plan cases are solely used In particular, because the conditions businesses built, increase the cost to for small, nonresidential development, under which jeopardy and adverse own property, and decrease the city’s and use of this data ignores, and, modification may occur are so similar tax base. therefore, excludes all residential and closely related, the Service does not Our Response: In Section 4.2, the DEA development from the analysis. expect the designation of critical habitat acknowledges that the City of Cedar Our Response: As described in to substantially increase the cost of Park is rapidly growing and that Section 4.2.3 of the DEA, the data on consultation. potential effects on the regional real development site plan cases is used (51) Comment: One commenter estate market may occur. However, only to calculate average project size indicates that in the context of section these effects would be considered within the study area. This data is not 7 consultation on development baseline impacts because conservation used to limit the areas affected by the activities, preparation of the biological efforts recommended by the Service are proposed critical habitat designation or assessment will most likely be paid for assumed to occur due to the listing of the type of development affected by the by the private developer or land owner. the species and not the designation of proposed critical habitat designation. Assuming otherwise leads to an critical habitat. The DEA focuses on the Because of the narrow focus of site plan underestimate of impacts to third incremental impacts of the critical cases (that is, small, nonresidential parties in the DEA and an underestimate habitat designation and does not development), the FEA uses a modified of impacts to small businesses in the quantify impacts associated with the assumption of average project size. SBREFA analysis. listing of the salamanders. As described (56) Comment: One commenter states Our Response: In our FEA of the in Chapter 2 of the DEA, incremental that the DEA does not estimate impacts critical habitat designation, we impacts of the critical habitat associated with activities in upstream evaluated the potential economic effects designation are limited to the areas that may affect critical habitat. The on small business entities resulting from administrative cost of section 7 commenter goes on to state that the conservation actions related to the consultation. These administrative costs analysis incorrectly excludes listing of the Austin blind and Jollyville are not considered high relative to real incremental impacts on over 90 percent Plateau salamanders and the estate development value, and therefore, of the lands included in the study area. designation of critical habitat. The FEA are not expected to have an effect on Our Response: As first described in has been modified to reflect the fact that real estate markets. paragraph 3 of the executive summary preparation of the biological assessment (53) Comment: One comment states to the DEA, the study area for the will most likely be paid for by the third that the designation of critical habitat analysis is defined as all lands within party participants to a consultation. could significantly affect the planned the watersheds containing areas This change leads to an increase in the Leander Transit Oriented Development proposed for critical habitat designation. impact on small businesses in the by requiring low-density development This broad definition of the study area SBREFA analysis. The FEA estimates to avoid adverse modification of critical is meant to capture the effect that that 6,853 small developers across the habitat. conditions in the areas surrounding the study area will be affected by this rule. Our Response: The DEA addresses critical habitat units have on water Based on the expected number of impacts to development in Section 4.2. quality and quantity in salamander consultations, the cost per developer Because the Service does not anticipate habitat. Exhibit 4–4 in the DEA provides ranges from 0.05 to 0.09 percent of the requesting additional project information on the projected acres of annual revenue of the average small modifications to avoid adverse development within the watersheds developer ($4.6 million). The FEA modification of critical habitat beyond outside of the proposed critical habitat estimates that two small surface mining those requested to avoid jeopardy to the units as context for the area of land that businesses will each incur $880 in species, any impacts resulting from may be developed within the proposed administrative costs. This represents restrictions on development density designation. In the DEA, development is less than 0.01 percent of their average would occur in the baseline due to the restricted to vacant parcels not currently annual revenue ($10 million). Finally, listing of the species. Therefore, such preserved in perpetuity. the FEA estimates that nine small HCP impacts are not quantified in the DEA. (57) Comment: One comment states permittees will be impacted by the rule Incremental impacts associated with the that the DEA underestimates impacts to at a cost of approximately $6,925 per designation of critical habitat are development activities by failing to permittee. This cost represents less than expected to be limited to administrative consider the economic impact of one percent of the annual revenues, costs of section 7 consultation. restricting development. assuming the average annual revenue is (54) Comment: One commenter Our Response: Section 4.2 of the DEA $1.1 million (Industrial Economics indicates that the assumption made in does consider the economic impact of 2013, pp. A–6, A–7, A–8). Based on the the DEA that only vacant land develops restricting development. However, as above reasoning and currently available is invalid. The commenter explains that described in this section, all information, we concluded that this rule land currently classified for agriculture, conservation efforts recommended as would not result in a significant ranch, and farm uses may also be part of section 7 consultation would be economic impact on a substantial developed in the future. recommended absent critical habitat number of small entities. Our Response: The development designation. These baseline (52) Comment: Two commenters note analysis has been modified in the FEA conservation efforts may include that the City of Cedar Park and the to include agriculture, ranch, and farm restricting future development within surrounding area are rapidly growing. land in addition to vacant land as certain areas and establishing protected The commenters are concerned that the potentially developable. This change preserves to offset water quality

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51337

impacts. The DEA focuses on Our Response: A critical habitat salamander has been observed from a quantifying the incremental impacts of designation does not signal that habitat spring outlet. However, in this final the critical habitat designation and, outside the designated area is rule, we revised surface critical habitat therefore, does not quantify the unimportant or may not to be managed to include 262 ft (80 m) of stream economic impact of restricting or conserved for recovery of the species. habitat upstream and downstream from development due to the listing of the Areas that are important to the known salamander sites. This revision species. conservation of the species, both inside is based on a recent study completed by and outside the critical habitat the City of Austin (Bendik 2013, pers. Other Comments designation, will continue to be subject comm.) and is the farthest a Jollyville (58) Comment: The Service has not to: (1) Conservation actions Plateau salamander has been observed met its burden for identifying how the implemented under section 7(a)(1) of from a spring outlet. Due to their similar proposed critical habitat units may the Act, (2) regulatory protections life histories, this knowledge was require special management. The afforded by the requirement in section applied to the Austin blind salamander. Service makes the same generic 7(a)(2) of the Act for Federal agencies to Because the surface designation is statement regarding special management ensure their actions are not likely to contained within the extent of the that it does for nearly all of the critical jeopardize the continued existence of subsurface critical habitat, this habitat units in the proposed rule: ‘‘This any endangered or threatened species, expansion did not increase the total critical habitat unit requires special and (3) section 9 of the Act’s acreage of critical habitat. management because of the potential for prohibitions on taking any individual of Based on new information that we did groundwater pollution from current and the species, including taking caused by not have at the time of publication of future development in the watershed, actions that affect habitat. Federally the proposed rule or the revised potential for vandalism, and depletion funded or permitted projects outside of proposed rule and notice of availability of groundwater.’’ The Service does not designated critical habitat areas may on January 25, 2013, we made a number identify the sources of potential still result in jeopardy or in adverse of changes to our critical habitat units. groundwater pollution or the magnitude effects on areas within critical habitat, if We moved the location of Brushy Creek of this threat. This does not meet the those activities are affecting the critical Spring (Jollyville Plateau salamander burden under the Cape Hatteras or habitat. critical habitat Unit 2) approximately 98 Home Builders case, which stated ft (30 m) to more accurately mark the Summary of Changes From Proposed location of this spring. We also removed ‘‘Rather than discuss how each Rule identified PCE would need management several units, which has resulted in a During the second comment period protection, the Service lists activities discontinuous list of unit numbers for (January 25 to March 11, 2013), we that once resulted in consultation and the Jollyville Plateau salamander (see notified the public of changes to the makes a conclusory statement that TABLE 3 later in this document). proposed critical habitat designation We removed Salamander Cave dredging or shoreline management based on additional information we (Jollyville Plateau salamander critical could result in permanent habitat loss.’’ received during the first comment habitat Unit 29) based on new The Service’s critical habitat period (August 22 to October 22, 2012). information that suggests this cave designation is legally deficient without On January 25, 2013 (78 FR 5385), we opening had been filled about 20 years a more robust description as to why the proposed to revise Units 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, ago. Therefore, the exact location of the particular area requires special 17, 22, 23, and 28 for the Jollyville cave is currently unknown. Finally, we management or protection. Plateau salamander. At that time and added two additional locations for the Our Response: Although we did not along with numerous other changes, we Jollyville Plateau salamander to critical list activities that identify the sources combined proposed Units 3, 4, and 5 for habitat (Downstream of Small Sylvia and magnitude of threats within each the Jollyville Plateau salamander into Spring 1, Downstream of Small Sylvia critical habitat unit, we believe that the one proposed critical habitat unit, Unit Spring 2). These two new locations were level of detail provided in the unit 3 (Buttercup Creek Unit) based on eight within 213 ft (65 m) of two existing descriptions is legally sufficient. The new locations. Please see the January critical habitat units (Units 22 and 33) source and magnitude of threats for 25, 2013, Federal Register document (78 and resulted in the merging of those two specific sites is often unknown. In our FR 5385) for additional changes to the units into a single unit (Unit 22). Total critical habitat designation, we assess proposed rule. critical habitat acreage for Unit 22 is 439 whether the specific areas within the Based on additional information we ac (178 ha) as a result of this merging. geographical area occupied by the received during the second comment In response to comments, we species at the time of listing contain period regarding the source of water in conducted a weighing analysis of the features that are essential to the Austin blind salamander and Jollyville Grandview Habitat Conservation Plan conservation of the species and which Plateau salamander habitat, we refined (HCP), Four Points HCP, and Buttercup may require special management our description of the primary Creek HCP and have excluded these considerations or protection. Each unit constituent elements to more accurately areas from critical habitat. As a result of description states whether or not the reflect the habitat needs of these two these exclusions, critical habitat unit 3 unit has the features that need special species. We also separated the primary for the Jollyville Plateau salamander management. Please see Special constituent elements into surface and was split into five smaller subunits, and Management Considerations or subsurface habitat categories for both the size of critical habitat units 14 and Protections section of the final critical salamander species in order to clarify 19 was reduced by 44 ac (18 ha) and 157 habitat rule for particular management the needs of the species. ac (64 ha), respectively. needs of the physical or biological In the proposed rule, surface critical Overall, the total amount of critical features. habitat was delineated by starting with habitat designated decreased by 603 ac (59) Comment: It is unclear what the the cave or spring point locations that (244 ha) in this final rule compared to impact will be to activities outside of are occupied by the salamanders and the proposed rule, including proposed critical habitat that may impact water extending a line downstream 164 ft (50 changes announced in the January 25, quality in critical habitat areas. m) because this was the farthest a 2013, Federal Register notice (78 FR

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51338 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

5385). A summary of the changes in critical habitat acreage are presented in Table 1.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN CRITICAL HABITAT ACREAGE FOR THE JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU SALAMANDER SPECIES IN THE FINAL RULE

Proposed critical Final critical Critical habitat units that changed habitat in acres habitat in acres Change in acres (hectares) (hectares) (hectares)

3. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... 699 (283) * 323 (131) ¥376 (¥152) 14. Kretschmarr Unit ...... 112 (45) 68 (28) ¥44 (¥18) 19. Bull Creek 3 Unit ...... 254 (103) 97 (39) ¥157 (¥64) 22. Sylvia Spring Area Unit ...... 238 (96) 439 (178) +201 (+81) 29. Salamander Cave Unit ...... 68 (28) 0 (0) ¥68 (¥28) 33. Tributary 4 Unit ...... 159 (64) 0 (0) ¥159 (¥64)

Total of all units ...... 5,054 (2,045) 4,451 (1,801) ¥603 (¥244) * This represents the sum of the five subunits created from the exclusion. Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

Critical Habitat critical habitat. The designation of soil type) that are essential to the critical habitat does not affect land conservation of the species. Primary Background ownership or establish a refuge, constituent elements are those specific Critical habitat is defined in section 3 wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other elements of the physical or biological of the Act as: conservation area. Such designation features that provide for a species’ life- (1) The specific areas within the does not allow the government or public history processes and are essential to geographical area occupied by the to access private lands. Such the conservation of the species. species, at the time it is listed in designation does not require Under the second prong of the Act’s accordance with the Act, on which are implementation of restoration, recovery, definition of critical habitat, we can found those physical or biological or enhancement measures by non- designate critical habitat in areas features Federal landowners. Where a landowner outside the geographical area occupied (a) Essential to the conservation of the requests Federal agency funding or by the species at the time it is listed, species, and authorization for an action that may upon a determination that such areas (b) Which may require special affect a listed species or critical habitat, are essential for the conservation of the management considerations or the consultation requirements of section species. We designate critical habitat in protection; and 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even areas outside the geographical area (2) Specific areas outside the in the event of a destruction or adverse occupied by a species only when a geographical area occupied by the modification finding, the obligation of designation limited to its range would species at the time it is listed, upon a the Federal action agency and the be inadequate to ensure the determination that such areas are landowner is not to restore or recover conservation of the species. essential for the conservation of the the species, but to implement Section 4 of the Act requires that we species. reasonable and prudent alternatives to designate critical habitat on the basis of Conservation, as defined under avoid destruction or adverse the best scientific and commercial data section 3 of the Act, means to use and modification of critical habitat. available. Further, our Policy on the use of all methods and procedures Under the first prong of the Act’s Information Standards Under the that are necessary to bring an definition of critical habitat, areas Endangered Species Act (published in endangered or threatened species to the within the geographical area occupied the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 point at which the measures provided by the species at the time it was listed FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act pursuant to the Act are no longer are included in a critical habitat (section 515 of the Treasury and General necessary. Such methods and designation if they contain physical or Government Appropriations Act for procedures include, but are not limited biological features (1) which are Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. to, all activities associated with essential to the conservation of the 5658)), and our associated Information scientific resources management such as species and (2) which may require Quality Guidelines provide criteria, research, census, law enforcement, special management considerations or establish procedures, and provide habitat acquisition and maintenance, protection. For these areas, critical guidance to ensure that our decisions propagation, live trapping, and habitat designations identify, to the are based on the best scientific data transplantation, and, in the extent known using the best scientific available. They require our biologists, to extraordinary case where population and commercial data available, those the extent consistent with the Act and pressures within a given ecosystem physical or biological features that are with the use of the best scientific data cannot be otherwise relieved, may essential to the conservation of the available, to use primary and original include regulated taking. species (such as space, food, cover, and sources of information as the basis for Critical habitat receives protection protected habitat). In identifying those recommendations to designate critical under section 7 of the Act through the physical or biological features within an habitat. requirement that Federal agencies area, we focus on the principal When we are determining which areas ensure, in consultation with the Service, biological or physical constituent should be designated as critical habitat that any action they authorize, fund, or elements (primary constituent elements our primary source of information is carry out is not likely to result in the such as roost sites, nesting grounds, generally the information developed destruction or adverse modification of seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide, during the listing process for the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51339

species. Additional information sources protection. These include, but are not Lanier Spring outlet (Bendik 2013, pers. may include articles in peer-reviewed limited to: comm.). This study demonstrates that journals, conservation plans developed (1) Space for individual and Eurycea salamanders can travel greater by States and counties, scientific status population growth and for normal distances from a discrete spring opening surveys and studies, biological behavior; than previously thought, including assessments, other unpublished (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or upstream areas, if suitable habitat is materials, or experts’ opinions or other nutritional or physiological present. Therefore, based on the personal knowledge. requirements; information above, we identify springs, Habitat is dynamic, and species may (3) Cover or shelter; associated streams, Barton Springs pool, move from one area to another over (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or and underground spaces within the time. We recognize that critical habitat rearing (or development) of offspring; Barton Springs Segment of the Edwards designated at a particular point in time and Aquifer to be the primary space may not include all of the habitat areas (5) Habitats that are protected from essential for individual and population that we may later determine are disturbance or are representative of the growth and for normal behavior. necessary for the recovery of the historical, geographical, and ecological species. For these reasons, a critical distributions of a species. Jollyville Plateau Salamander habitat designation does not signal that We derive the specific physical or The Jollyville Plateau salamander habitat outside the designated area is biological features essential for the occurs in wetted caves and where water unimportant or may not be needed for Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau emerges from the ground as a spring-fed recovery of the species. Areas that are salamanders from studies of these stream. Within the spring ecosystem, important to the conservation of the species’ habitat, ecology, and life history proximity to the springhead is species, both inside and outside the as described in the Critical Habitat presumed important because of the critical habitat designation, will section of the proposed rule to designate appropriate stable water chemistry and continue to be subject to: (1) critical habitat published in the Federal temperature, substrate, and flow regime. Conservation actions implemented Register on August 22, 2012 (77 FR Eurycea salamanders are rarely found under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) 50768), and in the information more than 66 ft (20 m) from a spring regulatory protections afforded by the presented below. Additional source (TPWD 2011, p. 3). However, requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act information can be found in the final Jollyville Plateau salamanders have for Federal agencies to insure their listing rule published elsewhere in been found farther from a spring actions are not likely to jeopardize the today’s Federal Register. We have opening in the Bull Creek drainage. A continued existence of any endangered determined that the Austin blind and recent study using mark-recapture or threatened species, and (3) section 9 Jollyville Plateau salamanders require methods found marked individuals of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any the following physical or biological moved up to 262 ft (80 m) both individual of the species, including features: upstream and downstream from the taking caused by actions that affect Lanier Spring outlet (Bendik 2013, pers. Space for Individual and Population habitat. Federally funded or permitted comm.). This study demonstrates that Growth and for Normal Behavior projects outside the designated critical Eurycea salamanders can travel greater habitat areas may still result in adverse Austin Blind Salamander distances from a discrete spring opening effects on areas within critical habitat, if The Austin blind salamander has than previously thought, including those activities are affecting the critical upstream areas, if suitable habitat is habitat. In addition, federally funded or been found where water emerges from the ground as a spring. However, this present. Jollyville Plateau salamanders permitted projects affecting listed are also known to retreat underground species outside their designated critical species is rarely seen at the surface of the spring, so we assume that it is to wetted areas (such as the aquifer) for habitat areas may still result in jeopardy habitat when surface habitats go dry findings in some cases. These subterranean for most of its life (Hillis et al. 2001, p. 267). Supporting this (Bendik 2011a, p. 31). We presume that protections and conservation tools will these salamanders also use subsurface continue to contribute to recovery of assumption is the fact that the species’ physiology is cave-adapted, with areas to some extent during normal flow these species. Similarly, critical habitat conditions. Forms of Jollyville Plateau designations made on the basis of the reduced eyes and pale coloration (Hillis et al. 2001, p. 267). Most individuals salamander with cave morphology have best available information at the time of been found in several underground designation will not control the found on the surface near spring streams (Chippindale et al. 2000, pp. direction and substance of future openings are juveniles (Hillis et al. 36–37; TPWD 2011a, pp. 9–10). recovery plans, HCPs, or other species 2001, p. 273), and it is unclear if this Therefore, based on the information conservation planning efforts if new means adults are able to retreat back above, we identify springs, associated information available at the time of into the aquifer or if juveniles are more streams, and underground spaces within these planning efforts calls for a likely to be flushed to the surface the Trinity Aquifer, Northern Segment different outcome. habitat. Austin blind salamanders have been found in the streambed a short of the Edwards Aquifer, and local Physical or Biological Features distance (about 33 ft (10 m)) alluvial aquifers to be the primary space In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) downstream of Sunken Gardens Spring essential for individual and population and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations (Laurie Dries 2011, COA, pers. comm.). growth and for normal behavior. at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which However, Jollyville Plateau Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or areas within the geographical area salamanders, a closely related species, Other Nutritional or Physiological occupied by the species at the time of have been found farther from a spring Requirements listing to designate as critical habitat, opening in the Bull Creek drainage. A we consider the physical or biological recent study using mark-recapture Austin Blind Salamander features essential to the conservation of methods found marked individuals No species-specific dietary study has the species and which may require moved up to 262 ft (80 m) both been completed, but the diet of the special management considerations or upstream and downstream from the Austin blind salamander is presumed to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51340 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

be similar to other Eurycea species, assume that the dissolved oxygen level Jollyville Plateau Salamander consisting of small aquatic invertebrates of water is important to the Austin blind As in other Eurycea species, the such as amphipods, copepods, isopods, salamander as well. The mean annual Jollyville Plateau salamander feeds on and insect larvae (reviewed in COA dissolved oxygen (from 2003 through aquatic invertebrates that commonly 2001, pp. 5–6). The feces of one wild- 2011) at Main Spring, Eliza Spring, and occur in spring environments (reviewed caught Austin blind salamander Sunken Garden Spring was 6.36, 5.89, in COA 2001, pp. 5–6). A stomach ¥1 contained amphipods, ostracods, and 5.95 mg L , respectively (COA content analysis by the City of Austin copepods, and plant material (Hillis et 2011, unpublished data). demonstrated that this salamander preys al. 2001, p. 273). In addition, flatworms The conductivity of water is on varying proportions of ostracods, were found to be the primary food important to salamander physiology copepods, mayfly larvae, fly larvae, source for the co-occurring Barton because it is related to the concentration snails, water mites, aquatic beetles, and Springs salamander (Eurycea sosorum) of ions in the water. Increased stone fly larvae depending on the (Gillespie 2013, p. 5), suggesting that conductivity is associated with location of the site (Bendik 2011b, pers. flatworms may also contribute to the increased water contamination and comm.). In addition, flatworms were diet of the Austin blind salamander. decreased Eurycea abundance (Willson found to be the primary food source for Austin blind salamanders are strictly and Dorcas 2003, pp. 766–768; Bowles aquatic and spend their entire lives the related Barton Springs salamander et al. 2006, pp. 117–118). The lower (Gillespie 2013, p. 5), suggesting that submersed in water from the Barton limit of observed conductivity in Springs Segment of the Edwards Aquifer flatworms may also contribute to the developed Jollyville Plateau salamander diet of the Jollyville Plateau salamander (Hillis et al. 2001, p. 273). Under sites where salamander densities were drought conditions, Barton Springs if present in the invertebrate lower than undeveloped sites was 800 community. (particularly Sunken Gardens/Old Mill ¥ microsiemens per centimeter (mS cm 1) Jollyville Plateau salamanders are Spring) also receives some recharge (Bowles et al. 2006, p. 117). from the Blanco River (Johnson et al. strictly aquatic and spend their entire Salamanders were significantly more lives submersed in water sourced from 2012, p. 82), whose waters originate abundant at undeveloped sites where from the Trinity Aquifer. These the Northern Segment of the Edwards water conductivity averaged 600 mS Aquifer, the Trinity Aquifer, and local salamanders, and the prey that they feed cm¥1 (Bowles et al. 2006, p. 117). on, require water at sufficient flows alluvium (loose unconsolidated soils) Because of its similar physiology to the (COA 2001, pp. 3–4; Bowles et al. 2006, (quantity) to meet all of their Jollyville Plateau salamander, we physiological requirements. Flows at p. 112; Johns 2011, p. 5–6). These assume that the Austin blind Barton Springs have never gone dry salamanders, and the prey that they feed salamander will have a similar response during the worst droughts of Texas on, require water at sufficient flows to elevated water conductance. (Hauwert et al. 2005, p. 19). This water (quantity) to meet all of their Although one laboratory study on the should be flowing and unchanged in physiological requirements. This water related San Marcos salamander chemistry, temperature, and volume should be flowing and unchanged in demonstrated that conductivities up to from natural conditions. The average chemistry, temperature, and volume 2,738 mS cm¥1 had no measurable effect water temperature at Austin blind from natural conditions. The average on adult activity (Woods and Poteet salamander sites in Barton Springs is water temperature at Jollyville Plateau 2006, p. 5), it remains unclear how between 67.8 and 72.3 °F (19.9 and 22.4 salamander sites with undeveloped ° °C) (COA 2011, unpublished data). elevated water conductance might affect watersheds ranges from 65.3 to 73.4 F ° Concentrations of contaminants should juveniles or the long-term health of (18.5 to 23 C) (Bowles et al. 2006, p. be below levels that could exert direct salamanders in the wild. Furthermore, 115; COA 2012, pers. comm.). lethal or sublethal effects (such as higher conductivity in urban streams is Concentrations of water quality effects to reproduction, growth, well-documented and is correlated with contaminants should be below levels development, or metabolic processes), decreases in invertebrate species, the that could exert direct lethal or or indirect effects (such as effects to the prey base of this species (Coles et al. sublethal effects (such as effects to Austin blind salamander’s prey base). 2012, p. 63, 78). Based on the best reproduction, growth, development, or Edwards Aquifer Eurycea species are available information on the sensitivity metabolic processes), or indirect effects adapted to a lower ideal range of oxygen of salamanders to changes in (such as effects to the Jollyville Plateau saturations compared to other conductivity (or other contaminants) in salamander’s prey base). salamanders (Turner 2009, p. 11). the wild, it is reasonable to assume that Edwards Aquifer Eurycea species are However, Eurycea salamanders need salamander survival, growth, and adapted to a lower range of oxygen dissolved oxygen concentrations to be reproduction will be most successful saturations compared to other above a certain concentration, as the co- when water quality is unaltered from salamanders (Turner 2009, p. 11). occurring Barton Springs salamander natural aquifer conditions. The average However, Eurycea salamanders need demonstrates declining abundance with water conductance at Main Spring, Eliza dissolved oxygen concentrations to be declining dissolved oxygen levels Spring, and Sunken Garden Spring is above a certain concentration, as the ¥ (Turner 2009, p. 14). Woods et al. (2010, between 605 and 740 mS cm 1 (COA related Barton Springs salamander p. 544) observed a number of 2011, unpublished data). demonstrates declining abundance with physiological effects to low dissolved Therefore, based on the information declining dissolved oxygen levels oxygen concentrations (below 4.5 above, we identify aquatic invertebrates (Turner 2009, p. 14). In addition, Woods milligrams of oxygen per liter (mg L¥1)) and water from the Barton Springs et al. (2010, p. 544) observed a number in the related San Marcos salamander Segment of the Edwards Aquifer with of physiological effects to low dissolved (Eurycea nana), including decreased adequate dissolved oxygen oxygen concentrations (below 4.5 mg metabolic rates and decreased juvenile concentration, water conductance, and L¥1) in the related San Marcos growth rates. Barton Springs salamander water temperature to be physical or salamander, including decreased abundance is highest when dissolved biological features essential for the metabolic rates and decreased juvenile oxygen is between 5 to 7 mg L¥1 nutritional and physiological growth rates. The average dissolved (Turner 2009, p. 12). Therefore, we requirements of this species. oxygen level of Jollyville Plateau

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51341

salamander sites with little or no aquifer, and may only be flushed to the Therefore, based on the information development in the watershed ranges surface accidentally (Hillis et al. 2001, above, we identify rocky substrate, from 5.6 to 7.1 mg L¥1 (Bendik 2011a, p. 273). This species should therefore consisting of boulder, cobble, and p. 10). Based on this information, we have access back into the aquifer gravel, with interstitial spaces that have conclude that the dissolved oxygen through the spring outlets. minimal sediment, to be an essential level of water is important to the While on the surface near spring component of the physical or biological Jollyville Plateau salamander for outlets, they move into interstitial features essential for the cover and respiratory function. spaces (empty voids between rocks) shelter for this species. Access to the The conductivity of water is also within the substrate, using these spaces subsurface groundwater table is also an important to salamander physiology for foraging habitat and cover from essential component of these physical or because it is related to the concentration predators similar to other Eurycea biological features. of ions in the water. Increased salamanders in central Texas (Cole Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or conductivity is associated with 1995, p. 24; Pierce and Wall 2011, pp. Rearing (or Development) of Offspring increased water contamination and 16–17). These spaces should have decreased Eurycea abundance (Willson minimal sediment, as sediment fills Austin Blind Salamander and Dorcas 2003, pp. 766–768; Bowles interstitial spaces, eliminating resting Little is known about the reproductive et al. 2006, pp. 117–118). The lower places and also reducing habitat of the habits of this species in the wild. limit of conductivity in developed prey base (small aquatic invertebrates) However, the Austin blind salamander Jollyville Plateau salamander sites (O’Donnell et al. 2006, p. 34). Austin is fully aquatic and, therefore, spends where salamander densities were lower blind salamanders have been observed all of its life cycles in aquifer and spring than undeveloped sites was 800 mS under rocks and vegetation (Dries 2011, waters. Eggs of central Texas Eurycea ¥1 cm (Bowles et al. 2006, p. 117). COA, pers. comm.). species are rarely seen on the surface, so Salamanders were significantly more Therefore, based on the information it is widely assumed that eggs are laid abundant at undeveloped sites where above, we identify rocky substrate, underground (Gluesenkamp 2011, water conductivity averaged 600 mS consisting of boulder, cobble, and TPWD, pers. comm.; Bendik 2011b, ¥1 cm (Bowles et al. 2006, p. 117). The gravel, with interstitial spaces that have COA, pers. comm.). average water conductance of Jollyville minimal sediment, to be an essential Therefore, based on the information Plateau salamander sites with little or component of the physical or biological above, we identify underground spaces no development in the watershed ranges features essential for the cover and to be an essential component of the ¥1 from 550 to 625 mS cm (Bendik 2011a, shelter for this species. Access to the physical or biological features essential p. 10, Bowles et al. 2006, p.115). aquifer is also an essential component of for breeding and reproduction for this Although one laboratory study on the these physical or biological features. species. related San Marcos salamander demonstrated that conductivities up to Jollyville Plateau Salamander Jollyville Plateau Salamander ¥1 2,738 mS cm had no measurable effect Similar to other Eurycea salamanders Little is known about the reproductive on adult activity (Woods and Poteet in central Texas, Jollyville Plateau habits of this species in the wild. 2006, p. 5), it remains unclear how salamanders move an unknown depth However, the Jollyville Plateau elevated water conductance might affect into the interstitial spaces (empty voids salamander is fully aquatic and, juveniles or the long-term health of between rocks) within the substrate, therefore, spends all of its life cycles in salamanders in the wild. Furthermore, using these spaces for foraging habitat aquifer and spring waters. Eggs of higher conductivity in urban streams is and cover from predators (Cole 1995, p. central Texas Eurycea species are rarely well-documented and is correlated with 24; Pierce and Wall 2011, pp. 16–17). seen on the surface, so it is widely decreases in invertebrate species, the These spaces should have minimal assumed that eggs are laid underground prey base of this species (Coles et al. sediment, as sediment fills interstitial (Gluesenkamp 2011, TPWD, pers. 2012, p. 63, 78). Based on the best spaces, eliminating resting places and comm.; Bendik 2011b, COA, pers. available information on the sensitivity also reducing habitat of the prey base comm.). of salamanders to changes in (small aquatic invertebrates) (O’Donnell Therefore, based on the information conductivity (or other contaminants) in et al. 2006, p. 34). above, we identify underground spaces the wild, it is reasonable to presume Jollyville Plateau salamanders have to be an essential component of the that salamander survival, growth, and been observed under rocks, leaf litter, physical or biological features essential reproduction will be most successful and other vegetation (Bowles et al. 2006, for breeding and reproduction for this when water quality is unaltered from pp. 114–116). There was a strong species. natural aquifer conditions. positive relationship between Therefore, based on the information salamander abundance and the amount Primary Constituent Elements for the above, we identify aquatic invertebrates of available rocky substrate (Bowles et Austin Blind and Jollyville Plateau and water from the Northern Segment of al. 2006, p. 114). Salamanders were Salamanders the Edwards Aquifer, including more likely to use larger rocks (larger Under the Act and its implementing adequate dissolved oxygen than 2.5 inches (in) or 64 millimeters regulations, we are required to identify concentration, water conductance, and (mm)) compared to gravel (Bowles et al. the physical or biological features water temperature, to be physical or 2006, p. 114, 116). essential to the conservation of the biological features essential for the If springs stop flowing and the surface Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau nutritional and physiological habitat dries up, Jollyville Plateau salamanders in areas occupied at the requirements of this species. salamanders are known to recede with time of listing, focusing on the features’ Cover or Shelter the water table and persist in primary constituent elements. Primary groundwater refugia until surface flow constituent elements (PCEs) are those Austin Blind Salamander returns (Bendik 2011a, p. 31). Access to specific elements of the physical or The Austin blind salamander spends subsurface refugia allows populations biological features that provide for a most of its life below the surface in the some resiliency against drought events. species’ life-history processes and are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51342 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

essential to the conservation of the historical pattern of the specific sites are conditions. Concentrations of water species. present, with continuous flow in the quality constituents and contaminants Based on our current knowledge of subterranean habitat. The water are below levels that could exert direct the physical or biological features and chemistry is similar to natural aquifer lethal or sublethal effects (such as habitat characteristics required to conditions, including temperature, effects to reproduction, growth, sustain the species’ life-history dissolved oxygen, and specific water development, or metabolic processes), processes, we determine that the conductance. or indirect effects (such as effects to the primary constituent elements specific to ii. Subsurface spaces. Conduits Jollyville Plateau salamander’s prey the Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau underground are large enough to base). Hydrologic regimes similar to the salamanders are: provide salamanders with cover, shelter, historical pattern of the specific sites are and foraging habitat. present, with continuous flow. The Austin Blind Salamander iii. Aquatic invertebrates for food. The water chemistry is similar to natural Surface Habitat PCEs habitat supports an aquatic invertebrate aquifer conditions, including i. Water from the Barton Springs community that includes crustaceans, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and Segment of the Edwards Aquifer. The insects, or flatworms. specific water conductance. ii. Subsurface spaces. Voids between groundwater is similar to natural aquifer Jollyville Plateau Salamander rocks underground are large enough to conditions as it discharges from natural Surface Habitat PCEs provide salamanders with cover, shelter, spring outlets. Concentrations of water and foraging habitat. These spaces have quality constituents and contaminants i. Water from the Trinity Aquifer, minimal sedimentation. are below levels that could exert direct Northern Segment of the Edwards iii. Aquatic invertebrates for food. The lethal or sublethal effects (such as Aquifer, and local alluvial aquifers. The habitat supports an aquatic invertebrate effects to reproduction, growth, groundwater is similar to natural aquifer community that includes crustaceans, development, or metabolic processes), conditions as it discharges from natural insects, or flatworms. or indirect effects (such as effects to the spring outlets. Concentrations of water Austin blind salamander’s prey base). quality constituents and contaminants Special Management Considerations or Hydrologic regimes similar to the should be below levels that could exert Protections historical pattern of the specific sites are direct lethal or sublethal effects (such as When designating critical habitat, we present, with constant surface flow. The effects to reproduction, growth, assess whether the specific areas within water chemistry is similar to natural development, or metabolic processes), the geographical area occupied by the aquifer conditions, with temperatures or indirect effects (such as effects to the species at the time of listing contain from 67.8 to 72.3 °F (19.9 and 22.4 °C), Jollyville Plateau salamander’s prey features that are essential to the dissolved oxygen concentrations from 5 base). Hydrologic regimes similar to the conservation of the species and which to 7 mg L¥1, and specific water historical pattern of the specific sites are may require special management conductance from 605 to 740 mS cm¥1. present, with at least some surface flow considerations or protection. The ii. Rocky substrate with interstitial during the year. The water chemistry is features essential to the conservation of spaces. Rocks in the substrate of the similar to natural aquifer conditions, these species may require special salamander’s surface aquatic habitat are with temperatures from 64.1 to 73.4 °F management considerations or large enough to provide salamanders (17.9 to 23 °C), dissolved oxygen protection to reduce the following with cover, shelter, and foraging habitat concentrations from 5.6 to 8 mg L¥1, threats: water quality degradation from (larger than 2.5 in (64 mm)). The and specific water conductance from contaminants, alteration to natural flow substrate and interstitial spaces have 550 to 721 mS cm¥1. regimes, and physical habitat minimal sedimentation. ii. Rocky substrate with interstitial modification. iii. Aquatic invertebrates for food. The spaces. Rocks in the substrate of the For these salamanders, special spring environment supports a diverse salamander’s surface aquatic habitat are management considerations or aquatic invertebrate community that large enough to provide salamanders protection are needed to address threats. includes crustaceans, insects, and with cover, shelter, and foraging habitat Management activities that could flatworms. (larger than 2.5 in (64 mm)). The ameliorate threats include (but are not iv. Subterranean aquifer. Access to substrate and interstitial spaces have limited to): (1) Protecting the quality of the subsurface water table exists to minimal sedimentation. groundwater by implementing provide shelter, protection, and space iii. Aquatic invertebrates for food. The comprehensive programs to control and for reproduction. This access can occur spring environment supports a diverse reduce point sources and non-point in the form of large conduits that carry aquatic invertebrate community that sources of pollution throughout the water to the spring outlet or fissures in includes crustaceans, insects, and Barton Springs and Northern Segments the bedrock. flatworms. of the Edwards Aquifer and contributing iv. Subterranean aquifer. Access to portions of the Trinity Aquifer, (2) Subsurface Habitat PCEs the subsurface water table should exist protecting the quality and quantity of i. Water from the Barton Springs to provide shelter, protection, and space surface water by implementing Segment of the Edwards Aquifer. The for reproduction. This access can occur comprehensive programs to control and groundwater is similar to natural aquifer in the form of large conduits that carry reduce point sources and non-point conditions. Concentrations of water water to the spring outlet or porous sources of pollution within the surface quality constituents and contaminants voids between rocks in the streambed drainage areas of the salamander spring are below levels that could exert direct that extend down into the water table. sites, (3) protecting groundwater and lethal or sublethal effects (such as spring flow quantity (for example, by effects to reproduction, growth, Subsurface Habitat PCEs implementing water conservation and development, or metabolic processes), i. Water from the Trinity Aquifer, drought contingency plans throughout or indirect effects (such as effects to the Northern Segment of the Edwards the Barton Springs and Northern Austin blind salamander’s prey base). Aquifer, and local alluvial aquifers. The Segments of the Edwards Aquifer and Hydrologic regimes similar to the groundwater is similar to natural aquifer contributing portions of the Trinity

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51343

Aquifer), (4) fencing and signage to therefore considered any site that had a upstream habitat does not exist for these protect from human vandalism, (5) salamander observation at any prior sites. The surface habitat does not protecting water quality and quantity time to be currently occupied, unless include manmade structures (such as from present and future quarrying, and that spring or cave site had been buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, (6) excluding cattle and feral hogs destroyed. and other paved areas) within this through fencing to protect spring Based on our review, the critical circle. habitats from damage. habitat areas described below constitute We delineated the subsurface critical our best assessment at this time of areas habitat unit boundaries by starting with Criteria Used To Identify Critical that are within the geographical range the cave or spring point locations that Habitat occupied by at least one of the two are occupied by the salamanders. From As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of salamander species and are considered these cave or spring points, we the Act, we use the best scientific data to contain features essential to the delineated an area with a 984-ft (300-m) available in determining areas that conservation of these species. The radius to create the polygons that contain the features that are essential to extent to which the subterranean capture the extent to which we believe the conservation of the Austin blind and populations of these species exist the salamander populations exist Jollyville Plateau salamanders. During belowground away from outlets of the through underground habitat. This our preparation for designating critical spring system is unknown. Because the radial distance comes from observations habitat for the two salamander species, hydrology of central Texas is very of the Austin blind salamander, which we reviewed: (1) Data for historical and complex and information on the is believed to occur underground current occurrence, (2) information hydrology of specific spring sites is throughout the entire Barton Springs pertaining to habitat features essential largely unknown, we will continue to complex (Dries 2011, COA, pers. for the conservation of these species, seek information to increase our comm.). The spring outlets used by and (3) scientific information on the understanding of spring hydrology and salamanders of the Barton Springs biology and ecology of the two species. salamander underground distribution to complex are not connected on the We have also reviewed a number of inform conservation efforts for these surface, so the Austin blind salamander studies and surveys of the two species. At the time of this final critical population extends a horizontal salamander species that confirm habitat rule, the best scientific evidence distance of at least 984 ft (300 m) historical and current occurrence of the available suggests that a population of underground, as this is the approximate two species including, but not limited these salamanders can extend at least distance between the farthest two to, Sweet (1978; 1982), Russell (1993), 984 ft (300 m) from the spring opening outlets within the Barton Springs Warton (1997), COA (2001), through underground conduits or voids complex known to be occupied by the Chippindale et al. (2000), and Hillis et between rocks. species. This knowledge was applied to al. (2001). Finally, salamander site We are designating as critical habitat the Jollyville Plateau salamanders due locations and observations were verified areas that we have determined are to its similar life history. The subsurface with the aid of salamander biologists, occupied by at least one of the two polygons were then simplified to reduce museum collection records, and site salamanders and contain elements of the number of vertices, but still retain visits. physical or biological features essential the overall shape and extent. Once that In accordance with the Act and its for the conservation of the species. We was done, polygons that were within 98 implementing regulation at 50 CFR delineated both surface and subsurface ft (30 m) of each other were merged 424.12(e), we consider whether critical habitat components. The surface together because these areas are likely designating additional areas—outside critical habitat component was connected underground. Each new those currently occupied as well as delineated by starting with the spring merged polygon was then revised by those occupied at the time of listing— point locations that are occupied by the removing extraneous divits or are necessary to ensure the conservation salamanders and extending a line protrusions that resulted from the merge of the species. We are not designating upstream and downstream 262 ft (80 m) process. any additional areas outside the because this is the farthest a salamander Developed areas such as lands geographical area occupied by the has been observed from a spring outlet covered by buildings, pavement, and species, although we acknowledge that (Bendik 2013, pers. comm.). When other structures lack physical or other areas, such as the recharge zone of determining surface critical habitat biological features for the Austin blind the aquifers supporting salamander boundaries, we were not able to and Jollyville Plateau salamanders. The locations, are very important to the delineate specific stream segments on scale of the maps we prepared under the conservation of the species. We also the map due to the small size of the parameters for publication within the recognize that there may be additional streams. Therefore, we drew a circle Code of Federal Regulations may not occupied areas outside of the areas with a 262-ft (80-m) radius representing reflect the exclusion of such developed designated as critical habitat that we are the extent the surface population of the lands. Any such lands left inside critical not aware of at the time of this site is estimated to exist upstream and habitat boundaries shown on the maps designation that are necessary for the downstream. The surface critical habitat of this final rule have been excluded by conservation of the species. For the includes the spring outlets and outflow text in the rule and are not designated purpose of designating critical habitat up to the ordinary high water line (the as critical habitat. Therefore, a Federal for the Austin blind and Jollyville average amount of water present in non- action involving these lands will not Plateau salamanders, we define an area flood conditions, as defined in 33 CFR trigger section 7 consultation with as occupied based upon the reliable 328.3(e)) and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream respect to critical habitat and the observation of a salamander species by and downstream habitat (to the extent requirement of no adverse modification a knowledgeable scientist. It is very that this habitat is ever present), unless the specific action would affect difficult to prove unquestionably that a including the dry stream channel during the physical or biological features in the salamander population has been periods of no surface flow. We adjacent or subsurface critical habitat. extirpated from a spring site due to acknowledge that some spring sites The critical habitat designation is these species’ ability to occupy the occupied by one of the two salamanders defined by the map or maps, as inaccessible subsurface habitat. We are the start of the watercourse, and modified by any accompanying

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51344 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

regulatory text, presented at the end of biological features and support multiple total). The critical habitat areas we this document in the rule portion. We life-history processes. Some units describe below constitute our current include more detailed information on contain only some elements of the best assessment of areas that meet the the boundaries of the critical habitat physical or biological features necessary definition of critical habitat for the designation in the preamble of this to support Austin blind and Jollyville Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau document. We will make the Plateau salamanders’ particular use of salamanders. As previously noted, we coordinates or plot points or both on that habitat. In some units, the physical are designating both surface and which each map is based available to or biological features essential for the subsurface critical habitat components. the public on http:// conservation of these salamanders have The surface critical habitat includes the www.regulations.gov at Docket No. been impacted at times, and in some spring outlets and outflow up to the FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001, on our cases these impacts have had negative high water line and 262 ft (80 m) of Internet site (http://www.fws.gov/ effects on the salamander populations _ _ upstream and downstream habitat, but southwest/es/AustinTexas/ESA Sp there. We recognize that some units does not include manmade structures Salamanders.html) and at the field have experienced impacts and may have (such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, office responsible for the designation physical or biological features of lesser roads, and other paved areas); however, (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT quality than others. Special the subsurface critical habitat may above). management considerations or extend below such structures. The Final Critical Habitat Designation protection may be needed at these sites subsurface critical habitat includes We are designating a total of 33 units to provide for long-term sustainability of underground features in a circle with a for designation for the Austin blind and the species at these sites. In addition, radius of 984 ft (300 m) around the cave Jollyville Plateau salamanders based on high-quality sites need protection, and and surface salamander locations. The essential physical or biological features in some cases management, to maintain 33 units we are designating as critical being present to support the their quality and ability to sustain the habitat are listed and described below, salamanders’ life-history processes. The salamander populations over the long and acreages are based on the size of the critical habitat areas described below term. subsurface critical habitat component, constitute our best assessment at this We are designating 1 unit as critical because it encompasses the surface time of areas that meet the definition of habitat for the Austin blind salamander critical habitat. All units described critical habitat. Some units contain all and 32 units as critical habitat for the below are occupied by one of the two of the identified elements of physical or Jollyville Plateau salamander (33 units salamander species.

TABLE 2—CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT FOR THE AUSTIN BLIND SALAMANDER

Size of unit in Critical habitat unit Land ownership by type acres (hectares)

1. Barton Springs Unit ...... City, Private ...... 120 (49) Total ...... 120 (49)

NOTE: Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.

TABLE 3—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU SALAMANDER

Size of unit in Critical habitat unit Land ownership by type acres (hectares)

1. Krienke Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 2. Brushy Creek Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 3A. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... Private, City ...... 260 (105) 3B. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... Private ...... 28 (11) 3C. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... Private ...... 3 (1) 3D. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... Private ...... 16 (6) 3E. Buttercup Creek Unit ...... Private ...... 17 (7) 6. Avery Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 237 (96) 7. PC Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 8. Baker and Audubon Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 110 (45) 9. Wheless Spring Unit ...... Private, County ...... 145 (59) 10. Blizzard R-Bar-B Spring Unit ...... Private, County ...... 88 (36) 11. House Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 12. Kelly Hollow Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 13. MacDonald Well Unit ...... Private, County ...... 68 (28) 14. Kretschmarr Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 15. Pope and Hiers (Canyon Creek) Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 16. Fern Gully Spring Unit ...... Private, City ...... 68 (28) 17. Bull Creek 1 Unit ...... Private, City, County ...... 1,198 (485) 18. Bull Creek 2 Unit ...... Private, City, County ...... 237 (96) 19. Bull Creek 3 Unit ...... Private, City ...... 97 (39) 20. Moss Gully Spring Unit ...... City, County ...... 68 (28) 21. Ivanhoe Spring Unit ...... City ...... 68 (28) 22. Sylvia Spring Area Unit ...... Private, City, County ...... 439 (178) 24. Long Hog Hollow Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 25. Tributary 3 Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51345

TABLE 3—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU SALAMANDER—Continued

Size of unit in Critical habitat unit Land ownership by type acres (hectares)

26. Sierra Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 27. Troll Spring Unit ...... Private, City ...... 98 (40) 28. Stillhouse Unit ...... Private, City ...... 203 (82) 30. Indian Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 31. Spicewood Spring Unit ...... Private ...... 68 (28) 32. Balcones District Park Spring Unit ...... Private, City ...... 68 (28) Total ...... 4,331 (1,753)

NOTE: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.

We present below brief descriptions elements of the physical or biological Road) crosses the northern half of the of all units and reasons why they meet features essential to the conservation of unit. This unit contains Krienke Spring, the definition of critical habitat for the the species. which is occupied by the Jollyville Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau Special management considerations Plateau salamander. The spring is salamanders. The function of each unit or protection may be required because located on an unnamed tributary of Dry with respect to species conservation is of the potential for groundwater Fork, which is a tributary to Brushy to contribute to the redundancy, pollution from current and future Creek. The unit contains primary representation, and resiliency of its development in the contributing and constituent elements of the physical or respective species, which determines recharge zone for the Barton Springs biological features essential to the the species’ probability of persistence. segment of the Edwards Aquifer, conservation of the species. Redundancy means a sufficient number depletion of groundwater, runoff from Special management considerations of populations to provide a margin of impervious cover within the surface or protection may be required because safety to reduce the risk of losing a watershed into surface habitat, and of the potential for groundwater species or certain representation impacts of the impoundment (see pollution from current and future (variation) within a species. Special Management Considerations or development in the recharge area, runoff Representation means conserving ‘‘some Protection section). Special management from impervious cover within the of everything’’ with regard to genetic may also be needed to protect the surface watershed into surface habitat, and ecological diversity to allow for surface from disturbance as part of the potential physical disturbance of the future adaptation and maintenance of operation of Barton Springs Pool, and surface habitat, impacts of the evolutionary potential. Resiliency is the this management is being provided as impoundment, and depletion of ability of a species to persist through part of the Barton Springs Pool HCP. groundwater (see Special Management severe hardships (Tear et al. 2005, p. Twenty-two ac (9 ha) of this unit are Considerations or Protection section). 841). covered by the Barton Springs Pool Private landowners have shown interest HCP, which covers adverse impacts to in conserving the area and are providing Austin Blind Salamander the Barton Springs salamander and the some management of the area. Unit 1: Barton Springs Unit Austin blind salamander. The designation includes the spring outlet and outflow up to the high water The Barton Springs Unit consists of The designation includes the underground aquifer in this area and the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and 120 ac (49 ha) of City and private land downstream habitat. The unit was in the City of Austin, Travis County, springs and fissure outlets, and their outflows 262 ft (80 m) upstream and further delineated by drawing a circle Texas. Most of the unit consists of with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around landscaped areas managed as Zilker downstream. The unit was further delineated by drawing a circle with a the spring, representing the extent of the Park, which is owned by the City of subterranean critical habitat. Austin. The southwestern portion of the radius of 984 ft (300 m) around the unit is dense commercial development, springs, representing the extent of the Unit 2: Brushy Creek Spring Unit and part of the southern portion subterranean critical habitat. We joined Unit 2 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of contains residential development. the edges of the resulting circles. private land in southern Williamson Barton Springs Road, a major roadway, Because we did not have specific points County, Texas. The unit is centered just crosses the northeastern portion of the for species locations, we used the center south of Palm Valley Boulevard and unit. This unit contains Parthenia of Eliza and Sunken Gardens springs west of Grimes Boulevard. The northern Spring, Sunken Gardens (Old Mill) and the southwestern point of a fissure part of the unit is covered with Spring, and Eliza Spring, which are in Parthenia Springs as the center point commercial and residential occupied by Austin blind salamander. for the circles. development, while the southern part is The springs are located in the Barton Jollyville Plateau Salamander less densely developed. Some areas Creek watershed. Parthenia Spring is along the stream are undeveloped. This located in the backwater of Barton Unit 1: Krienke Spring Unit unit contains Brushy Creek Spring, Springs Pool, which is formed by a dam Unit 1 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of which is occupied by the Jollyville on Barton Creek; Eliza Spring is on an private land in southern Williamson Plateau salamander. The spring is near unnamed tributary to the bypass County, Texas. The unit is located just Brushy Creek. The unit contains channel of the pool; and Sunken south of State Highway 29. The northern primary constituent elements of the Gardens Spring is located on a tributary part of the unit is under dense physical or biological features essential that enters Barton Creek downstream of residential development, while the to the conservation of the species. the dam for Barton Springs Pool. The southern part of the unit is less densely Special management considerations unit contains primary constituent developed. County Road 175 (Sam Bass or protection may be required because

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51346 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

of the potential for groundwater of groundwater (see Special Management Considerations or pollution from current and future Management Considerations or Protection section). development in the recharge area, runoff Protection section). These caves are The subunit was delineated by from impervious cover within the currently gated and locked. drawing a circle with a radius of 984 ft surface watershed into surface habitat, The critical habitat designation (300 m) around nearby cave openings, potential physical disturbance of the includes the cave openings. The subunit representing the extent of the surface habitat, and depletion of was further delineated by drawing a subterranean critical habitat. We joined groundwater (see Special Management circle with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) the edges of the resulting circles. Those Considerations or Protection section). around the cave openings, representing areas within the boundary of the The designation includes the spring the extent of the subterranean critical Buttercup Creek HCP (including the outlet and outflow up to the high water habitat. We joined the edges of the cave openings) were then removed from line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and resulting circles. Those areas within the the subunit. downstream habitat. The unit was boundary of the Buttercup Creek HCP Subunit 3D further delineated by drawing a circle were then excluded from the subunit. with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around Subunit 3D consists of 16 ac (6 ha) of the spring, representing the extent of the Subunit 3B private land in southern Williamson subterranean critical habitat. Subunit 3B consists of 28 ac (11 ha) County, Texas. The subunit is located east of Lakeline Boulevard and north of Unit 3: Buttercup Creek Unit of private land in southern Williamson County, Texas. The unit is located east Buttercup Creek Boulevard. The subunit In the proposed rule, Unit 3 consisted of Anderson Mill Road and west of is under residential development. This of 699 ac (283 ha) of City of Austin, City Lakeline Boulevard. The unit is mostly subunit does not contain a cave of Cedar Park, State of Texas, and under a quarry, except for the eastern opening. The subunit contains private land in southern Williamson portion, which is covered by several subsurface primary constituent elements County and northern Travis County, buildings and a parking lot. This of the physical or biological features Texas. Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, subunit does not contain a cave essential to the conservation of the certain lands in this unit have been opening. The subunit contains Jollyville Plateau salamander. excluded from the final rule for critical subsurface primary constituent elements Special management considerations habitat (see Application of Section of the physical or biological features or protection may be required because 4(b)(2) of the Act section below). The of the potential for groundwater remaining portions of the unit not essential to the conservation of the Jollyville Plateau salamander. pollution from current and future within the boundaries of the HCP were development in the recharge area, and Special management considerations retained as critical habitat subunits depletion of groundwater (see Special or protection may be required because because these areas still contained Management Considerations or of the potential for groundwater subsurface primary constituent elements Protection section). of the physical or biological features pollution from current and future The subunit was delineated by essential to the conservation of the development in the recharge area, drawing a circle with a radius of 984 ft species. We created five subunits depletion of groundwater, and potential (300 m) around nearby cave openings, following the exclusion. All of the impacts from quarry operations (see representing the extent of the subunits are occupied by the Jollyville Special Management Considerations or subterranean critical habitat. We joined Plateau salamander. A description of Protection section). the edges of the resulting circles. Those these subunits follows. The subunit was delineated by areas within the boundary of the drawing a circle with a radius of 984 ft Subunit 3A Buttercup Creek HCP (including the (300 m) around nearby cave openings, cave openings) were then removed from Subunit 3A consists of 260 ac (105 ha) representing the extent of the the subunit. of City of Austin, City of Cedar Park, subterranean critical habitat. We joined and private land in southern the edges of the resulting circles. Those Subunit 3E Williamson County and northern Travis areas within the boundary of the Subunit 3E consists of 17 ac (7 ha) of County, Texas. The subunit is located Buttercup Creek HCP (including the private land in southern Williamson between Anderson Mill Road and cave openings) were then excluded from County, Texas. The subunit is located Lakeline Boulevard. The subunit is the subunit. east of Lakeline Boulevard. Buttercup mostly covered with residential Subunit 3C Creek Boulevard crosses the subunit property on the eastern half and from east to west. The subunit is under undeveloped area of parks on the Subunit 3C consists of 3 ac (1 ha) of residential development. This subunit western half. This subunit contains four private land in southern Williamson does not contain a cave opening. The caves, Hunter’s Lane Cave, Testudo County, Texas. The unit is located east subunit contains subsurface primary Tube, Bluewater Cave #1, and Bluewater of Lakeline Boulevard. The subunit is constituent elements of the physical or Cave #2, which are all occupied by the under residential development. This biological features essential to the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The subunit does not contain a cave conservation of the Jollyville Plateau subunit contains subsurface primary opening. The subunit contains salamander. constituent elements of the physical or subsurface primary constituent elements Special management considerations biological features essential to the of the physical or biological features or protection may be required because conservation of the Jollyville Plateau essential to the conservation of the of the potential for groundwater salamander. Jollyville Plateau salamander. pollution from current and future Special management considerations Special management considerations development in the recharge area, and or protection may be required because or protection may be required because depletion of groundwater (see Special of the potential for groundwater of the potential for groundwater Management Considerations or pollution from current and future pollution from current and future Protection section). development in the recharge area, development in the recharge area, and The subunit was delineated by potential for vandalism, and depletion depletion of groundwater (see Special drawing a circle with a radius of 984 ft

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51347

(300 m) around nearby cave openings, of the potential for groundwater the subterranean critical habitat. We representing the extent of the pollution from current and future joined the edges of the resulting circles. subterranean critical habitat. We joined development in the recharge area, runoff Unit 9: Wheless Spring Unit the edges of the resulting circles. Those from impervious cover within the areas within the boundary of the surface watershed into surface habitat, Unit 9 consists of 145 ac (59 ha) of Buttercup Creek HCP (including the potential physical disturbance of the private and Travis County land in cave openings) were then removed from surface habitat, and depletion of northern Travis County, Texas. The unit the subunit. groundwater (see Special Management is located about 0.8 mi (1.3 km) west of Grand Oaks Loop. The unit is wooded Unit 6: Avery Springs Unit Considerations or Protection section). The designation includes the spring and consists of totally undeveloped Unit 6 consists of 237 ac (96 ha) of outlet and outflow up to the high water land. The unit is managed as part of the private land in southern Williamson line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Balcones Canyonlands Preserve HCP. County, Texas. The unit is located north downstream habitat. The unit was An unpaved two-track road crosses the of Avery Ranch Boulevard and west of further delineated by drawing a circle unit from north to south. This unit Parmer Lane. The unit has large areas with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around contains three sites (Wheless Spring, covered by residential development. the spring, representing the extent of the Wheless 2 and Spring 25) that are The developed areas are separated by subterranean critical habitat. occupied by the Jollyville Plateau fairways and greens of a golf course. salamander. The springs are in the Long This unit contains three springs (Avery Unit 8: Baker and Audubon Spring Unit Hollow Creek drainage that leads to Springhouse Spring, Hill Marsh Spring, Unit 8 consists of 110 ac (45 ha) of Lake Travis. The unit contains primary and Avery Deer Spring) that are private land in northern Travis County, constituent elements of the physical or occupied by the Jollyville Plateau Texas. The unit is located south of Lime biological features essential to the conservation of the species. salamander. The springs are located on Creek Road and southwest of the The unit is within the Balcones three unnamed tributaries to South intersection of Canyon Creek Drive and Brushy Creek. The unit contains Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as Lime Springs Road. The unit is wooded, mitigation for impacts to 35 species primary constituent elements of the undeveloped, and owned by Travis physical or biological features essential covered in the Balcones Canyonlands Audubon Society and Lower Colorado HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, to the conservation of the species. River Authority. The entire unit is Special management considerations impacts to the Jollyville Plateau managed as part of the Balcones or protection may be required because salamander are not covered under this Canyonlands HCP. This unit contains of the potential for groundwater HCP. Some special management is being two springs (Baker Spring and Audubon pollution from current and future provided by the preserve because the Spring) that are occupied by the development in the recharge area, runoff surface watersheds of these three sites Jollyville Plateau salamander. The from impervious cover within the are entirely contained within the springs are in the drainage of an surface watershed into surface habitat, preserve. Special management unnamed tributary to Cypress Creek. potential physical disturbance of the considerations or protection may be The unit contains primary constituent surface habitat, and depletion of required because of the potential for elements of the physical or biological groundwater (see Special Management groundwater pollution and depletion features essential to the conservation of Considerations or Protection section). from current and future development in The designation includes the spring the species. the groundwater recharge area of the outlets and outflow up to the high water The unit is within the Balcones springs, which may extend outside of line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Canyonlands Preserve which serves as the preserve. The surface habitat also downstream habitat. The unit was mitigation for impacts to 35 species needs special management to protect it further delineated by drawing a circle covered in the Balcones Canyonlands from potential physical disturbance (see with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, Special Management Considerations or the three springs, representing the impacts to the Jollyville Plateau Protection section). extent of the subterranean critical salamander are not covered under this The designation includes the spring habitat. We joined the edges of the HCP. Special management is being outlets and outflow up to the high water resulting circles. provided by the preserve because the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and surface watersheds of these two springs downstream habitat. The unit was Unit 7: PC Spring Unit are entirely contained within the further delineated by drawing a circle Unit 7 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of preserve. Special management may also with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around private land in southern Williamson be needed because of the potential for the springs, representing the extent of County, Texas. State Highway 45, a groundwater pollution and depletion the subterranean critical habitat. We major toll road, crosses the north central from current and future development in joined the edges of the resulting circles. part of the unit from east to west, and the groundwater recharge area of the Ranch to Market Road 620 goes under springs, which may extend outside of Unit 10: Blizzard R-Bar-B Spring Unit the toll road midway between the center the preserve. The surface habitat also Unit 10 consists of 88 ac (36 ha) of and the western edge. Except for needs special management to protect it private and Travis County land in roadways, the unit is undeveloped. This from potential physical disturbance (see northern Travis County, Texas. The unit unit contains PC Spring, which is Special Management Considerations or is located west of Grand Oaks Loop. The occupied by the Jollyville Plateau Protection section). extreme eastern portion of the unit is on salamander. The spring is located on The designation includes the spring the edge of residential development; a Davis Spring Branch. The unit contains outlets and outflow up to the high water golf course (Twin Creeks) crosses the primary constituent elements of the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and central portion; and the remainder is physical or biological features essential downstream habitat. The unit was wooded and undeveloped. This unit to the conservation of the species. further delineated by drawing a circle contains three sites (Blizzard R-Bar-B Special management considerations with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around Spring, Blizzard 2, and Blizzard 3) that or protection may be required because the springs, representing the extent of are occupied by the Jollyville Plateau

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51348 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

salamander. The springs are located on groundwater (see Special Management The unit is within the Balcones Cypress Creek. The unit contains Considerations or Protection section). Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as primary constituent elements of the The designation includes the spring mitigation for impacts to 35 species physical or biological features essential outlet and outflow up to the high water covered in the Balcones Canyonlands to the conservation of the species. line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, The unit is within the Balcones downstream habitat. The unit was impacts to the Jollyville Plateau Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as further delineated by drawing a circle salamander are not covered under this mitigation for impacts to 35 species with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around HCP. Some special management is being covered in the Balcones Canyonlands the springs, representing the extent of provided by the preserve because the HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, the subterranean critical habitat. surface watershed of this spring is impacts to the Jollyville Plateau partially contained within the preserve. Unit 12: Kelly Hollow Spring Unit salamander are not covered under this Special management considerations or HCP. Some special management is being Unit 12 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of protection may be required because of provided by the preserve because the private land in northern Travis County, the potential for groundwater pollution surface watersheds of these three Texas. The unit is located southeast of and depletion from current and future springs are partially contained within the intersection of Anderson Mill Road development in the groundwater the preserve. Special management and Farm to Market Road 2769. With recharge area of the spring, which may considerations or protection may be the exception of a portion of Anderson extend outside of the preserve. The required because of the potential for Mill Road along the northern edge of the surface habitat also needs special groundwater pollution and depletion unit, this unit is primarily undeveloped management to protect it from surface from current and future development in woodland. This unit contains Kelly runoff from impervious cover outside of the groundwater recharge area of the Hollow Spring, which is occupied by the preserve and potential physical springs, which may extend outside of the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The disturbance of the surface habitat (see the preserve. The surface habitat also spring is located on an unnamed Special Management Considerations or needs special management to protect it tributary to Lake Travis. The unit Protection section). from surface runoff from impervious contains primary constituent elements The designation includes the spring cover outside of the preserve and of the physical or biological features outlet and outflow up to the high water potential physical disturbance of the essential to the conservation of the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and surface habitat (see Special Management species. downstream habitat. The unit was further delineated by drawing a circle Considerations or Protection section). Special management considerations with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around or protection may be required because The designation includes the spring the spring, representing the extent of the of the potential for groundwater outlets and outflow up to the high water subterranean critical habitat. line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and pollution from current and future downstream habitat. The unit was development in the recharge area, runoff Unit 14: Kretschmarr Unit further delineated by drawing a circle from impervious cover within the Unit 14 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around surface watershed into surface habitat, private land in northern Travis County, the sites, representing the extent of the potential physical disturbance of the Texas. The unit is located west of Ranch subterranean critical habitat. We joined surface habitat, and depletion of to Market Road 620. Wilson Parke the edges of the resulting circles. groundwater (see Special Management Avenue crosses the unit along its Considerations or Protection section). Unit 11: House Spring Unit southern border. Most of the unit is The designation includes the spring undeveloped, with one commercial Unit 11 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of outlet and outflow up to the high water development near the west-central private land in northern Travis County, line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and portion. This unit contains two sites Texas. The unit is located just north of downstream habitat. The unit was (Kretschmarr Salamander Cave and Benevento Way Road. Dies Ranch Road further delineated by drawing a circle Unnamed Tributary Downstream of crosses the extreme eastern part of the with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around Grandview) that are occupied by the unit. The entire unit is covered with the springs, representing the extent of Jollyville Plateau salamander. dense residential development except the subterranean critical habitat. Kretschmarr Salamander Cave is a cave, for a narrow corridor along the stream, Unit 13: MacDonald Well Unit and Unnamed Tributary Downstream of which crosses the unit from north to Grandview is a spring site. Under south. Several streets are located in the Unit 13 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of section 4(b)(2) of the Act, certain lands unit. This unit contains House Spring, private and Travis County land in in this unit have been excluded from the which is occupied by the Jollyville northern Travis County, Texas. The unit final rule for critical habitat (see Plateau salamander. The spring is is centered near the intersection of Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act located on an unnamed tributary to Lake Grand Oaks Loop and Farm to Market section below). These lands include Travis. The unit contains primary Road 2769. Farm to Market Road 2769 approximately half of the surface habitat constituent elements of the physical or crosses the unit slightly north of its of Unnamed Tributary Downstream of biological features essential to the center. The northern portion of the unit Grandview. This unit also contains conservation of the species. contains residential development and approximately half of the surface habitat Special management considerations part of Twin Creeks Golf Course. This of SAS Canyon, which is a spring outlet or protection may be required because unit contains MacDonald Well, which is on the Grandview Hills HCP. The unit of the potential for groundwater a spring occupied by the Jollyville contains primary constituent elements pollution from current and future Plateau salamander. The spring is of the physical or biological features development in the recharge area, runoff located on an unnamed tributary to Lake essential to the conservation of the from impervious cover within the Travis. The unit contains primary species. surface watershed into surface habitat, constituent elements of the physical or Some special management is being potential physical disturbance of the biological features essential to the provided by the Balcones Canyonlands surface habitat, and depletion of conservation of the species. Preserve, which serves as mitigation for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51349

impacts to 35 species covered in the preserve into surface habitat, potential Unit 17: Bull Creek 1 Unit Balcones Canyonlands HCP (Service physical disturbance of the surface 1996, p. 3), because the surface habitat, and depletion of groundwater Unit 17 consists of 1,198 ac (485 ha) watersheds of these two springs are (see Special Management of private, City of Austin, and Travis partially contained within the preserve. Considerations or Protection section). County land in northern Travis County, However, impacts to the Jollyville The designation includes the spring Texas. The unit extends from the Plateau salamander are not covered outlets and outflow up to the high water southeastern portion of Chestnut Ridge under this HCP. Special management line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Road to 3M Center, just north of Ranch considerations or protection may be downstream habitat. The unit was to Market Road 2222. The unit contains required because of the potential for further delineated by drawing a circle some residential development on the groundwater pollution and depletion with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around extreme edge of its northern portion and from current and future development in the springs, representing the extent of part of Vandegrift High School near its the groundwater recharge area of the the subsurface critical habitat. southeastern corner. Most of the remainder of the unit is undeveloped springs, which may extend outside of Unit 16: Fern Gully Spring Unit the preserve. The surface habitat also land managed by the City of Austin and needs special management to protect it Unit 16 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of Travis County as part of the Balcones from surface runoff from impervious private and City of Austin land in Canyonlands HCP Preserve. This unit cover outside of the preserve and northern Travis County, Texas. The unit contains the following sites: Bull Creek potential physical disturbance of the is centered just south of the intersection Tributary 6 site 2, Bull Creek Tributary surface habitat (see Special Management of Jenaro Court and Boulder Lane. The 6 site 3, Bull Creek Tributary 5 site 2, Considerations or Protection section). unit contains dense residential Bull Creek Tributary 5 site 3, Tubb The surface designation was development on much of its northern Spring, Broken Bridge Spring, Spring delineated by drawing a circle with a half. Most of the southern half of the 17, Tributary No. 5, Tributary 6 at radius of 262 ft (80 m) around the spring unit is undeveloped land managed by Sewage Line, Canyon Creek, Tributary outlets (including a nearby occupied the City of Austin as part of the No. 6, Gardens of Bull Creek, Canyon spring within the boundary of the HCP) Balcones Canyonlands HCP Preserve, Creek Hog Wallow Spring, Spring 5, and outflow up to the high water line and a portion is part of the Canyon Three Hole Spring, Franklin, Franklin and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Creek preserve, a privately managed Tract 2, Franklin Tract 3, Pit Spring, downstream habitat. The unit was conservation area. This unit contains Bull Creek Spring Pool, Spring 1, Spring further delineated by drawing a circle Fern Gully Spring, which is occupied by 4, Spring 2, Lanier Spring, Cistern (Pipe) with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The Spring, Spring 3, Lanier 90-foot Riffle, the spring outlets (including a nearby spring is located on Bull Creek Bull Creek at Lanier Tract, Ribelin/ occupied spring within the boundary of Tributary 5. The unit contains primary Lanier, Spring 18, Horsethief, Ribelin, the HCP) and cave, representing the constituent elements of the physical or Spring 15, Spring 16, Spring 14, Lower biological features essential to the extent of the subsurface critical habitat. Ribelin, Spring 13, Spring 12, Upper conservation of the species. We connected the edges of the resulting Ribelin, Ribelin 2, Spring 10, and Spring The unit is within the Balcones circles. Those surface and subsurface 9. These springs are occupied by the areas within the boundary of the Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as mitigation for impacts to 35 species Jollyville Plateau salamander and are Grandview Hills HCP were then located on Bull Creek and its tributaries. removed from the unit. covered in the Balcones Canyonlands HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, The unit contains primary constituent Unit 15: Pope and Hiers (Canyon Creek) impacts to the Jollyville Plateau elements of the physical or biological Spring Unit salamander are not covered under this features essential to the conservation of the species. Unit 15 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of HCP. Some special management is being private land in northern Travis County, provided by the preserve because the The unit is within the Balcones Texas. The unit is located between surface watershed of this spring is Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as Bramblecrest Drive and Winchelsea partially contained within the preserve. mitigation for impacts to 35 species Drive. The unit contains dense However, special management covered in the Balcones Canyonlands residential development on its northern, considerations or protection may be HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, eastern, and western portions. The required because of the potential for impacts to the Jollyville Plateau central portion of the unit is an groundwater pollution and depletion salamander are not covered under this undeveloped canyon and is preserved in from current and future development in HCP. Some special management is being perpetuity as part of a private preserve. the groundwater recharge area of the provided by the preserve because the This unit contains Pope and Hiers spring, which may extend outside of the surface watersheds of these springs are (Canyon Creek) Spring, which is preserve. The surface habitat also needs partially contained within the preserve. occupied by the Jollyville Plateau special management to protect it from However, special management salamander. The spring is located on surface runoff from impervious cover considerations or protection may be Bull Creek Tributary 6. The unit outside of the preserve and potential required because of the potential for contains primary constituent elements physical disturbance of the surface groundwater pollution and depletion of the physical or biological features habitat (see Special Management from current and future development in essential to the conservation of the Considerations or Protection section). the groundwater recharge area of the species. The designation includes the spring springs, which may extend outside of Special management considerations outlet and outflow up to the high water the preserve. The surface habitat also or protection may be required because line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and needs special management to protect it of the potential for groundwater downstream habitat. The unit was from surface runoff from impervious pollution from current and future further delineated by drawing a circle cover outside of the preserve and development in the recharge area, runoff with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around potential physical disturbance of the from impervious cover within the the spring, representing the extent of the surface habitat (see Special Management surface watershed outside of the subsurface critical habitat. Considerations or Protection section).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51350 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

The designation includes the spring Unit 19: Bull Creek 3 Unit Unit 20: Moss Gully Spring Unit outlets and outflow up to the high water Unit 19 consists of 97 ac (39 ha) of Unit 20 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and City of Austin and Travis County land downstream habitat. The unit was private and City of Austin land in northern Travis County, Texas. The unit in northern Travis County, Texas. The further delineated by drawing a circle unit is just east of the eastern end of with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around is just southeast of the intersection of Ranch to Market Road 620 and Vista Unit 19. The unit is all undeveloped the sites, representing the extent of the woodland, and it is managed by the City Parke Drive. The unit contains some subsurface critical habitat. We joined of Austin or Travis County as part of the residential development on its western the edges of the resulting circles. Balcones Canyonlands HCP Preserve. tip, but the rest of the unit is This unit contains Moss Gully Spring, Unit 18: Bull Creek 2 Unit undeveloped land. Much of the which is occupied by the Jollyville remainder of the unit is managed by the Unit 18 consists of 237 ac (96 ha) of Plateau salamander. The spring is City of Austin as part of the Balcones private, City of Austin, and Travis located on Bull Creek. The unit contains Canyonlands Preserve HCP. This unit County land in northern Travis County, primary constituent elements of the contains two sites (Hamilton Reserve Texas. The center of the unit is near the physical or biological features essential West and Gaas Spring) that are occupied eastern end of Concordia University to the conservation of the species. Drive. Concordia University is in the by the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The unit is within the Balcones central and eastern parts of the unit. The springs are located on Bull Creek. Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as Much of the rest of the unit is The unit contains primary constituent mitigation for impacts to 35 species undeveloped land managed by the City elements of the physical or biological covered in the Balcones Canyonlands of Austin and Travis County as part of features essential to the conservation of HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, the Balcones Canyonlands HCP the species. impacts to the Jollyville Plateau Preserve. This unit contains six springs The unit is partially within the salamander are not covered under this (Schlumberger Spring No. 1, Balcones Canyonlands Preserve, which HCP. Some special management is being Schlumberger Spring No. 2, Spring 6, serves as mitigation for impacts to 35 provided by the preserve because the Spring 19, Concordia Spring X, and species covered in the Balcones surface watershed of this site is entirely Concordia Spring Y) that are occupied Canyonlands HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). contained within the preserve. by the Jollyville Plateau salamander. However, impacts to the Jollyville However, special management The springs are located on Bull Creek Plateau salamander are not covered considerations or protection may be Tributary 7. The unit contains primary under this HCP. Some special required because of the potential for constituent elements of the physical or management is being provided by the groundwater pollution and depletion biological features essential to the preserve because the surface watersheds from current and future development in conservation of the species. of these springs are partially contained the groundwater recharge area of the spring, which may extend outside of the The unit is within the Balcones within the preserve. However, special preserve. The surface habitat also needs Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as management considerations or special management to protect it from mitigation for impacts to 35 species protection may be required because of potential physical disturbance of the covered in the Balcones Canyonlands the potential for groundwater pollution surface habitat (see Special Management HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, and depletion from current and future Considerations or Protection section). impacts to the Jollyville Plateau development in the groundwater recharge area of the springs, which may The designation includes the spring salamander are not covered under this outlet and outflow up to the high water HCP. Some special management is being extend outside of the preserve. The surface habitat also needs special line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and provided by the preserve because the downstream habitat. The unit was surface watersheds of these springs are management to protect it from surface runoff from impervious cover outside of further delineated by drawing a circle partially contained within the preserve. with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around However, special management the preserve and potential physical disturbance of the surface habitat (see the spring, representing the extent of the considerations or protection may be subsurface critical habitat. required because of the potential for Special Management Considerations or groundwater pollution and depletion Protection section). Under section Unit 21: Ivanhoe Spring Unit 4(b)(2) of the Act, certain lands in this from current and future development in Unit 21 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of unit have been excluded from the final the groundwater recharge area of the City of Austin land in northern Travis rule for critical habitat under the Four springs, which may extend outside of County, Texas. The unit is east of the Points HCP (see Application of Section the preserve. The surface habitat also northwest extent of High Hollow Drive. 4(b)(2) of the Act section below). needs special management to protect it The unit is all undeveloped woodland from surface runoff from impervious The designation includes the spring and is managed by the City of Austin as cover outside of the preserve and outlets and outflow up to the high water part of the Balcones Canyonlands potential physical disturbance of the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Preserve HCP. This unit contains surface habitat (see Special Management downstream habitat. The unit was Ivanhoe Spring 2, which is occupied by Considerations or Protection section). further delineated by drawing a circle the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The The designation includes the spring with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around spring is located on West Bull Creek. outlets and outflow up to the high water the spring outlets (including nearby The unit contains primary constituent line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and occupied spring outlets within the elements of the physical or biological downstream habitat. The unit was boundary of the Four Points HCP), features essential to the conservation of further delineated by drawing a circle representing the extent of the subsurface the species. with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around critical habitat. We connected the edges The unit is within the Balcones the springs, representing the extent of of the resulting circles. Those areas Canyonlands Preserve, which serves as the subsurface critical habitat. We within the boundary of the Four Points mitigation for impacts to 35 species joined the edges of the resulting circles. HCP were then excluded from the unit. covered in the Balcones Canyonlands

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51351

HCP (Service 1996, p. 3). However, constituent elements of the physical or the unit, and scattered woodland in the impacts to the Jollyville Plateau biological features essential to the eastern and western part. There is a golf salamander are not covered under this conservation of the species. course in the north-central part of the HCP. Some special management is being Special management considerations unit. This unit contains Tributary No. 3, provided by the preserve because the or protection may be required because which is occupied by the Jollyville surface watershed of this site is entirely of the potential for groundwater Plateau salamander. The spring is contained within the preserve. pollution from current and future located on Bull Creek Tributary 3. The However, special management development in the recharge area, runoff unit contains primary constituent considerations or protection may be from impervious cover within the elements of the physical or biological required because of the potential for surface watershed into surface habitat, features essential to the conservation of groundwater pollution and depletion potential physical disturbance of the the species. from current and future development in surface habitat, and depletion of Special management considerations the groundwater recharge area of the groundwater (see Special Management or protection may be required because spring, which may extend outside of the Considerations or Protection section). of the potential for groundwater preserve. The surface habitat also needs The designation includes the spring pollution from current and future special management to protect it from outlets and outflow up to the high water development in the recharge area, runoff potential physical disturbance of the line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and from impervious cover within the surface habitat (see Special Management downstream habitat. The unit was surface watershed into surface habitat, Considerations or Protection section). further delineated by drawing a circle potential physical disturbance of the The designation includes the spring with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around surface habitat, and depletion of outlet and outflow up to the high water the springs, representing the extent of groundwater (see Special Management line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and the subsurface critical habitat. We Considerations or Protection section). downstream habitat. The unit was joined the edges of the resulting circles. The designation includes the spring further delineated by drawing a circle Unit 24: Long Hog Hollow Unit outlet and outflow up to the high water with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around Unit 24 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and the spring, representing the extent of the downstream habitat. The unit was subsurface critical habitat. private land in northern Travis County, Texas. The unit is centered east of the further delineated by drawing a circle Unit 22: Sylvia Spring Area Unit intersection of Cassia Drive and Fireoak with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around Unit 22 consists of 439 ac (178 ha) of Drive. Most of the unit is in residential the spring, representing the extent of the private, City of Austin, and Williamson development. There are wooded subsurface critical habitat. County land in northern Travis County corridors in the central and eastern Unit 26: Sierra Spring Unit and southwestern Williamson County, portion of the unit. This unit contains Unit 26 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of Texas. The unit is located east of the one spring (Long Hog Hollow Tributary private land in northern Travis County, intersection of Callanish Park Drive and below Fireoak Spring) that is occupied Texas. The unit is located west of the Westerkirk Drive, north of the by the Jollyville Plateau salamander. intersection of Tahoma Place and intersection of Spicewood Springs Road The spring is located on Long Hog Ladera Vista Drive. The eastern and and Yaupon Drive, and west of the Hollow Tributary. The unit contains western part of the unit is in residential intersection of Spicewood Springs Road primary constituent elements of the development. A wooded corridor and Old Lampasas Trail in the Bull physical or biological features essential crosses the central part of the unit from Creek Ranch community. Spicewood to the conservation of the species. Springs Road crosses the unit from Special management considerations north to south. A facility that handles southwest to east. Residential and or protection may be required because automotive fluids is located in the commercial development is found in of the potential for groundwater northwest portion of the unit. This unit most of the unit. An undeveloped pollution from current and future contains Sierra Spring, which is stream corridor crosses the unit from development in the recharge area, runoff occupied by the Jollyville Plateau east to west. This unit contains 13 sites from impervious cover within the salamander. The spring is located on a (Small Sylvia Spring, Sylvia Spring surface watershed into surface habitat, tributary to Bull Creek. The unit Area 2, Sylvia Spring Area 3, Sylvia potential physical disturbance of the contains primary constituent elements Spring Area 4, Downstream of Small surface habitat, and depletion of of the physical or biological features Sylvia Spring 1, Downstream of Small groundwater (see Special Management essential to the conservation of the Sylvia Spring 2, Spicewood Valley Park Considerations or Protection section). species. Spring, Tributary 4 upstream, Tributary The designation includes the spring Special management considerations 4 downstream, Spicewood Park Dam, outlet and outflow up to the high water or protection may be required because Tanglewood Spring, Tanglewood 2, and line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and of the potential for groundwater Tanglewood 3) that are occupied by the downstream habitat. The unit was pollution from current and future Jollyville Plateau salamander. Small further delineated by drawing a circle development in the recharge area, runoff Sylvia Spring, Sylvia Spring Area 2, with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around from impervious cover within the Sylvia Spring Area 3, Sylvia Spring the spring, representing the extent of the surface watershed into surface habitat, Area 4, Downstream of Small Sylvia subsurface critical habitat. potential physical disturbance of the Spring 1, Downstream of Small Sylvia surface habitat, and depletion of Spring 2, Spicewood Valley Park Unit 25: Tributary 3 Unit groundwater (see Special Management Spring, Tributary 4 upstream, Tributary Unit 25 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of Considerations or Protection section). 4 downstream, and Spicewood Park private land in northern Travis County, The designation includes the spring Dam are located on Tributary 4. Texas. The unit is centered between outlet and outflow up to the high water Tanglewood Spring, Tanglewood 2, and Bluegrass Drive and Spicebush Drive. line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Tanglewood 3 are located on The eastern and western part of the unit downstream habitat. The unit was Tanglewood Creek, a tributary to is in residential development. There are further delineated by drawing a circle Tributary 4. The unit contains primary wooded corridors in the central part of with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51352 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

the spring, representing the extent of the pollution from current and future contains two sites, Spicewood Spring subsurface critical habitat. development in the recharge area, runoff and Spicewood Tributary, which are from impervious cover within the occupied by the Jollyville Plateau Unit 27: Troll Spring Unit surface watershed into surface habitat, salamander. The springs are located in Unit 27 consists of 98 ac (40 ha) of potential physical disturbance of the an unnamed tributary to Shoal Creek. City of Austin and private land in surface habitat, and depletion of The unit contains primary constituent northern Travis County, Texas. The unit groundwater (see Special Management elements of the physical or biological is located west of the intersection of Considerations or Protection section). features essential to the conservation of Jollyville Road and Taylor Draper Lane. The designation includes the spring the species. The eastern and western part of the unit outlets and outflows up to the high Special management considerations is in residential development. A water line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream or protection may be required because wooded corridor crosses the central part and downstream habitat. The unit was of the potential for groundwater of the unit from north to south. This further delineated by drawing a circle pollution from current and future unit contains two springs (Hearth with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around development in the recharge area, runoff Spring and Troll Spring) that are the sites, representing the extent of the from impervious cover within the occupied by the Jollyville Plateau subsurface critical habitat. We surface watershed into surface habitat, salamander. The springs are located on connected the edges of the resulting physical disturbance of the surface a tributary to Bull Creek. The unit circles. habitat, and depletion of groundwater contains primary constituent elements (see Special Management Unit 30: Indian Spring Unit of the physical or biological features Considerations or Protection section). essential to the conservation of the Unit 30 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of The designation includes the spring species. private land in northern Travis County, outlet and outflow up to the high water Special management considerations Texas. The unit is centered just south of line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and or protection may be required because Greystone Drive about halfway between downstream habitat. The unit was of the potential for groundwater its intersection with Edgerock Drive and further delineated by drawing a circle pollution from current and future Chimney Corners Drive. Most of the unit with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around development in the recharge area, runoff is covered with residential development the sites, representing the extent of the from impervious cover within the except for a small wooded corridor that subsurface critical habitat. surface watershed into surface habitat, crosses the central part of the unit from Unit 32: Balcones District Park Spring potential physical disturbance of the east to west. This unit contains Indian Unit surface habitat, and depletion of Spring, which is occupied by the groundwater (see Special Management Jollyville Plateau salamander. The Unit 32 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of Considerations or Protection section). spring is located on an unnamed private and City of Austin land in The designation includes the spring tributary to Shoal Creek. The unit northern Travis County, Texas. The unit outlets up to the high water line and 262 contains primary constituent elements is centered about 1,411 ft (430 m) ft (80 m) of upstream and downstream of the physical or biological features northeast of the intersection of Duval habitat. The unit was further delineated essential to the conservation of the Road and Amherst Drive. Most of the by drawing a circle with a radius of 984 species. unit is in a city park (Balcones District ft (300 m) around the springs, Special management considerations Park) with a swimming pool. A representing the extent of the subsurface or protection may be required because substantial amount of the park is critical habitat. We connected the edges of the potential for groundwater wooded and undeveloped. There is of the resulting circles. pollution from current and future dense commercial development in the development in the recharge area, runoff southern and southeastern portions of Unit 28: Stillhouse Unit from impervious cover within the the unit. This unit contains Balcones Unit 28 consists of 203 ac (82 ha) of surface watershed into surface habitat, District Park Spring, which is occupied City of Austin and private land in and depletion of groundwater (see by the Jollyville Plateau salamander. northern Travis County, Texas. The unit Special Management Considerations or The spring is located in the streambed is centered due north of the intersection Protection section). of an unnamed tributary to Walnut of West Rim Drive and Burney Drive. The designation includes the spring Creek. The unit contains primary The northern and southern part of the outlet and outflow up to the high water constituent elements of the physical or unit is in residential development. A line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and biological features essential to the wooded corridor crosses the central part downstream habitat. The unit was conservation of the species. of the unit from east to west. This unit further delineated by drawing a circle Special management considerations contains eight sites: Stillhouse Hollow, with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around or protection may be required because Barrow Hollow Spring, Spring 20, the spring, representing the extent of the of the potential for groundwater Stillhouse Hollow Tributary, Stillhouse subsurface critical habitat. pollution from current and future Tributary, Little Stillhouse Hollow development in the recharge area, runoff Spring, Stillhouse Hollow Spring, and Unit 31: Spicewood Spring Unit from impervious cover within the Barrow Preserve Tributary. All are Unit 31 consists of 68 ac (28 ha) of surface watershed into surface habitat, occupied by the Jollyville Plateau private land in northern Travis County, potential physical disturbance of the salamander. The springs are located on Texas. The unit is centered just surface habitat, and depletion of an unnamed tributary to Bull Creek. The northeast of the intersection of Ceberry groundwater (see Special Management unit contains primary constituent Drive and Spicewood Springs Road, just Considerations or Protection section). elements of the physical or biological downstream of the bridge on Ceberry The designation includes the spring features essential to the conservation of Drive. Most of the unit is covered with outlet and outflow up to the high water the species. commercial and residential line and 262 ft (80 m) of upstream and Special management considerations development except for a small wooded downstream habitat. The unit was or protection may be required because corridor along the stream, which crosses further delineated by drawing a circle of the potential for groundwater the unit from north to east. This unit with a radius of 984 ft (300 m) around

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51353

the spring, representing the extent of the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through with implementation of the proposed subsurface critical habitat. our issuance of: Federal action, the affected critical (1) A concurrence letter for Federal habitat would continue to serve its Effects of Critical Habitat Designation actions that may affect, but are not intended conservation role for the Section 7 Consultation likely to adversely affect, listed species species. Activities that may destroy or Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires or critical habitat; or adversely modify critical habitat are (2) A biological opinion for Federal Federal agencies, including the Service, those that alter the physical or actions that may affect and are likely to to ensure that any action they fund, biological features to an extent that adversely affect, listed species or critical authorize, or carry out is not likely to appreciably reduces the conservation habitat. value of critical habitat for the Austin jeopardize the continued existence of When we issue a biological opinion blind and Jollyville Plateau any endangered species or threatened concluding that a project is likely to salamanders. As discussed above, the species or result in the destruction or jeopardize the continued existence of a role of critical habitat is to support life- adverse modification of designated listed species and/or destroy or history needs of the species and provide critical habitat of such species. In adversely modify critical habitat, we for the conservation of the species. The addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act provide reasonable and prudent function of each unit with respect to requires Federal agencies to confer with alternatives to the project, if any are species conservation is to contribute to the Service on any agency action which identifiable, that would avoid the the redundancy, representation, and is likely to jeopardize the continued likelihood of jeopardy and/or resiliency of its respective species, existence of any species to be listed destruction or adverse modification of which affects the species’ probability of under the Act or result in the critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable persistence. destruction or adverse modification of and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us critical habitat. 402.02) as alternative actions identified to briefly evaluate and describe, in any Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit during consultation that: proposed or final regulation that Courts of Appeals have invalidated our (1) Can be implemented in a manner designates critical habitat, activities regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or consistent with the intended purpose of involving a Federal action that may adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) the action, destroy or adversely modify such (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. (2) Can be implemented consistent habitat, or that may be affected by such Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d with the scope of the Federal agency’s designation. 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. legal authority and jurisdiction, Activities that may affect critical U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 (3) Are economically and habitat, when carried out, funded, or F.3d 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we technologically feasible, and authorized by a Federal agency, should do not rely on this regulatory definition (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, result in consultation for the Austin when analyzing whether an action is avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the blind and Jollyville Plateau likely to destroy or adversely modify continued existence of the listed species salamanders. These activities include, critical habitat. Under the statutory and/or avoid the likelihood of but are not limited to: provisions of the Act, we determine destroying or adversely modifying (1) Actions that would physically destruction or adverse modification on critical habitat. disturb the spring or subsurface habitat the basis of whether, with Reasonable and prudent alternatives upon which these two salamander implementation of the proposed Federal can vary from slight project species depend. Such activities could action, the affected critical habitat modifications to extensive redesign or include, but are not limited to, would continue to serve its intended relocation of the project. Costs channelization, removal of the substrate, conservation role for the species. associated with implementing a and other activities that result in the If a Federal action may affect a listed reasonable and prudent alternative are physical destruction of habitat or the species or its critical habitat, the similarly variable. modification of habitat so that it is not responsible Federal agency (action Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require suitable for the species. agency) must enter into consultation Federal agencies to reinitiate (2) Actions that would increase the with us. Examples of actions that are consultation on previously reviewed concentration of sediment or subject to the section 7 consultation actions in instances where we have contaminants in the surface or process are actions on State, tribal, listed a new species or subsequently subsurface habitat. Such activities could local, or private lands that require a designated critical habitat that may be include, but are not limited to, increases Federal permit (such as a permit from affected and the Federal agency has in impervious cover in the surface the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under retained discretionary involvement or watershed, inadequate erosion controls section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 control over the action (or the agency’s on the surface and subsurface U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the discretionary involvement or control is watersheds, and release of pollutants Service under section 10 of the Act) or authorized by law). Consequently, into the surface water or connected that involve some other Federal action Federal agencies sometimes may need to groundwater at a point source or by (such as funding from the Federal request reinitiation of consultation with dispersed release (non-point source). Highway Administration, Federal us on actions for which formal These activities could alter water Aviation Administration, or the Federal consultation has been completed, if conditions to levels that are harmful to Emergency Management Agency). those actions with discretionary the Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau Federal actions not affecting listed involvement or control may affect salamanders or their prey and result in species or critical habitat, and actions subsequently listed species or direct, indirect, or cumulative adverse on State, tribal, local, or private lands designated critical habitat. effects to these salamander individuals that are not federally funded or and their life cycles. Sedimentation can authorized, do not require section 7 Application of the ‘‘Adverse also adversely affect salamander habitat consultation. Modification’’ Standard by reducing access to interstitial spaces. As a result of section 7 consultation, The key factor related to the adverse (3) Actions that would deplete the we document compliance with the modification determination is whether, aquifer to an extent that decreases or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51354 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

stops the flow of occupied springs or benefit to the species for which critical implementation of a management plan that reduces the quantity of habitat is proposed for designation.’’ that provides equal to or more subterranean habitat used by the There are no Department of Defense conservation than a critical habitat species. Such activities could include, lands with a completed INRMP within designation would provide. but are not limited to water withdrawals or near the critical habitat designation. In the case of the Austin blind and from aquifers, increases in impervious Therefore, we are not exempting lands Jollyville Plateau salamanders, the cover over recharge areas, and from this final designation of critical benefits of critical habitat include channelization or other modification of habitat for the Austin blind and public awareness of the species’ recharge features that would decrease Jollyville Plateau salamanders pursuant presence and the importance of habitat recharge. These activities could dewater to section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. protection and, in cases where a Federal habitat or cause reduced water quality nexus exists, increased habitat Exclusions to levels that are harmful to one of the protection for the species due to the two salamanders or their prey and result Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act protection from adverse modification or in adverse effects to their habitat. destruction of critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that When considering the benefits of Exemptions the Secretary shall designate and make exclusion and whether exclusion is revisions to critical habitat on the basis Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act likely to result in implementation of a of the best available scientific data after management plan that provides equal or The Sikes Improvement Act of 1997 taking into consideration the economic more conservation than a critical habitat (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) required impact, national security impact, and designation would provide, we consider each military installation that includes any other relevant impact of specifying a variety of factors, including but not land and water suitable for the any particular area as critical habitat. limited to, whether the plan is finalized; conservation and management of The Secretary may exclude an area from how it provides for the conservation of natural resources to complete an critical habitat if she determines that the the essential physical or biological Integrated Natural Resources benefits of such exclusion outweigh the features; whether there is a reasonable Management Plan (INRMP) by benefits of specifying such area as part expectation that the conservation November 17, 2001. An INRMP of the critical habitat, unless she management strategies and actions integrates implementation of the determines, based on the best scientific contained in a management plan will be military mission of the installation with data available, that the failure to implemented into the future; whether stewardship of the natural resources designate such area as critical habitat the conservation strategies in the plan found on the base. Each INRMP will result in the extinction of the are likely to be effective; and whether includes: species. In making that determination, the plan contains a monitoring program (1) An assessment of the ecological the statute on its face, as well as the or adaptive management to ensure that needs on the installation, including the legislative history, are clear that the the conservation measures are effective need to provide for the conservation of Secretary has broad discretion regarding and can be adapted in the future in listed species; which factor(s) to use and how much response to new information. (2) A statement of goals and priorities; weight to give to any factor. When considering the benefits of In considering whether to exclude a exclusion and whether exclusion is (3) A detailed description of particular area from the designation, we likely to result in the continuation, management actions to be implemented identify the benefits of including the strengthening, or encouragement of to provide for these ecological needs; area in the designation, identify the partnerships, we consider a variety of and benefits of excluding the area from the factors including but not limited to, (4) A monitoring and adaptive designation, and evaluate whether the whether or not the Service has entered management plan. benefits of exclusion outweigh the into written conservation agreements Among other things, each INRMP benefits of inclusion. If the analysis with landowners based on conservation must, to the extent appropriate and indicates that the benefits of exclusion partnerships or issued permits with applicable, provide for fish and wildlife outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the assurances covering the species. management; fish and wildlife habitat Secretary may exercise her discretion to After identifying the benefits of enhancement or modification; wetland exclude the area only if such exclusion inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, protection, enhancement, and would not result in the extinction of the we carefully weigh the two sides to restoration where necessary to support species. evaluate whether the benefits of fish and wildlife; and enforcement of When identifying the benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. applicable natural resource laws. inclusion for an area, we consider the If our analysis indicates that the benefits The National Defense Authorization additional regulatory benefits that area of exclusion outweigh the benefits of Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– would receive from the protection from inclusion, we then determine whether 136) amended the Act to limit areas adverse modification or destruction as a exclusion would result in extinction. If eligible for designation as critical result of actions with a Federal nexus; exclusion of an area from critical habitat habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) the educational benefits of mapping will result in extinction, we will not of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) essential habitat for recovery of the exclude it from the designation. now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not listed species; and any benefits that may Based on the information provided by designate as critical habitat any lands or result from a designation due to State or entities seeking exclusion, as well as other geographical areas owned or Federal laws that may apply to critical additional public comments received, controlled by the Department of habitat. we evaluated whether certain lands Defense, or designated for its use, that When identifying the benefits of were appropriate for exclusion from this are subject to an integrated natural exclusion, we consider, among other final designation pursuant to section resources management plan prepared things, whether exclusion of a specific 4(b)(2) of the Act. As a result, we are under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 area is likely to result in conservation; excluding approximately 576 ac (233 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines the continuation, strengthening, or ha) from the portions of Jollyville in writing that such plan provides a encouragement of partnerships; or Plateau salamander proposed critical

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51355

habitat Units 3, 14, and 19 that are final designation. We are excluding comment periods, but after further covered under the Four Points, these areas because we believe that they analysis we did not exclude these Grandview Hills, and Buttercup Creek are appropriate for exclusion under the additional areas from critical habitat. HCPs. The boundaries of these HCPs did ‘‘other relevant impacts’’ provisions of Explanations for our conclusions in not cover the entirety of their respective section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Please note these cases can be found in the critical habitat units; therefore, the that we identified some additional areas Summary of Comments and entire unit was not excluded. Table 3 within our proposed rule that we Recommendations section of this final below provides approximate areas of considered for exclusion, and we rule. lands that meet the definition of critical received requests for exclusion of habitat but have been excluded from our additional areas during the public

TABLE 4—AREAS EXCLUDED FROM THE DESIGNATION OF CRITICAL HABITAT BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT

Areas excluded in Critical habitat unit Specific area Basis for exclusion acres (hectares)

3 ...... Buttercup Creek ...... Buttercup Creek HCP/Partnership ...... 375 (152) 14 ...... Grandview Hills ...... Grandview Hills HCP/Partnership ...... 44 (18) 19 ...... Four Points ...... Four Points HCP/Partnership ...... 157 (64)

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts distributed, including an assessment of comprehensive discussion of the Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we any local or regional impacts of habitat potential impacts. Our economic analysis did not consider the economic impacts of conservation and the potential effects of identify any disproportionate costs that specifying any particular area as critical conservation activities on government are likely to result from the designation habitat. To consider economic impacts, agencies, private businesses, and of critical habitat for the Austin blind we prepared a draft economic analysis individuals. The FEA measures lost and Jollyville Plateau salamanders. of the proposed critical habitat economic efficiency associated with Consequently, we have determined not designation and related factors residential and commercial to use our discretion to exclude any (Industrial Economics 2013). development and public projects and areas from this designation of critical The intent of the final economic activities, such as economic impacts on habitat based on economic impacts. A analysis (FEA) is to quantify the water management and transportation copy of the FEA with supporting economic impacts of potential projects, Federal lands, small entities, documents may be obtained by conservation efforts for the central and the energy industry. The Service contacting the Austin Ecological Texas salamanders; some of these costs uses this information to assess whether Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES) or will likely be incurred regardless of the effects of the designation might by downloading them from the Internet whether we designate critical habitat unduly burden a particular group or at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket (baseline). The economic impact of the economic sector. Finally, the FEA No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001. final critical habitat designation is considers those costs that may occur in analyzed by comparing scenarios both the 23 years following the designation of Exclusions Based on National Security ‘‘with critical habitat’’ and ‘‘without critical habitat, which was determined Impacts critical habitat.’’ The ‘‘without critical to be the appropriate period for analysis Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we habitat’’ scenario represents the baseline because limited planning information consider whether there are lands owned for the analysis, considering protections was available for most activities to or managed by the Department of already in place for the species (for forecast activity levels for projects Defense (DOD) where a national security example, under the Federal listing and beyond a 23-year timeframe. The FEA impact might exist. In preparing this other Federal, State, and local quantifies economic impacts of the final rule, we have determined that regulations). The baseline, therefore, Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau none of the lands within the designation represents the estimated costs incurred salamanders’ conservation efforts of critical habitat for the Austin blind regardless of whether critical habitat is associated with the following categories and Jollyville Plateau salamanders are designated. The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ of activity: (1) Development, (2) Water owned and managed by the Department scenario describes the estimated management activities, (3) of Defense. Consequently, the Secretary incremental impacts (costs) associated Transportation projects, (4) Utility is not exercising her discretion to specifically with the designation of projects, (5) Mining, and (6) Livestock exclude any areas from this final critical habitat for the species. The grazing. designation based on impacts on incremental conservation efforts and national security. associated impacts are those not All incremental costs anticipated to expected to occur absent the designation result from the designation are Exclusions Based on Other Relevant of critical habitat for the species. In administrative in nature and result from Impacts other words, the incremental costs are the consideration of adverse Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we those attributable solely to the modification in section 7 consultations consider any other relevant impacts, in designation of critical habitat above and and reinitiation for existing addition to economic impacts and beyond the baseline costs; these are the management plans. Consultations impacts on national security. We costs we consider in the final associated with development activities consider a number of factors including designation of critical habitat. account for approximately 98.7 percent whether the landowners have developed The FEA also addresses how potential of incremental impacts in the FEA. any HCPs or other management plans economic impacts are likely to be Please refer to the FEA for a for the area, or whether there are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51356 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

conservation partnerships that would be Cave ground beetle (Rhadine that we are excluding have either been encouraged by designation of, or persephone) and bone cave authorized for development or exclusion from, critical habitat. In harvestman), and the Jollyville Plateau preserved in perpetuity for the addition, we look at any tribal issues salamander, and to contribute to conservation of the golden-cheeked and consider the government-to- conservation of the covered species and warbler, Tooth Cave ground beetle, bone government relationship of the United other listed and non-listed cave or karst cave harvestman, and Jollyville Plateau States with tribal entities. fauna. The Jollyville Plateau salamander salamander. The entirety of Unit 19 is was covered as a non-listed species in not covered under this HCP, and thus, Land and Resource Management Plans, the HCP and the Service provided ‘‘No the entire unit was not excluded. Conservation Plans, or Agreements Surprises’’ assurances covering the Grandview Hills HCP Overview Based on Conservation Partnerships Jollyville Plateau salamander. The ‘‘No When considering the benefits of Surprises’’ rule (63 FR 8859, February The goals of the Grandview Hills HCP exclusion based on a current land 23, 1998) generally states that the are to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for management or conservation plan (HCPs Service will not require additional the potential negative effects of as well as other types), we assess commitment of land, water, or financial construction and operation of whether: compensation or restrictions on the use residential and commercial (1) The plan is complete and of land, water, or other natural resources development near and adjacent to identifies how it provides for the otherwise available for development or Jollyville Plateau salamander, golden- conservation of the essential physical or use under the HCP for species covered cheeked warbler, black-capped vireo, biological features; by the permit under a properly Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion (2) there is a reasonable expectation implemented conservation plan without (Tartarocreagris texana), and the that the conservation management the consent of the permittee. No Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle strategies and actions will be surprises assurances apply only to (Texamaurops reddelli). The Jollyville implemented for the foreseeable future, species adequately covered by the HCP Plateau salamander was covered as a based on past practices, written in question and only to those permittees non-listed species in the HCP, and the guidance, or regulations; who are in full compliance with the Service provided ‘‘No Surprises’’ (3) the conservation strategies in the terms of their HCP, incidental take assurances covering the Jollyville plan are likely to be effective; permit, and other supporting Plateau salamander. (4) the plan contains a monitoring documents. The Grandview Hills HCP authorizes program or adaptive management to The Four Points HCP authorizes incidental take of golden-cheeked ensure that the conservation measures incidental take of the golden-cheeked warbler, black-capped vireo, and karst are effective and can be adapted in the warbler and endangered karst invertebrates. Implementation of the future in response to new information; invertebrates (in two caves). Under the HCP will result in preservation of and Four Points HCP, mitigation for take approximately 313 ac (127 ha), which (5) whether the plan provides equal or was implemented by setting aside 179 includes golden-cheeked warbler and more conservation than a critical habitat ac (72 ha) of the property, which remain black-capped vireo habitat, one designation would provide. in a natural undisturbed condition and endangered species karst invertebrate When considering the benefits of are preserved in perpetuity for the cave, and a spring and spring run exclusion based on whether it is likely benefit of the listed and non-listed containing Jollyville Plateau to result in the continuation, species. Specifically, one 52-ac (21-ha) salamanders. Specifically, 266 ac (108 strengthening, or encouragement of on-site preserve contains five caves ha) of golden-cheeked warbler habitat partnerships, we assess whether: (four with Tooth Cave ground beetle and will be deeded to the Balcones (1) The Service has entered into a three with bone cave harvestman) and Canyonlands Preserve, 15 ac (6 ha) of written conservation agreement with a high-quality golden-cheeked warbler black-capped vireo habitat will be landowner based on a conservation habitat, and contributes to the restored, 600-ft (183-m) setbacks will be partnership, or maintenance of water quality for placed around Amber Cave, buffers will (2) the Service has issued a permit Jollyville Plateau salamander springs be placed around the Jollyville Plateau with assurances covering the species. downstream, both on and offsite of Four salamander spring, and drainage will be Based on consideration of these other Points. Another approximately 127-ac routed away from the Jollyville Plateau relevant factors, we believe the benefits (51-ha) onsite preserve supports high- salamander site. As part of the of excluding the Four Points, Grandview quality golden-cheeked warbler habitat Grandview Hills HCP, 69 Grandview LP Hills, and Buttercup Creek HCP areas and contributes to protection of the (formerly Tomen-Parke Associates) is outweigh the benefits of including them. water quality of onsite Jollyville Plateau required to protect and manage the Thus, we are excluding approximately salamander springs, Springs 21, 22, and onsite preserve areas in perpetuity in 576 ac (233 ha) of non-Federal lands in 24. Additionally, development within accordance with the permit, HCP, and portions of Units 3, 14, and 19 under the upland area that is immediately conservation needs of the species. these HCPs. See further discussion of adjacent to the preserve lands with the All of the approximately 44 ac (18 ha) our assessment below. Jollyville Plateau salamander will be of non-Federal lands under the sited to avoid drainages that contain Grandview Hills HCP in critical habtat Four Points HCP Overview springs known to support Jollyville Unit 14 that we are excluding have The goals of the Four Points HCP are Plateau salamanders. As part of the Four either been authorized for development to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for the Points HCP, the permittee, New TPG— or preserved in perpetuity for the potential negative effects of construction Four Points, is required to protect and conservation of the golden-cheeked and operation of mixed use (hotel, manage the preserve areas in perpetuity warbler, black-capped vireo, Tooth Cave commercial, office, and retail) and in accordance with the permit, HCP, pseudoscorpion, Kretschmarr Cave residential development near and and conservation needs of the species. mold beetle, and Jollyville Plateau adjacent to currently occupied habitat of All of the approximately 157 ac (64 salamander. The entirety of Unit 14 is the endangered golden-cheeked warbler, ha) of non-Federal lands under the Four not covered under this HCP, and thus, endangered karst invertebrates (Tooth Points HCP in critical habitat Unit 19 the entire unit was not excluded.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51357

Buttercup Creek HCP Overview All of the approximately 375 ac (152 conservation activities, to be valuable. ha) of non-Federal lands under the Designation of critical habitat would The goals of the Buttercup Creek HCP Buttercup Creek HCP in critical habitat provide educational benefits by are to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for Unit 3 that we are excluding have either informing Federal agencies and the the potential negative effects of been authorized for development or public about the presence of listed construction and operation of single and preserved in perpetuity for the species for all units. multifamily residences and a school conservation of the Tooth Cave ground near and adjacent to currently occupied In summary, we believe that the beetle, Jollyville Plateau salamander, benefits of inclusion of lands under the habitat of the endangered Tooth Cave and other non-listed species. The Four Points, Grandview Hills, and ground beetle and other rare cave and entirety of Unit 3 is not covered under Buttercup Creek HCPs are (1) a karst species, including the Jollyville this HCP, and thus, the entire unit was regulatory benefit when there is a Plateau salamander, and to contribute to not excluded. conservation of the listed and non-listed Federal nexus present for a project that Benefits of Inclusion cave or karst fauna. The Jollyville might adversely modify critical habitat Plateau salamander was covered as a The principal benefit of including an and (2) educational benefits about the non-listed species in an Implementing area in critical habitat designation is the Jollyville Plateau salamander and its Agreement signed by the Service, and requirement of Federal agencies to habitat. the Service provided ‘‘No Surprises’’ ensure that actions that they fund, Benefits of Exclusion assurances covering the Jollyville authorize, or carry out are not likely to Plateau salamander. result in the destruction or adverse The benefits of excluding lands from modification of any designated critical critical habitat designation with The Buttercup Creek HCP authorizes habitat, which is the regulatory standard incidental take of endangered karst properly implemented HCPs, such as of section 7(a)(2) of the Act under which the Four Points, Grandview Hills, and invertebrates, if encountered during consultation is completed. Federal construction. Under the Buttercup Creek Buttercup Creek HCPs, include relieving agencies must consult with the Service the permit holders of any additional HCP, mitigation for take of the karst on actions that may affect a listed invertebrates was implemented by regulatory burden that might be species, and refrain from actions that are imposed as a result of the designation. setting aside 12 separate cave preserves likely to jeopardize the continued (totaling 130 ac (53 ha) and A related benefit of exclusion is the existence of such species. The analysis continued ability to maintain existing encompassing 37 caves) and two of effects to critical habitat is a separate greenbelt flood plains (33 ac (13 ha)) for relationships and seek new partnerships and different analysis from that of the with future HCP participants, including a total of 163 ac (66 ha), which remain effects to the species. Therefore, the in a natural undisturbed condition and States, counties, local jurisdictions, difference in outcomes of these two conservation organizations, private are preserved in perpetuity for the analyses represents the regulatory benefit of the listed and non-listed landowners, and developers, which benefit of critical habitat. For some together can implement conservation species. There are 21 occupied cases, the outcome of these analyses endangered karst invertebrate caves and actions that we would be unable to will be similar, because effects to habitat accomplish on our own. Not only are 10 Jollyville Plateau salamander caves will often result in effects to the species. in the preserves. The shape and size of HCPs important for listed species, but However, the regulatory standard is they can help conserve many species each preserve was designed to include different, as the jeopardy analysis surface drainage basins for all caves, the that are not State or federally listed, investigates the action’s impact to which might not otherwise receive subsurface extent of all caves, and survival and recovery of the species, protection absent the HCPs. We place connectivity between nearby caves and while the adverse modification analysis great value on the partnerships that are features. Additionally, for those more investigates the action’s effects to the developed with HCPs. sensitive cave preserves, particularly designated critical habitat’s contribution with regard to recharge, 7 of the 12 to conservation. This will, in many The exclusion of lands under the Four preserves are to be fenced off to restrict cases, lead to different results and Points, Grandview Hills, and Buttercup access for only maintenance, different regulatory requirements. Thus, Creek HCPs from critical habitat will monitoring, and research. All preserves critical habitat designation may provide help preserve the partnership we have are regularly monitored, fences and greater benefits to the recovery of a developed with the permittees, reinforce gates are checked and repaired, and red species than listing would alone. those relationships we are building with imported fire ants (Solenopsis invicta) Therefore, critical habitat designation other developers, and foster future controlled. Surface water drainage from may provide a regulatory benefit for the partnerships and development of future streets and parking areas will be Jollyville Plateau salamander on lands management plans. The preserve lands diverted by permanent diversion covered under the Four Points, under these HCPs are providing some structures to treatment systems and Grandview Hills, and Buttercup Creek protection for the physical and detention ponds or will discharge HCPs when there is a Federal nexus biological features essential to the down-gradient of the cave preserves. An present for a project that might conservation of the species. Therefore, additional 3 to 4 in (76 to 102 mm) of adversely modify critical habitat. exclusion of these lands under the Four topsoil are added in yards and Another possible benefit of including Points, Grandview Hills, and Buttercup landscaped areas for additional lands in critical habitat is public Creek HCPs from critical habitat will filtration and absorption of fertilizers, education regarding the potential help preserve the partnerships and will pesticides, and other common conservation value of an area that may foster future partnerships and future constituents. And an education and help focus conservation efforts on areas conservation efforts. Excluding lands outreach program informs homeowners of high conservation value for certain under these HCPs will show that we are about the proper use of fertilizers and species. We consider any information committed to our partners to further the pesticides, the benefits of native about the Jollyville Plateau salamander conservation for the Jollyville Plateau landscaping, and the disposal of and its habitat that reaches a wide salamander and other endangered and household hazardous waste. audience, including parties engaged in threatened species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51358 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the activities with a Federal nexus and with a Federal nexus and educational Benefits of Inclusion educational benefits). benefits). Four Points HCP Grandview Hills HCP Buttercup Creek HCP We reviewed and evaluated the We reviewed and evaluated the We reviewed and evaluated the benefits of inclusion versus exclusion benefits of inclusion versus exclusion benefits of inclusion versus exclusion from critical habitat of the Four Points from critical habitat Unit 14 of the from critical habitat Unit 19 of the HCP lands within proposed critical Grandview Hills HCP lands. We Buttercup Creek HCP lands. First, the habitat Unit 3. We acknowledge that the acknowledge that the Grandview Hills Buttercup Creek development has been Four Points development has not been development has not been completed completed around each of the cave completed within the watersheds of two within the watershed of the two springs, openings with Jollyville Plateau of the three springs onsite, and, and, therefore, there is potential for salamanders. Second, in accordance therefore, there is potential for more more conservation benefit to this with their HCP, the permit holder, conservation benefit to this species at species at this site. In accordance with Forestar, captures and routes runoff this site. In accordance with their HCP, their HCP, 69 Grandview LP is required from development away from the cave New TPG—Four Points is required to to capture and route runoff from preserves. Finally, by our issuance of an capture and route runoff from development away from drainages that incidental take permit under the HCP development away from drainages that contain springs known to support the and covering the Jollyville Plateau contain springs known to support Jollyville Plateau salamander. salamander, the Service has already Jollyville Plateau salamanders. Additionally, by our issuance of an determined that long-term conservation Additionally, by our issuance of an incidental take permit under the HCP benefits will result from the incidental take permit under the HCP and covering the Jollyville Plateau implementation of this HCP, which will and covering the Jollyville Plateau salamander, the Service has already occur regardless of critical habitat salamander, the Service has already determined that long-term conservation designation. Inclusion of the Buttercup determined that long-term conservation benefits will result from the Creek HCP lands in the critical habitat benefits will result from the implementation of this HCP, which will designation would provide little implementation of this HCP, which will occur regardless of critical habitat additional regulatory protection under occur regardless of critical habitat designation. Inclusion of the Grandview section 7 of the Act because no designation. Inclusion of the Four HCP lands in the critical habitat additional future Federal actions that Points HCP lands in the critical habitat designation would provide little may affect the critical habitat are designation would provide little additional regulatory protection under foreseen. Any potential educational additional regulatory protection under section 7 of the Act because no benefits resulting from a critical habitat section 7 of the Act because no additional future Federal actions that designation are reduced because the additional future Federal actions that may affect the critical habitat are HCP permit holders are already aware of may affect the critical habitat are foreseen. Any potential educational the species’ location, and these benefits foreseen. Any potential educational benefits resulting from a critical habitat are outweighed by the benefits of benefits resulting from a critical habitat designation are reduced because the exclusion. designation are reduced because the HCP permit holders are already aware of While additional or different HCP permit holders are already aware of the species’ location, and these benefits conservation measures may be included the species’ location, and these benefits are outweighed by the benefits of in future section 7 consultations and are outweighed by the benefits of exclusion. HCPs, at the time of this HCP, these exclusion. While additional or different conservation measures were considered While additional or different conservation measures may be included appropriate to minimize, mitigate, or conservation measures may be included in future section 7 consultations and avoid impacts to the Jollyville Plateau in future section 7 consultations and HCPs, at the time of this HCP, these salamander. The Service provided ‘‘No HCPs, at the time of this HCP, these conservation measures were considered Surprises’’ assurances that the permit conservation measures were considered appropriate to minimize, mitigate, or holders, if appropriately implementing appropriate to minimize, mitigate, or avoid impacts to the Jollyville Plateau the HCP, would not incur additional avoid impacts to the Jollyville Plateau salamander. The Service provided ‘‘No commitment of land, water, or financial salamander. The Service provided ‘‘No Surprises’’ assurances that the permit compensation or restrictions on the use Surprises’’ assurances that the permit holders, if appropriately implementing of land, water, or other natural resources holders, if appropriately implementing the HCP, would not incur additional otherwise available for development or the HCP, would not incur additional commitment of land, water, or financial use under the HCP for this species. commitment of land, water, or financial compensation or restrictions on the use Therefore, in consideration of the compensation or restrictions on the use of land, water, or other natural resources relevant impact to current and future of land, water, or other natural resources otherwise available for development or partnerships and conservation benefits otherwise available for development or use under the HCP for this species. as discussed under Exclusions Based on use under the HCP for this species. Therefore, in consideration of the Other Relevant Factors above, we Therefore, in consideration of the relevant impact to current and future determined for the Buttercup Creek HCP relevant impact to current and future partnerships and conservation benefits lands that the benefits of exclusion partnerships as discussed under as discussed under Exclusions Based on (continuation, strengthening, and Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Other Relevant Factors above, we encouragement of conservation Factors above, we determined for the determined for the Grandview Hills partnerships) outweigh the benefits of Four Points HCP lands that the benefits HCP lands that the benefits of exclusion critical habitat designation (additional of exclusion (continuation, (continuation, strengthening, and regulatory protections from activities strengthening, and encouragement of encouragement of conservation with a Federal nexus and educational conservation partnerships) outweigh the partnerships) outweigh the benefits of benefits). benefits of critical habitat designation critical habitat designation (additional In summary, impacts to the Jollyville (additional regulatory protections from regulatory protections from activities Plateau salamander from the HCP’s

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51359

permitted activities within those areas Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the businesses with less than $5 million in being excluded have already been principles of E.O. 12866 while calling annual sales, general and heavy analyzed and authorized. Once an HCP for improvements in the nation’s construction businesses with less than is permitted, implementation of regulatory system to promote $27.5 million in annual business, conservation measures will occur predictability, to reduce uncertainty, special trade contractors doing less than regardless of whether critical habitat is and to use the best, most innovative, $11.5 million in annual business, and designated within its plan boundaries. and least burdensome tools for agricultural businesses with annual Furthermore, we believe that the achieving regulatory ends. The sales less than $750,000. To determine educational benefits of critical habitat executive order directs agencies to if potential economic impacts on these designation are not significant due to consider regulatory approaches that small entities are significant, we the ongoing conservation efforts. Also, reduce burdens and maintain flexibility consider the types of activities that we are designating as critical habitat and freedom of choice for the public might trigger regulatory impacts under those lands surrounding lands covered where these approaches are relevant, this rule, as well as the types of project by the Four Points, Grandview Hills, feasible, and consistent with regulatory modifications that may result. In and Buttercup Creek HCPs, which objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes general, the term ‘‘significant economic already results in educational benefits further that regulations must be based impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical for the Jollyville Plateau salamander and on the best available science and that small business firm’s business its habitat without designating the HCP the rulemaking process must allow for operations. lands as critical habitat. Thus, an public participation and an open Importantly, the incremental impacts inclusion of the Four Points, Grandview exchange of ideas. We have developed of a rule must be both significant and Hills, and Buttercup Creek HCP lands this rule in a manner consistent with substantial to prevent certification of the would not provide any additional these requirements. rule under the RFA and to require the educational benefits. As noted above, preparation of an initial regulatory Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 flexibility analysis. If a substantial the exclusion of the Four Points, et seq.) Grandview Hills, and Buttercup Creek number of small entities are affected by HCP lands will help to strengthen the Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act the proposed critical habitat relationships between the Service and (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended designation, but the per-entity economic our partners and provide an incentive by the Small Business Regulatory impact is not significant, the Service Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of for the voluntary development of may certify. Likewise, if the per-entity 1996 (5 U.S.C 801 et seq.), whenever an effective management plans that provide economic impact is likely to be agency must publish a notice of benefits to species. These partnership significant, but the number of affected rulemaking for any proposed or final benefits are significant, because they entities is not substantial, the Service rule, it must prepare and make available serve to provide protection and may also certify. for public comment a regulatory The Service’s current understanding conservation of species on private lands flexibility analysis that describes the of recent case law is that Federal that would not otherwise occur. effects of the rule on small entities agencies are required to evaluate the The Exclusion Will Not Likely Result in (small businesses, small organizations, potential impacts of rulemaking only on Extinction of the Jollyville Plateau and small government jurisdictions). those entities directly regulated by the Salamander However, no regulatory flexibility rulemaking; therefore, they are not The exclusion from final critical analysis is required if the head of an required to evaluate the potential habitat designation of the Four Points, agency certifies the rule will not have a impacts to those entities not directly Grandview Hills, and Buttercup Creek significant economic impact on a regulated. The designation of critical HCP lands will not result in extinction substantial number of small entities. habitat for an endangered or threatened The SBREFA amended the RFA to of the Jollyville Plateau salamander due, species only has a regulatory effect require Federal agencies to provide a in part, to the long-term conservation where a Federal action agency is certification statement of the factual benefits that result from the involved in a particular action that may basis for certifying that the rule will not affect the designated critical habitat. implementation of the HCPs. In have a significant economic impact on Under these circumstances, only the addition, the jeopardy standard of a substantial number of small entities. Federal action agency is directly section 7 of the Act will also provide In this final rule, we are certifying that regulated by the designation, and, protection in occupied areas when there the critical habitat designation for the therefore, consistent with the Service’s is a Federal nexus. Therefore, based on Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau current interpretation of RFA and recent the above discussion, the Secretary is salamanders will not have a significant case law, the Service may limit its exercising her discretion to exclude 576 economic impact on a substantial evaluation of the potential impacts to ac (233 ha) of land within the number of small entities. The following those identified for Federal action boundaries of these three HCPs from discussion explains our rationale. agencies. Under this interpretation, this final critical habitat designation. According to the Small Business there is no requirement under the RFA Required Determinations Administration, small entities include to evaluate the potential impacts to small organizations, such as entities not directly regulated, such as Regulatory Planning and Review independent nonprofit organizations; small businesses. However, Executive (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) small governmental jurisdictions, Orders 12866 and 13563 direct Federal Executive Order 12866 provides that including school boards and city and agencies to assess costs and benefits of the Office of Information and Regulatory town governments that serve fewer than available regulatory alternatives in Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of 50,000 residents; as well as small quantitative (to the extent feasible) and Management and Budget will review all businesses. Small businesses include qualitative terms. Consequently, it is the significant rules. The Office of manufacturing and mining concerns current practice of the Service to assess Information and Regulatory Affairs has with fewer than 500 employees, to the extent practicable these potential determined that this rule is not wholesale trade entities with fewer than impacts if sufficient data are available, significant. 100 employees, retail and service whether or not this analysis is believed

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51360 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

by the Service to be strictly required by mining, and (3) habitat and species 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental the RFA. In other words, while the management. mandate’’ includes a regulation that effects analysis required under the RFA The FEA analyzes the proposed ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty is limited to entities directly regulated designation as described in the upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ by the rulemaking, the effects analysis proposed rule and does not reflect with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a under the Act, consistent with the E.O. changes to the proposed critical habitat condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also regulatory analysis requirements, can designation made in the final rule. In excludes ‘‘a duty arising from take into consideration impacts to both summary, we considered whether this participation in a voluntary Federal directly and indirectly impacted designation would result in a significant program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates entities, where practicable and economic effect on a substantial number to a then-existing Federal program reasonable. of small entities. Based on the currently under which $500,000,000 or more is In conclusion, we believe that, based available information, we concluded provided annually to State, local, and on our interpretation of directly that this rule would not result in a tribal governments under entitlement regulated entities under the RFA and significant economic impact on a authority,’’ if the provision would relevant case law, this designation of substantial number of small entities ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of critical habitat will directly regulate (Industrial Economics 2013, pp. A–2– assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or only Federal agencies, which are not by A–8). Therefore, we are certifying that otherwise decrease, the Federal definition small business entities. And the designation of critical habitat for Government’s responsibility to provide as such, we certify that, if promulgated, Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal this designation of critical habitat would salamanders will not have a significant governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust not have a significant economic impact economic impact on a substantial accordingly. At the time of enactment, on a substantial number of small number of small entities, and a these entitlement programs were: business entities. Therefore, a regulatory regulatory flexibility analysis is not Medicaid; Aid to Families with flexibility analysis is not required. required. Dependent Children work programs; However, though not necessarily Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— required by the RFA, in our final Services Block Grants; Vocational Executive Order 13211 economic analysis for this rule we Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, considered and evaluated the potential Executive Order 13211 (Actions Adoption Assistance, and Independent effects to third parties that may be Concerning Regulations That Living; Family Support Welfare involved with consultations with Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Services; and Child Support Federal action agencies related to this Distribution, or Use) requires agencies Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector action. to prepare Statements of Energy Effects mandate’’ includes a regulation that Designation of critical habitat affects when undertaking certain actions. OMB ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty only activities authorized, funded, or has provided guidance for upon the private sector, except (i) a carried out by Federal agencies. Some implementing this Executive Order that condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a kinds of activities are unlikely to have outlines nine outcomes that may duty arising from participation in a any Federal involvement and so will not constitute ‘‘a significant adverse effect’’ voluntary Federal program.’’ be affected by critical habitat when compared to not taking the The designation of critical habitat designation. In areas where the species regulatory action under consideration. does not impose a legally binding duty is present, Federal agencies already are The economic analysis finds that on non-Federal Government entities or required to consult with us under none of these criteria are relevant to this private parties. Under the Act, the only section 7 of the Act on activities they analysis. Thus, based on information in regulatory effect is that Federal agencies authorize, fund, or carry out that may the economic analysis, energy-related must ensure that their actions do not affect the Austin blind and Jollyville impacts associated with the Austin destroy or adversely modify critical Plateau salamanders. Federal agencies blind and Jollyville Plateau habitat under section 7. While non- also must consult with us if their salamanders’ conservation activities Federal entities that receive Federal activities may affect critical habitat. within critical habitat are not expected. funding, assistance, or permits, or that Designation of critical habitat, therefore, As such, the designation of critical otherwise require approval or could result in an additional economic habitat is not expected to significantly authorization from a Federal agency for impact on small entities due to the affect energy supplies, distribution, or an action, may be indirectly impacted requirement to reinitiate consultation use. Therefore, this action is not a by the designation of critical habitat, the for ongoing Federal activities (see significant energy action, and no legally binding duty to avoid Application of the ‘‘Adverse Statement of Energy Effects is required. destruction or adverse modification of Modification Standard’’ section). critical habitat rests squarely on the In our final economic analysis of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 Federal agency. Furthermore, to the critical habitat designation, we U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) extent that non-Federal entities are evaluated the potential economic effects In accordance with the Unfunded indirectly impacted because they on small business entities resulting from Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et receive Federal assistance or participate conservation actions related to the seq.), we make the following findings: in a voluntary Federal aid program, the listing of the Austin blind and Jollyville (1) This rule will not produce a Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would Plateau salamanders and the Federal mandate. In general, a Federal not apply, nor would critical habitat designation of critical habitat. The mandate is a provision in legislation, shift the costs of the large entitlement analysis is based on the estimated statute, or regulation that would impose programs listed above onto State impacts associated with the rulemaking an enforceable duty upon State, local, or governments. as described in Chapters 1 through 4 tribal governments, or the private sector, (2) We do not believe that this rule and Appendix A of the analysis and and includes both ‘‘Federal will significantly or uniquely affect evaluates the potential for economic intergovernmental mandates’’ and small governments because it would not impacts related to: (1) Residential and ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ produce a Federal mandate of $100 commercial development, (2) surface These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. million or greater in any year; that is, it

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51361

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ lands within or affected by the Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order under the Unfunded Mandates Reform designation. 12988 Act. The FEA concludes incremental Federalism—Executive Order 13132 In accordance with Executive Order impacts may occur due to 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office administrative costs of section 7 In accordance with Executive Order of the Solicitor has determined that the consultations for development, water 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not rule does not unduly burden the judicial management activities, transportation have significant Federalism effects. A system and that it meets the applicable projects, utility projects, mining, and federalism impact summary statement is standards set forth in sections 3(a) and livestock grazing; however, these are not not required. In keeping with 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating expected to significantly affect small Department of the Interior and critical habitat in accordance with the governments. Incremental impacts Department of Commerce policy, we provisions of the Act. To assist the stemming from various species requested information from, and public in understanding the habitat conservation and development control coordinated development of, this needs of the species, the rule identifies activities are expected to be borne by critical habitat designation with the elements of physical or biological the Federal Government, Texas features essential to the conservation of Department of Transportation, City of appropriate State resource agencies in Texas. We received comments from the Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau Austin, Lower Colorado River salamanders. The designated areas of Authority, Travis and Williamson Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Texas Commission on Environmental critical habitat are presented on maps, Counties, Concordia University, and and the rule provides several options for other entities, which are not considered Quality, Texas Department of Transportation, Office of the Governor, the interested public to obtain more small governments. Consequently, we detailed location information, if desired. do not believe that the critical habitat Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, designation would significantly or and the Texas Department of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 uniquely affect small government Agriculture and have addressed them in U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) entities. As such, a Small Government the Summary of Comments and This rule does not contain any new Agency Plan is not required. Recommendations, which can be found collections of information that require on the Internet at http:// Takings—Executive Order 12630 approval by OMB under the Paperwork www.regulations.gov and http:// Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 In accordance with Executive Order www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ et seq.). This rule will not impose 12630 (Government Actions and AustinTexas/ at Docket No. FWS–R2– recordkeeping or reporting requirements Interference with Constitutionally ES–2013–0001. The designation of on State or local governments, Protected Private Property Rights), we critical habitat in areas currently individuals, businesses, or have analyzed the potential takings occupied by the Austin blind and organizations. An agency may not implications of designating critical Jollyville Plateau salamanders imposes conduct or sponsor, and a person is not habitat for the Austin blind and no additional restrictions to those required to respond to, a collection of Jollyville Plateau salamanders in a currently in place and, therefore, has information unless it displays a takings implications assessment. As little incremental impact on State and currently valid OMB control number. discussed above, the designation of local governments and their activities. critical habitat affects only Federal The designation may have some benefit National Environmental Policy Act (42 actions. Although private parties that to these governments in that the areas U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) receive Federal funding, assistance, or that contain the physical or biological It is our position that, outside the require approval or authorization from a features essential to the conservation of jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals Federal agency for an action may be the species are more clearly defined, for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to indirectly impacted by the designation and the elements of the features of the prepare environmental analyses of critical habitat, the legally binding habitat necessary to the conservation of pursuant to the National Environmental duty to avoid destruction or adverse the species are specifically identified. Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et modification of critical habitat rests This information does not alter where seq.) in connection with designating squarely on the Federal agency. The and what federally sponsored activities critical habitat under the Act. We FEA found that this designation will not may occur. However, it may assist local published a notice outlining our reasons affect a substantial number of small governments in long-range planning for this determination in the Federal entities, but there could be costs of (rather than having them wait for case- Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR development restrictions in the form of by-case section 7 consultations to 49244). This position was upheld by the reduced land values. A number of the occur). U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth private landowners are not small Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 businesses. However, we found that Where State and local governments F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 6,864 small developers may be affected require approval or authorization from a 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). The designation by this designation, but the impact is Federal agency for actions that may of critical habitat for the Austin blind less than 1 percent of average annual affect critical habitat, consultation and Jollyville Plateau salamanders is sales of these businesses. Based on under section 7(a)(2) would be required. entirely within the 5th Circuit information contained in the FEA and While non-Federal entities that receive jurisdiction; therefore, we did not described within this document, it is Federal funding, assistance, or permits, prepare an environmental analysis in not likely that economic impacts to a or that otherwise require approval or connection with this critical habitat property owner will be of a sufficient authorization from a Federal agency for designation. magnitude to support a takings action. an action, may be indirectly impacted The takings implications assessment by the designation of critical habitat, the Government-to-Government concludes that this designation of legally binding duty to avoid Relationship With Tribes critical habitat for the Austin blind and destruction or adverse modification of In accordance with the President’s Jollyville Plateau salamanders does not critical habitat rests squarely on the memorandum of April 29, 1994 pose significant takings implications for Federal agency. (Government-to-Government Relations

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51362 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

with Native American Tribal tribal lands unoccupied by the Austin recordkeeping requirements, Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive blind and Jollyville Plateau salamanders Transportation. Order 13175 (Consultation and that are essential for the conservation of Coordination with Indian Tribal the species. Therefore, we are not Regulation Promulgation Governments), and the Department of designating critical habitat for the Accordingly, we amend part 17, the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we Austin blind and Jollyville Plateau subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the salamanders on tribal lands. readily acknowledge our responsibility Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth to communicate meaningfully with References Cited below: recognized Federal Tribes on a A complete list of all references cited government-to-government basis. In PART 17—[AMENDED] accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 is available on the Internet at http:// of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS– R2–ES–2013–0001, and http:// ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust continues to read as follows: Responsibilities, and the Endangered www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ AustinTexas/, and upon request from Species Act), we readily acknowledge Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– the Austin Ecological Services Field our responsibilities to work directly 1544; 4201–4245; unless otherwise noted. Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION with tribes in developing programs for ■ CONTACT). 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding entries healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that for ‘‘Salamander, Georgetown’’ and tribal lands are not subject to the same Author(s) ‘‘Salamander, Salado’’ in alphabetical controls as Federal public lands, to The primary authors of this order under AMPHIBIANS to the List of remain sensitive to Indian culture, and rulemaking are the staff members of the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to to make information available to tribes. Austin Ecological Services Field Office read as follows: We determined that there are no tribal with support from staff of the Arlington lands occupied by the Austin blind and Ecological Services Field Office. § 17.11 Endangered and threatened Jollyville Plateau salamanders at the wildlife. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 time of listing that contain the physical * * * * * or biological features essential to Endangered and threatened species, conservation of the species, and no Exports, Imports, Reporting and (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate popu- Historic range lation where endan- Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name gered or threatened habitat rules

******* AMPHIBIANS

******* Salamander, Austin Eurycea U.S.A. (TX) Entire ...... E 817 17.95(d) NA blind. waterlooensis.

******* Salamander, Eurycea tonkawae .. U.S.A. (TX) Entire ...... T 817 17.95(d) NA Jollyville Plateau.

*******

■ 3. Amend § 17.95(d) by adding entries (i) Surface habitat PCEs. to 7 mg L¥1, and specific water ¥1 for ‘‘Austin Blind Salamander (Eurycea (A) Water from the Barton Springs conductance from 605 to 740 mS cm . waterlooensis),’’ and ‘‘Jollyville Plateau Segment of the Edwards Aquifer. The (B) Rocky substrate with interstitial spaces. Rocks in the substrate of the Salamander (Eurycea tonkawae)’’ in the groundwater is similar to natural aquifer salamander’s surface aquatic habitat are same alphabetical order in which the conditions as it discharges from natural species appear in the table at § 17.11(h), large enough to provide salamanders spring outlets. Concentrations of water to read as follows: with cover, shelter, and foraging habitat quality constituents and contaminants (larger than 2.5 in (64 mm)). The § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. are below levels that could exert direct substrate and interstitial spaces have * * * * * lethal or sublethal effects (such as minimal sedimentation. (d) Amphibians. effects to reproduction, growth, (C) Aquatic invertebrates for food. The * * * * * development, or metabolic processes), spring environment supports a diverse Austin Blind Salamander (Eurycea or indirect effects (such as effects to the aquatic invertebrate community that waterlooensis) Austin blind salamander’s prey base). includes crustaceans, insects, and (1) The critical habitat unit is Hydrologic regimes similar to the flatworms. depicted for Travis County, Texas, on historical pattern of the specific sites are (D) Subterranean aquifer. Access to the map below. present, with constant surface flow. The the subsurface water table exists to (2) Within this area, the primary water chemistry is similar to natural provide shelter, protection, and space constituent elements (PCEs) of the aquifer conditions, with temperatures for reproduction. This access can occur physical or biological features essential from 67.8 to 72.3 °F (19.9 and 22.4 °C), in the form of large conduits that carry to the conservation of Austin blind dissolved oxygen concentrations from 5 water to the spring outlet or fissures in salamander consist of six components: the bedrock.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51363

(ii) Subsurface habitat PCEs. high water line and 262 ft (80 m) of populations exist through underground (A) Water from the Barton Springs upstream and downstream habitat, conduits. The polygons were then Segment of the Edwards Aquifer. The including the dry stream channel during simplified to reduce the number of groundwater is similar to natural aquifer periods of no surface flow. The surface vertices, but still retain the overall conditions. Concentrations of water critical habitat does not include shape and extent. Subsequently, quality constituents and contaminants manmade structures (such as buildings, polygons that were within 98 ft (30 m) are below levels that could exert direct aqueducts, runways, roads, and other of each other were merged together. lethal or sublethal effects (such as paved areas) existing within the legal Each new merged polygon was then effects to reproduction, growth, boundaries on the effective date of this revised to remove extraneous divots or development, or metabolic processes), rule; however, the subsurface critical protrusions that resulted from the merge or indirect effects (such as effects to the habitat may extend below such process. The maps in this entry, as Austin blind salamander’s prey base). structures. The subsurface critical modified by any accompanying Hydrologic regimes similar to the habitat includes underground features regulatory text, establish the boundaries historical pattern of the specific sites are in a circle with a radius of 984 ft (300 of the critical habitat designation. The present, with continuous flow in the m) around the springs. coordinates or plot points or both on subterranean habitat. The water (4) Critical habitat map units. Data which each map is based are available chemistry is similar to natural aquifer layers defining map units were created to the public at the field office Internet conditions, including temperature, using a geographic information system site (http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ (GIS), which included species locations, dissolved oxygen, and specific water AustinTexas/), www.regulations.gov at roads, property boundaries, 2011 aerial conductance. Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001 and photography, and USGS 7.5′ (B) Subsurface spaces. Conduits at the Service’s Austin Ecological quadrangles. Points were placed on the underground are large enough to Services Field Office. You may obtain provide salamanders with cover, shelter, GIS. We delineated critical habitat unit boundaries by starting with the cave or field office location information by and foraging habitat. contacting one of the Service regional (C) Aquatic invertebrates for food. The spring point locations that are occupied offices, the addresses of which are listed habitat supports an aquatic invertebrate by the salamanders. From these cave or at 50 CFR 2.2. community that includes crustaceans, springs points, we delineated a circle insects, or flatworms. with a 984-ft (300-m) radius to create (5) Unit 1: Barton Springs Unit, Travis (3) Surface critical habitat includes the polygons that capture the extent to County, Texas. Map of Unit 1 follows: the spring outlets and outflow up to the which we believe the salamander BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51364 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C (A) Water from the Trinity Aquifer, base). Hydrologic regimes similar to the * * * * * Northern Segment of the Edwards historical pattern of the specific sites are Jollyville Plateau Salamander Aquifer, and local alluvial aquifers. The present, with at least some surface flow (Eurycea tonkawae) groundwater is similar to natural aquifer during the year. The water chemistry is (1) Critical habitat units are depicted conditions as it discharges from natural similar to natural aquifer conditions, for Travis and Williamson Counties, spring outlets. Concentrations of water with temperatures from 64.1 to 73.4 °F Texas, on the maps below. quality constituents and contaminants (17.9 to 23 °C), dissolved oxygen ¥ (2) Within these areas, the primary should be below levels that could exert concentrations from 5.6 to 8 mg L 1, constituent elements of the physical or direct lethal or sublethal effects (such as and specific water conductance from ¥ biological features essential to the effects to reproduction, growth, 550 to 721 mS cm 1. conservation of Jollyville Plateau development, or metabolic processes), (B) Rocky substrate with interstitial salamander consist of six components: or indirect effects (such as effects to the spaces. Rocks in the substrate of the (i) Surface habitat PCEs. Jollyville Plateau salamander’s prey salamander’s surface aquatic habitat are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.000 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51365

large enough to provide salamanders temperature, dissolved oxygen, and boundaries by starting with the cave or with cover, shelter, and foraging habitat specific water conductance. spring point locations that are occupied (larger than 2.5 in (64 mm)). The (B) Subsurface spaces. Voids between by the salamanders. From these cave or substrate and interstitial spaces have rocks underground are large enough to springs points, we delineated a 984-ft minimal sedimentation. provide salamanders with cover, shelter, (300-m) buffer to create the polygons (C) Aquatic invertebrates for food. The and foraging habitat. These spaces have that capture the extent to which we spring environment supports a diverse minimal sedimentation. believe the salamander populations aquatic invertebrate community that (C) Aquatic invertebrates for food. The exist through underground conduits. includes crustaceans, insects, and habitat supports an aquatic invertebrate The polygons were then simplified to flatworms. community that includes crustaceans, reduce the number of vertices, but still (D) Subterranean aquifer. Access to insects, or flatworms. retain the overall shape and extent. the subsurface water table should exist (3) Surface critical habitat includes Subsequently, polygons that were the spring outlets and outflow up to the to provide shelter, protection, and space within 98 ft (30 m) of each other were high water line and 262 ft (80 m) of for reproduction. This access can occur merged together. Each new merged upstream and downstream habitat, in the form of large conduits that carry polygon was then revised to remove including the dry stream channel during water to the spring outlet or porous extraneous divots or protrusions that voids between rocks in the streambed periods of no surface flow. The surface resulted from the merge process. The that extend down into the water table. critical habitat does not include (ii) Subsurface habitat PCEs. manmade structures (such as buildings, maps in this entry, as modified by any (A) Water from the Trinity Aquifer, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other accompanying regulatory text, establish Northern Segment of the Edwards paved areas) existing within the legal the boundaries of the critical habitat Aquifer, and local alluvial aquifers. The boundaries on the effective date of this designation. The coordinates or plot groundwater is similar to natural aquifer rule; however, the subsurface critical points or both on which each map is conditions. Concentrations of water habitat may extend below such based are available to the public at the quality constituents and contaminants structures. The subsurface critical field office Internet site (http:// are below levels that could exert direct habitat includes underground features www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ lethal or sublethal effects (such as in a circle with a radius of 984 ft (300 AustinTexas/), http:// effects to reproduction, growth, m) around the springs. www.regulations.gov at Docket No. development, or metabolic processes), (4) Critical habitat map units. Data FWS–R2–ES–2013–0001 and at the or indirect effects (such as effects to the layers defining map units were created Service’s Austin Ecological Services Jollyville Plateau salamander’s prey using a geographic information system Field Office. You may obtain field office base). Hydrologic regimes similar to the (GIS), which included species locations, location information by contacting one historical pattern of the specific sites are roads, property boundaries, 2011 aerial of the Service regional offices, the present, with continuous flow. The photography, and USGS 7.5′ addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR water chemistry is similar to natural quadrangles. Points were placed on the 2.2. aquifer conditions, including GIS. We delineated critical habitat unit BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 51366 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(5) Index map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.001 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51367

(6) Unit 1: Krienke Spring Unit, Williamson County, Texas. Map of Unit 1 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.002 51368 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(7) Unit 2: Brushy Creek Spring Unit, Williamson County, Texas. Map of Unit 2 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.003 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51369

(8) Units 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, and 3E: Travis Counties, Texas. Map of Units Buttercup Creek Units, Williamson and 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, and 3E follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.004 51370 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(9) Unit 6: Avery Springs Unit, Williamson County, Texas. Map of Unit 6 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.005 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51371

(10) Unit 7: PC Spring Unit, Williamson County, Texas. Map of Unit 7 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.006 51372 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(11) Unit 8: Baker and Audubon Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas, Map of Unit 8 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.007 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51373

(12) Unit 9: Wheless Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 9 and 10 follows:

(13) Unit 10: Blizzard R-Bar-B Spring Units 9 and 10 is provided at paragraph Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of (12) of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.008 51374 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(14) Unit 11: House Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 11, 12, and 13 follows:

(15) Unit 12: Kelly Hollow Spring Units 11, 12, and 13 is provided at (16) Unit 13: MacDonald Well Unit, Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of paragraph (14) of this entry. Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 11, 12, and 13 is provided at paragraph (14) of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.009 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51375

(17) Unit 14: Kretschmarr Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 follows:

(18) Unit 15: Pope and Hiers Spring 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided at Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of at paragraph (17) of this entry. paragraph (17) of this entry. Units 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 (20) Unit 17: Bull Creek 1 Unit, Travis (22) Unit 19: Bull Creek 3 Unit, Travis is provided at paragraph (17) of this County, Texas. Map of Units 14, 15, 16, County, Texas. Map of Units 14, 15, 16, entry. 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided at 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided at (19) Unit 16: Fern Gully Spring Unit, paragraph (17) of this entry. paragraph (17) of this entry. Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 14, (21) Unit 18: Bull Creek 2 Unit, Travis (23) Unit 20: Moss Gully Spring Unit, County, Texas. Map of Units 14, 15, 16, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 14,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.010 51376 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 is provided (25) Unit 22: Sylvia Spring Area Unit, at paragraph (17) of this entry. at paragraph (17) of this entry. Williamson and Travis Counties, Texas. (24) Unit 21: Ivanhoe Spring Unit, Map of Unit 22 follows: Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 14,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.011 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51377

(26) Unit 24: Long Hog Hollow Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 24, 25, 26, and 27 follows:

(27) Unit 25: Tributary 3 Unit, Travis (28) Unit 26: Sierra Spring Unit, (29) Unit 27: Troll Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 24, 25, 26, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 24, County, Texas. Map of Units 24, 25, 26, and 27 is provided at paragraph (26) of 25, 26, and 27 is provided at paragraph and 27 is provided at paragraph (26) of this entry. (26) of this entry. this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.012 51378 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

(30) Unit 28: Stillhouse Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 28, 30, and 31 follows:

(31) Unit 30: Indian Spring Unit, 30, and 31 is provided at paragraph (30) (32) Unit 31: Spicewood Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 28, of this entry. Travis County, Texas. Map of Units 28, 30, and 31 is provided at paragraph (30) of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.013 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 51379

(33) Unit 32: Balcones District Park Spring Unit, Travis County, Texas. Map of Unit 32 follows:

* * * * * Dated: August 6, 2013. Rachel Jacobson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2013–19713 Filed 8–19–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:59 Aug 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\20AUR3.SGM 20AUR3 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER20AU13.014