55304 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

threatened throughout an SPR, and the portions of the range that clearly do not England cottontail as an endangered or population in that significant portion is meet the biologically based definition of threatened species under the Act is not a valid DPS, we will list the DPS rather ‘‘significant’’ (i.e., the loss of that warranted at this time. than the entire taxonomic species or portion clearly would not be expected to We request that you submit any new subspecies. As stated above, we find the increase the vulnerability to extinction information concerning the status of, or New England cottontail does not of the entire species), those portions threats to, the New England cottontail to warrant listing throughout its range. will not warrant further consideration. our New England Field Office (see Therefore, we must consider whether If we identify any portions that may ADDRESSES section) whenever it there are any significant portions of the be both (1) significant and (2) becomes available. New information range of the New England cottontail. endangered or threatened, we engage in will help us monitor the New England The SPR policy is applied to all status a more detailed analysis to determine cottontail and encourage its determinations, including analyses for whether these standards are indeed met. conservation. If an emergency situation the purposes of making listing, The identification of an SPR does not develops for the New England delisting, and reclassification create a presumption, prejudgment, or cottontail, we will act to provide determinations. The procedure for other determination as to whether the immediate protection. analyzing whether any portion is an species in that identified SPR is SPR is similar, regardless of the type of endangered or threatened. We must go References Cited status determination we are making. through a separate analysis to determine A complete list of references cited is The first step in our analysis of the whether the species is endangered or available on the Internet at http:// status of a species is to determine its threatened in the SPR. To determine www.regulations.gov at Docket Number status throughout all of its range. If we whether a species is endangered or FWS–R5–ES–2015–0136 and upon determine that the species is in danger threatened throughout an SPR, we will request from the New England Field of extinction, or likely to become so in use the same standards and Office (see ADDRESSES section). the foreseeable future, throughout all of methodology that we use to determine its range, we list the species as an if a species is endangered or threatened Author(s) endangered (or threatened) species and throughout its range. The primary author(s) of this no SPR analysis will be required. If the Depending on the biology of the document are the staff members of the species is neither in danger of extinction species, its range, and the threats it New England Field Office. nor likely to become so throughout all faces, it may be more efficient to address of its range, we determine whether the the ‘‘significant’’ question first, or the Authority species is in danger of extinction or status question first. Thus, if we The authority for this section is likely to become so throughout a determine that a portion of the range is section 4 of the Endangered Species Act significant portion of its range. If it is, not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et we list the species as an endangered or determine whether the species is seq.). endangered or threatened there; if we a threatened species, respectively; if it is Dated: August 26, 2015. not, we conclude that listing the species determine that the species is not is not warranted. endangered or threatened in a portion of Daniel M. Ashe, When we conduct an SPR analysis, its range, we do not need to determine Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. we first identify any portions of the if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ [FR Doc. 2015–22885 Filed 9–11–15; 11:15 am] species’ range that warrant further The threats currently affecting the BILLING CODE 4310–55–P consideration. The range of a species New England cottontail, without can theoretically be divided into consideration for the planned or portions in an infinite number of ways. implemented conservation efforts, are DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR However, there is no purpose to occurring throughout the species’ range. analyzing portions of the range that are Habitat loss, predation, and the effects Fish and Wildlife Service not reasonably likely to be significant of small population size are affecting the and endangered or threatened. To species relatively uniformly across its 50 CFR Part 17 identify only those portions that warrant range. In addition, the Conservation [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0129; further consideration, we determine Strategy and its specific actions will 4500030113] whether there is substantial information continue to be implemented throughout RIN 1018–BA93 indicating that (1) the portions may be the species’ range, and we have a high significant and (2) the species may be in level of certainty that those efforts will Endangered and Threatened Wildlife danger of extinction in those portions or be effective in addressing the species’ and Plants; Threatened Species Status likely to become so within the rangewide threats. Therefore, we find for Platanthera integrilabia (White foreseeable future. We emphasize that that factors affecting the species are Fringeless Orchid) answering these questions in the essentially uniform throughout its affirmative is not a determination that range, indicating no portion of the range AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, the species is endangered or threatened warrants further consideration of Interior. throughout a significant portion of its possible endangered or threatened ACTION: Proposed rule. range—rather it is a step in determining status under the Act. whether a more detailed analysis of the Our review of the best available SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and issue is required. In practice, a key part scientific and commercial information Wildlife Service (Service), propose to of this analysis is whether the threats indicates that the New England list Platanthera integrilabia (white are geographically concentrated in some cottontail is not in danger of extinction fringeless orchid), a plant species from way. If the threats to the species are (endangered) nor likely to become Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, affecting it uniformly throughout its endangered within the foreseeable Mississippi, South Carolina, and range, no portion is likely to warrant future (threatened), throughout all or a Tennessee, as a threatened species further consideration. Moreover, if any significant portion of its range. under the Endangered Species Act (Act). concentration of threats apply only to Therefore, we find that listing the New If we finalize this rule as proposed, it

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55305

would extend the Act’s protections to fringeless orchid) as a threatened Therefore, we request comments or this species. species. The white fringeless orchid is a information from other concerned DATES: We will accept comments candidate species for which we have on governmental agencies, Native received or postmarked on or before file sufficient information on biological American tribes, the scientific November 16, 2015. Comments vulnerability and threats to support community, industry, or any other submitted electronically using the preparation of a listing proposal, but for interested parties concerning this Federal eRulemaking Portal (see which development of a listing proposed rule. We particularly seek ADDRESSES) must be received by 11:59 regulation has been precluded by other comments concerning: p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. higher priority listing activities. This (1) The white fringeless orchid’s We must receive requests for public rule reassesses all available information biology, range, and population trends, hearings, in writing, at the address regarding status of and threats to the including: shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION white fringeless orchid. (a) Biological or ecological CONTACT by October 30, 2015. This rule does not propose critical requirements of the species, including ADDRESSES: You may submit comments habitat for white fringeless orchid. We habitat requirements for germination, by one of the following methods: have determined that designation of growth, and reproduction; (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal critical habitat would not be prudent for (b) Genetics and taxonomy; eRulemaking Portal: http:// this species because: (c) Historical and current range, • www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, Designation would increase the including distribution patterns; enter FWS–R4–ES–2015–0129, which is likelihood and severity of illegal (d) Historical and current population the docket number for this rulemaking. collection of white fringeless orchid and levels, and current and projected trends; Then, in the Search panel on the left thereby make enforcement of take and side of the screen, under the Document prohibitions more difficult. (e) Past and ongoing conservation • Type heading, click on the Proposed This threat outweighs the benefits measures for the species, its habitat, or Rules link to locate this document. You of designation. both. may submit a comment by clicking on The basis for our action. Under the (2) Factors that may affect the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ Act, we may determine that a species is continued existence of the species, (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail an endangered or threatened species which may include habitat modification or hand-delivery to: Public Comments based on any of five factors: (A) The or destruction, overutilization, disease, Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2015– present or threatened destruction, predation, the inadequacy of existing 0129; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, modification, or curtailment of its regulatory mechanisms, or other natural MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls habitat or range; (B) overutilization for or manmade factors. Church, VA 22041–3803. commercial, recreational, scientific, or (3) Biological, commercial trade, or We request that you send comments educational purposes; (C) disease or other relevant data concerning any only by the methods described above. predation; (D) the inadequacy of threats (or lack thereof) to this species We will post all comments on http:// existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) and existing regulations that may be www.regulations.gov. This generally other natural or manmade factors addressing those threats. means that we will post any personal affecting its continued existence. We (4) The reasons why we should or information you provide us (see Public have determined that the threats to should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical Comments, below, for more white fringeless orchid consist primarily habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 information). of destruction and modification of U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether habitat (Factor A) resulting in excessive FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: there are threats to the species from shading, soil disturbance, altered Mary Jennings, Field Supervisor, U.S. human activity, the degree of which can hydrology, and proliferation of invasive Fish and Wildlife Service, Tennessee be expected to increase due to the plant species; collecting for recreational Ecological Services Field Office, 446 designation, and whether that increase or commercial purposes (Factor B); Neal Street, Cookeville, TN 38501; by in threat outweighs the benefit of herbivory (Factor C); and small telephone 931–528–6481; or by designation such that the designation of population sizes and dependence on facsimile 931–528–7075. Persons who critical habitat is not prudent. specific pollinators and fungi to use a telecommunications device for the Please include sufficient information complete its life cycle (Factor E). deaf (TDD) may call the Federal with your submission (such as scientific Existing regulatory mechanisms have Information Relay Service (FIRS) at journal articles or other publications) to not led to a reduction or removal of 800–877–8339. allow us to verify any scientific or threats posed to the species from these SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: commercial information you include. factors (see Factor D discussion). Please note that submissions merely Executive Summary We will seek peer review. We will seek stating support for or opposition to the Why we need to publish a rule. Under comments from independent specialists action under consideration without the Act, if we determine that a species to ensure that our designation is based providing supporting information, is an endangered or threatened species on scientifically sound data, although noted, will not be considered throughout all or a significant portion of assumptions, and analyses. We will in making a determination, as section its range, we are required to promptly invite these peer reviewers to comment 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that publish a proposal in the Federal on our listing proposal. determinations as to whether any Register and make a determination on Information Requested species is an endangered or threatened our proposal within 1 year. Listing a species must be made ‘‘solely on the species as an endangered or threatened Public Comments basis of the best scientific and species and designations and revisions We intend that any final action commercial data available.’’ of critical habitat can only be completed resulting from this proposed rule will be You may submit your comments and by issuing a rule. based on the best scientific and materials concerning this proposed rule This rule proposes the listing of commercial data available and be as by one of the methods listed in the Platanthera integrilabia (white accurate and as effective as possible. ADDRESSES section. We request that you

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55306 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

send comments only by the methods that are endangered or threatened, based November 22, 2013 (78 FR 70104), and described in the ADDRESSES section. on the best available scientific and December 5, 2014 (79 FR 72450). If you submit information via http:// commercial data. Section 12 of the Act The 2011 Multi-District Litigation www.regulations.gov, your entire directed the Secretary of the (MDL) settlement agreement specified submission—including any personal Smithsonian Institution to prepare a that the Service will systematically, over identifying information—will be posted report on endangered and threatened a period of 6 years, review and address on the Web site. If your submission is plant species, which was published as the needs of 251 candidate species to made via a hardcopy that includes House Document No. 94–51. The determine if they should be added to the personal identifying information, you Service published a notice in the Federal Lists of Endangered and may request at the top of your document Federal Register on July 1, 1975 (40 FR Threatened Wildlife and Plants. The that we withhold this information from 27824), in which we announced that white fringeless orchid was on that list public review. However, we cannot more than 3,000 native plant taxa of candidate species. Therefore, the guarantee that we will be able to do so. named in the Smithsonian’s report and Service is making this proposed listing We will post all hardcopy submissions other taxa added by the 1975 notice determination in order to comply with on http://www.regulations.gov. would be reviewed for possible the conditions outlined in the MDL Comments and materials we receive, inclusion in the List of Endangered and agreement. as well as supporting documentation we Threatened Plants. The 1975 notice was Background used in preparing this proposed rule, superseded on December 15, 1980 (45 will be available for public inspection FR 82480), by a new comprehensive Species Information on http://www.regulations.gov, or by notice of review for native plants that Taxonomy and Species Description appointment, during normal business took into account the earlier hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Smithsonian report and other White fringeless orchid was first Service, Tennessee Ecological Services accumulated information. On November recognized as a distinct taxon when D.S. Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 28, 1983 (48 FR 53640), a supplemental Correll (1941, pp. 153–157) described it INFORMATION CONTACT). plant notice of review noted the status as a variety of Habenaria (Platanthera) Because we will consider all of various taxa. Complete updates of the blephariglottis. C.A. Luer (1975, p. 186) comments and information received plant notice were published on elevated the taxon to full species status. during the public comment period, our September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), The currently accepted binomial for the final determinations may differ from February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184), and species is Platanthera integrilabia this proposal. September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144). (Correll) Luer. The description of this White fringeless orchid was first taxon at the full species level used the Public Hearing listed as a Category 1 candidate in the common name of ‘‘monkey-face’’ (Luer Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for December 15, 1980, review. Category 1 1975, p. 186), as have some other one or more public hearings on this candidates included taxa for which the publications (Zettler and Fairey 1990, p. proposal, if requested. Requests must be Service had sufficient information on 212; Zettler 1994, p. 686; Birchenko received within 45 days after the date of hand to support the biological 2001, p. 9). A status survey report for publication of this proposed rule in the appropriateness of listing as endangered the species recognized both ‘‘white Federal Register. Such requests must be or threatened species. The species was fringeless orchid’’ and ‘‘monkeyface’’ as sent to the address shown in the FOR reclassified as a Category 2 candidate in common names (Shea 1992, p. 1). The FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. the November 28, 1983, review. Service used the common name ‘‘white We will schedule public hearings on Category 2 candidates included taxa for fringeless orchid’’ when the species was this proposal, if any are requested, and which the Service had information first recognized as a candidate for announce the dates, times, and places of indicating that proposing to list the listing, and we retain usage of this those hearings, as well as how to obtain species as endangered or threatened was common name here. reasonable accommodations, in the possibly appropriate, but for which White fringeless orchid is a perennial Federal Register and local newspapers sufficient data on biological herb with a light green, 60-centimeters at least 15 days before the hearing. vulnerability and threat were not (cm) (23-inches (in)) long stem that available. Further biological research arises from a tuber (modified Peer Review and field study usually was necessary to underground stem of a plant that is In accordance with our joint policy on ascertain the status of taxa in this enlarged for nutrient storage). The peer review published in the Federal category. leaves are alternate with entire margins Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), In 1996, the Service eliminated and are narrowly elliptic to lanceolate we will seek the expert opinions of at candidate categories (February 28, 1996; (broadest below the middle and tapering least three appropriate and independent 61 FR 7596), and white fringeless orchid toward the apex) in shape. The lower specialists regarding this proposed rule. was no longer a candidate until it was leaves are 20 cm (8 in) long and 3 cm The purpose of peer review is to ensure again elevated to candidate status on (1 in) wide. The upper stem leaves are that our listing determination is based October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534). The much smaller. The white flowers are on scientifically sound data, species was also included in subsequent borne in a loose cluster at the end of the assumptions, and analyses. The peer candidate notices of review on October stem. The upper two flower petals are reviewers have expertise with the white 30, 2001 (66 FR 54808), June 13, 2002 about 7 millimeters (mm) (0.3 in) long, fringeless orchid’s biology, habitat, (67 FR 40657), May 4, 2004 (69 FR and the lower petal (the lip) is about 13 physical or biological factors, 24876), May 11, 2005 (70 FR 24870), mm (0.5 in) long. The epithet distribution, and status, or have general September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53756), ‘‘integrilabia’’ refers to the lack of any botanical and conservation biology December 6, 2007 (72 FR 69034), prominent fringe on the margin of the expertise. December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75176), lip petal (Luer 1975, p. 186). The plants November 9, 2009 (74 FR 57804), flower from late July through Previous Federal Action November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69222), September, and the small narrow The Act requires the Service to October 26, 2011 (76 FR 66370), fruiting capsule matures in October identify species of wildlife and plants November 21, 2012 (77 FR 69994), (Shea 1992, p. 23).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55307

Distribution As of 2015, there are records for 13 fringeless orchids, or vegetative plants To determine the current distribution historical and 12 extirpated occurrences of any species of Platanthera, associated of white fringeless orchid, we used data in NHP databases. Accounting for two with modification of the habitat to an provided by Natural Heritage Programs locations that Shea (1992, pp. 11–14) unsuitable condition for white fringeless (NHP), housed in State agencies or reported as extirpated and a third orchid. White fringeless orchid was last universities in each of the States in the reported as uncertain but now seen flowering at one extirpated species’ geographic range: Alabama considered to be historical, none of occurrence as recently as 2004, but Natural Heritage Program at Auburn which is included in NHP databases, habitat in this former transmission line University (ANHP 2014); Georgia there are 28 occurrences that currently right-of-way is no longer maintained Department of Natural Resources (GDNR are considered historical or extirpated. and has become unsuitable due to 2014); Kentucky State Nature Preserves In 1991, five of these were extant and woody vegetation encroachment. Commission (KSNPC 2014); Mississippi the status of five was uncertain (Shea Similarly, recent observation of Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and 1992, pp. 7–14). Based on these data, flowering white fringeless orchids or Parks (MDWFP 2014); North Carolina the species’ historical range included vegetative plants of any species of Department of Environment and Natural Cobb County, Georgia; Henderson Platanthera is lacking for historical Resources (NCDENR 2014); South County, North Carolina; and Roane occurrences, but the habitat has not Carolina Department of Natural County, Tennessee, in addition to the 35 been visibly altered at these locations. Resources (SCDNR 2012); and counties listed below in Table 1 for the We have assigned uncertain status to Tennessee Department of Environment species’ range as of 2014. The species occurrences where recent observation of and Conservation (TDEC 2014). In has been extirpated completely from flowering white fringeless orchids is addition to NHP data, we used Shea’s North Carolina. lacking, but where basal leaves of non- (1992, entire) Status Survey Report on Shea (1992, pp. 17–18) lists additional flowering Platanthera spp. orchids Platanthera integrilabia to determine records from Butler County, Alabama; typically have been observed during one the species’ historical distribution. Cherokee County, North Carolina; or more recent visits. In addition, we In most cases, a mapped occurrence Hamilton County, Tennessee; and Lee have assigned uncertain status to one in the databases maintained by the County, Virginia, whose validity she Mississippi occurrence, where a single NHPs represented a single group of could neither verify nor refute based on white fringeless orchid was seen plants growing together in a patch of available data. Lacking sufficient data to flowering in 2011, because the suitable habitat. However, the Kentucky document the collection of white hydrology at this site was subsequently NHP combined multiple groups of fringeless orchid from Lee County, the altered by a drainage ditch and the plants (i.e., sub-occurrences), growing in authors of the Flora of Virginia did not species’ persistence at this site is now distinct habitat patches in close include the species (Townsend 2012, questionable. proximity to one another, into single pers. comm.). Lacking any substantive occurrences. In two instances, the data for white fringeless orchid’s The white fringeless orchid’s Tennessee NHP also grouped several historical presence in the other three distribution is concentrated in the sub-occurrences into a single counties above, we also consider them Cumberland Plateau section of the occurrence, where they were all located to not be part of the species’ historical Appalachian Plateaus physiographic in separate stream heads draining into a range. province, with isolated populations single headwater stream. In describing Current Distribution—Using available scattered across the Blue Ridge, the current range and distribution of data, we categorized the current status Piedmont, and Coastal Plain provinces white fringeless orchid, we have of each occurrence as extant, extirpated, (Fenneman 1938, pp. 68, 134–137, 172, adopted these groupings in those historical, or uncertain. Extant 333–334). The species is currently instances where all of the sub- occurrences are those for which recent extant at 58 occurrences distributed occurrences were located within the (i.e., since ca. 2000) observations of among 32 counties, spanning 5 drainage of a single headwater stream. flowering plants are available to confirm southeastern States (Table 1). There are In two instances, where Kentucky NHP the species’ persistence at a given site, an additional 22 occurrences (Table 1) grouped sub-occurrences from drainages or from which material was collected whose current status is uncertain, which of separate headwater streams into a and cultivated in a greenhouse to include one additional State and three single occurrence, we split the sub- produce flowering specimens additional counties. We consider the occurrences into two separate confirming the identification of species’ current distribution to include occurrences by grouping together only vegetative plants that were observed in the 6 States and 35 counties where NHP those that were located within a single the field. Because white fringeless database records for these extant and headwater drainage. orchid commonly occurs with three uncertain occurrences exist (Table 1). Historical Distribution—As of 1991, congeners (species belonging to the We included records of uncertain status there were 30 extant occurrences and 13 same genus) that share similar leaf in defining the species’ current with uncertain status, distributed among characteristics, conclusive identification distribution to ensure that all relevant 20 counties in 5 southeastern States (see in the absence of flowering specimens is State and local governments and private Table 1, below). Shea (1992, pp. 14–17) not possible. Extirpated occurrences are stakeholders are aware of white also reported on six locations with those where the species’ absence is fringeless orchid’s potential presence historical occurrences and six from considered to be certain due to lack of and opportunities for conserving the which the species had been extirpated. recent observations of flowering white species and its habitat.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55308 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—COUNTY-LEVEL DISTRIBUTION OF EXTANT AND UNCERTAIN STATUS WHITE FRINGELESS ORCHID OCCUR- RENCES, CIRCA 1991 (SHEA 1992) AND 2014 (ANHP 2014, GDNR 2014, KSNPC 2014, MDWFP 2014, NCDENR 2014, SCDNR 2012, TDEC 2014)

1991 2014 State County Extant Uncertain Extant Uncertain

Alabama ...... Calhoun ...... 2 ...... Clay ...... 1 1 ...... Cleburne ...... 1 ...... DeKalb ...... 1 ...... Jackson ...... 1 Marion ...... 1 ...... 1 2 Tuscaloosa ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Winston ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Georgia ...... Bartow ...... 1 ...... Carroll ...... 2 ...... 2 ...... Chatooga ...... 1 ...... Cobb ...... 1 ...... Coweta ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Forsyth ...... 1 1 ...... Pickens ...... 1 ...... Rabun ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Stephens ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Kentucky ...... Laurel ...... 2 2 McCreary ...... 4 ...... 2 1 Pulaski ...... 1 1 2 ...... Whitley ...... 1 ...... Mississippi ...... Alcorn ...... 1 Itawamba ...... 2 1 Tishomingo ...... 1 1 South Carolina ...... Greenville ...... 1 ...... 1 Tennessee ...... Bledsoe ...... 2 2 1 Cumberland ...... 1 ...... Fentress ...... 2 ...... Franklin ...... 3 2 5 5 Grundy ...... 5 5 4 4 Marion ...... 2 ...... 8 ...... McMinn ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Polk ...... 1 ...... Scott ...... 1 ...... Sequatchie ...... 2 1 1 1 Van Buren ...... 2 ...... 5 1

Total ...... 30 13 58 22

More occurrences are included in the Federal listing. However, low numbers occurrences for which data are species’ current distribution than were of flowering plants have been observed available. At 26 (37 percent) of these historically known to exist, likely as a at most sites (Figure 1). For example, occurrences, fewer than 10 flowering result of increased survey effort having fewer than 50 flowering plants have plants have ever been recorded. been devoted to white fringeless orchid ever been observed at one time at 45 (64 due to its status as a candidate for percent) of the 70 extant and uncertain

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55309

There are 32 extant occurrences that addition, there are seven uncertain, five and one uncertain, are located on are located entirely, or in part, on lands extirpated, and two historical private lands that are protected by owned or managed by local, State, or occurrences that are similarly situated. conservation easements. Federal government entities (Table 2). In Two additional occurrences, one extant

TABLE 2—STATUS AND NUMBER OF WHITE FRINGELESS ORCHID OCCURRENCES ON PUBLICLY OWNED OR MANAGED LANDS [Note: One site is on privately owned lands that GDNR leases for use as a wildlife management area]

Ownership Extant Uncertain Extirpated Historical

National Park Service ...... 3 ...... U.S. Forest Service ...... 9 3 3 ...... U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...... 2 ...... Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources ...... 1 ...... Georgia Department of Natural Resources ...... 2 ...... Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission ...... 1 ...... 1 Mississippi Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks ...... 1 ...... North Carolina Plant Conservation Program ...... 1 ...... South Carolina State Parks ...... 1 ...... Tennessee Department of Transportation ...... 1 ...... Tennessee Division of Forestry ...... 7 ...... Tennessee State Parks ...... 5 1 ...... 1 Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... Forsyth County, Georgia ...... 1 ......

Total ...... 31 8 5 2

Habitat seepage slopes . . . with Sphagnum is fibric organic soil material, meaning . . . usually grows in partial shade.’’ that some plant forms incorporated into In Correll’s (1941, pp. 156–157) Hoy (2012, p. 53) demonstrated that the soil are identifiable (U.S. description of white fringeless orchid as precipitation was the primary Department of Agriculture, Natural a distinct variety, he included notes hydrologic source for three wetlands at Resources Conservation Service 2006, p. from herbarium specimens that describe a white fringeless orchid site on the 32). However, despite the common the species’ habitat variously as ‘‘bog,’’ Cumberland Plateau in Kentucky, which usage of the terms ‘‘bog’’ or ‘‘boggy’’ to ‘‘boggy sphagnum ravine,’’ ‘‘sphagnum was commonly referred to as a seep. describe them and the nearly ubiquitous bog,’’ ‘‘grassy swamps,’’ and ‘‘marshy Thus, describing many of the sites presence of Sphagnum spp. (sphagnum ground.’’ Luer (1975, p. 186) described where white fringeless orchid occurs as moss) in them, the wetlands that white the habitat as ‘‘. . . the deep shade of ‘‘seeps’’ or ‘‘seepage slopes’’ may fringeless orchid inhabits occur on damp deciduous forests . . . in the contradict the typical characterization of mineral soils and do not accumulate thick leaf litter and sphagnum moss seeps as wetlands where water from peat. Further, they often are located at along shallow wet ravines and subsurface sources emerges at the stream heads and connected to depressions.’’ Zettler and Fairey (1990, surface (Soulsby et al. 2007, p. 200). The ephemeral streams via dispersed sheet p. 212) observed the species growing in term ‘‘bogs’’ refers to a specific wetland flow or concentrated surface flow in ‘‘shaded and level bogs, swamps or type that accumulates peat, lacks incipient channels. seepage slopes usually containing significant inflow or outflow, and Weakley and Schafale (1994, pp. 164– Sphagnum.’’ Shea (1992, p. 19) harbors mosses adapted to acidic 165) commented on the discrepancy described the habitat as ‘‘wet, flat, boggy environments, particularly Sphagnum between regional use of the terms areas at the head of streams or on (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, p. 41). Peat ‘‘bogs’’ and ‘‘fens’’ to describe non-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP15SE15.001 55310 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

alluvial wetlands of the Southern Blue provides nutrient reserves) making them habitats. In the Tennessee population Ridge in which sphagnum moss is dependent upon acquiring carbon from studied by Zettler et al. (1996, p. 20), prominently featured and their more an external source (Yoder et al. 2010, p. more than half of the flowers on traditional usage in peatland 7). Like most terrestrial orchids, white inflorescences (the complete flower classifications. Noting that most of the fringeless orchid depends on a head of a plant including stems, stalks, region’s non-alluvial wetlands lacked symbiotic (interdependent) relationship bracts, and flowers) set fruit, resulting in organic soils, these authors nonetheless with mycorrhizal fungi (an association a mean of 4.7 capsules per plant. The chose to maintain the regional usage of of a fungus and a plant in which the capsules produced an average of 3,433 these terms in their classification, to fungus lives within or on the outside of seeds each, indicating that each emphasize differences in sources of the plant’s roots) to enhance seed inflorescence averaged over 16,000 hydrology and their effects on water germination and promote seedling seeds. With 577 inflorescences counted chemistry (nutrient-poor precipitation development and establishment (Zettler in the study area, Zettler et al. (1996, p. in ‘‘bogs’’ versus mineral-rich and McInnis 1992, pp. 157–160; 20) estimated that over 9,000,000 seeds groundwater seepage in ‘‘fens’’). Similar Rasmussen and Whigham 1993, p. were produced. However, in separate to the non-alluvial wetlands of the 1374). In addition to providing a carbon studies of in vitro and in situ seedling Southern Blue Ridge, further study is source for seedling development, development, even with fungal needed to characterize the range of mycorrhizal fungi enhance germination inoculation less than 3 percent of seeds variation in soils, hydrology, by promoting increased water uptake by developed into protocorms (young physicochemistry, and origin of orchid seeds (Yoder et al. 2000, 149). seedlings) that could be established on wetlands throughout the range of white Their small size permits dispersal of soil (Zettler and McInnis 1992, pp. 157– fringeless orchid. orchid seeds to new environments via 160; Zettler 1994, pp. 65). Most sites where white fringeless wind currents; however, very few of the Known pollinators for white populations exist are on soils formed seeds likely encounter suitable habitats fringeless orchid include three diurnal over sandstone bedrock, which usually where host fungi are present (Yoder et species from two families of butterflies are low in fertility and organic matter al. 2010, pp. 14–16). This likelihood is (Lepidoptera): Silver spotted skipper content and are acidic (Shea 1992, p. further reduced in the case of species (Hesperiidae: Epargyreus clarus), 20). The species often occurs in swamps such as white fringeless orchid, which spicebush swallowtail (Papilionidae: dominated by Acer rubrum (red maple) may rely on a single fungal host species, Papilio troilus), and eastern tiger and Nyssa sylvatica (blackgum), where Epulorhiza inquilina, to complete its life swallowtail (Papilionidae: P. glaucus) common shrubs and woody vines cycle (Currah et al. 1997, p. 340). (Zettler et al. 1996, p. 16). Based on include Alnus serrulata (smooth alder), White fringeless orchid has a self- floral characteristics, including white Decumaria barbara (climbing compatible breeding system, allowing flowers and a long nectiferous (nectar hydrangea), Smilax spp. (greenbrier), individuals to produce seed using their bearing) spur, as well as pollinaria and Viburnum nudum (possumhaw). own pollen; however, the proportions of morphology in relation to potential Common herbaceous associates of white fruits produced through self-pollination pollinator morphology, it is likely that fringeless orchid include Doellingeria versus cross-pollination are not known more effective pollinators for white umbellata (parasol flat-top white aster), (Zettler and Fairey 1990, p. 214). Rates fringeless orchid exist in the nocturnal Gymnadeniopsis clavellata (green of fruit set, measured as the proportion sphingid moth family (Lepidoptera: woodland orchid), Lobelia cardinalis of individual flowers that produced Sphingidae) (Zettler et al. 1996, pp. 17– (cardinal flower), Lycopus virginicus capsules, varied in studies of 18); however, this has not been (Virginia bugleweed), Osmunda populations in Georgia (6.9 percent), confirmed. Pollinaria are the pollen- cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), O. regalis South Carolina (20.3 percent) (Zettler bearing structure on orchids, consisting (royal fern), Oxypolis rigidior (stiff and Fairey 1990, p. 214), and Tennessee of pollen masses (pollinia) attached to a cowbane), Parnassia asarifolia (56.9 percent) (Zettler et al. 1996, p. 20). stalk that has a sticky pad (viscidium), (kidneyleaf grass of parnassus), While these observations were made at which attaches the pollinaria to Platanthera ciliaris (yellow fringed these populations in different years, the pollinators (Argue 2012, p. 5). Despite orchid), P. cristata (crested yellow Tennessee population, where the fact that nectar concentrations in orchid), Sphagnum spp. (sphagnum pollination was observed, is white fringeless orchid flowers did not moss), Thelypteris noveboracensis (New considerably larger than the Georgia or fluctuate significantly over a 24-hour York fern), Viola primulifolia (primrose- South Carolina populations, where no observation period, Zettler et al. (1996, leaf stemless white violet), and pollination was observed. Zettler et al. p. 20) noticed the floral fragrance Woodwardia areolata (chainfern) (1996, p. 22) reasoned that inbreeding produced by a large Tennessee (Zettler and Fairey 1990, p. 213; Shea depression was a likely cause for the population intensified between the 1992, p. 22; Patrick 2012, pers. comm.). lower fruit set in the smaller hours of 7:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., Sites located in powerline rights-of-way populations, noting that in a separate suggesting the species possesses share many of the herbaceous taxa listed study both germination rates and adaptions for attracting nocturnal above, but lack a canopy or well- propagation success were greater in pollinators. developed shrub stratum due to white fringeless orchid seeds collected Genetics vegetation management. Nomenclature from the largest of these populations follows the Integrated Taxonomic (Zettler and McInnis 1992, p. 160). They Birchenko (2001, pp. 18–23, 47–48) Information System (retrieved on speculated that higher rates of fruit set analyzed genetic structure among 25 January 16, 2015, from the Integrated were probably more typical historically, white fringeless orchid populations, Taxonomic Information System online when larger populations provided distributed across Alabama, Georgia, database, http://www.itis.gov). greater opportunities for cross- Tennessee, and Kentucky. Her pollination to occur. ‘‘populations’’ corresponded to specific Biology White fringeless orchid is capable of NHP occurrences. The majority (79 Orchid seeds are dust-like and lack an prodigious seed production, which percent) of the genetic variation was endosperm (the tissue produced inside might help to compensate for the likely present as variation within populations, seeds of most flowering plants that dispersal of many seeds into unsuitable while 21 percent of the variation was

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55311

attributable to differences between Factor A. The Present or Threatened had been extirpated from two Alabama populations (Birchenko 2001, p. 29). Destruction, Modification, or sites where logging had disturbed the While these results alone do not Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range habitat. At one of these sites, the loss demonstrate that genetic variability in Habitat modification caused by was attributed to impacts from logging white fringeless orchid populations has development, silvicultural practices, and removal of beaver dams. While white fringeless orchid has been eroded by restricted gene flow, invasive plant species, disturbance by sometimes shown short-term increases Birchenko (2001, pp. 34–40) cautioned feral hogs, shading due to understory that interactions between demographic in flower production following canopy and canopy closure, altered hydrology, removal, the longer-term response and ecological factors could be a cause and right-of-way maintenance have for some observed population declines typically is a decline in abundance as impacted the range and abundance of vegetation succession ensues (Shea and could ultimately cause declines in white fringeless orchid. 1992, pp. 26, 96; Birchenko 2001, p. 33). the species’ genetic variation and Development Forests have been clearcut at nine extant increase differentiation among white occurrences and two of uncertain status One white fringeless orchid fringeless orchid populations. in Tennessee, two extant sites and one occurrence was extirpated from a site in of uncertain status in Alabama, and one Summary of Factors Affecting the Henderson County, North Carolina, extant site in Georgia. Of these, there is Species which Shea (1992, p. 15) reported had evidence for declines in white fringeless Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we been nearly completely destroyed by orchid abundance following timber construction of a building. Another may list a species based on: (A) The harvests at five extant occurrences and occurrence in Tishomingo County, present or threatened destruction, two of uncertain status in Tennessee Mississippi, was extirpated from a site modification, or curtailment of its (TDEC 2014) and one extant occurrence that was disturbed by construction of habitat or range; (B) overutilization for in Alabama (Birchenko 2001, p. 33; the Yellow Creek Nuclear Power Plant commercial, recreational, scientific, or ANHP 2014). At some sites, the timber (Shea 1992, p. 15). A third site from harvests were too recent to know yet educational purposes; (C) disease or which the species is considered predation; (D) the inadequacy of how white fringeless orchid will extirpated, in Roane County, Tennessee, respond. existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) was severely disturbed during highway other natural or manmade factors In many cases, native forests construction (Shea 1992, p. 15). One surrounding white fringeless orchid affecting its continued existence. Listing extant occurrence in Carroll County, sites have been clearcut and replaced by actions may be warranted based on any Georgia, is located within a subdivision intensively managed pine plantations, of the above threat factors, singly or in where restrictions have been put in often consisting solely of Pinus taeda combination. place to protect the wetland habitat. (loblolly pine), where intensive Information pertaining to white Another extant occurrence in Pickens mechanical or chemical site preparation fringeless orchid in relation to the five County, Georgia, is located within a before planting occurs in order to factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the subdivision, but the wetland habitat reduce seedling competition with other Act is discussed below. In considering where white fringeless orchid occurs is tree species (Clatterbuck and Ganus what factors might constitute threats, we located within an area protected by a 1999, p. 4). Plantation forestry generally must look beyond the mere exposure of conservation easement held by the causes reductions in streamflow as the species to the factor to determine North American Land Trust. There is compared to native forest vegetation whether the species responds to the one occurrence of uncertain status that (Scott 2005, p. 4204), and research from factor in a way that causes actual is located on an as yet undeveloped lot the Cumberland Plateau comparing impacts to the species. If there is in a subdivision in Grundy County, calcium stores in soils and trees of exposure to a factor, but no response, or Tennessee. Potential future residential native hardwood forests to mature pine development at this site could directly only a positive response, that factor is on converted hardwood sites revealed impact white fringeless orchid due to not a threat. If there is exposure and the calcium loss from the system after a habitat conversion or ground species responds negatively, the factor single pine rotation that could impede disturbance, or could indirectly affect may be a threat, and we then attempt to future regrowth of the native oak- the species by altering hydrology, hickory forest (McGrath et al. 2004, p. determine if that factor rises to the level increasing shading, or introducing 21). The fact that plantation forests are of a threat, meaning that it may drive or invasive, nonnative plants. implicated in reduced streamflow contribute to the risk of extinction of the Based on our review of the best suggests that they could reduce the species such that the species warrants commercial and scientific data hydroperiod (seasonal pattern of the listing as an endangered or threatened available, development is a threat of low water level that results from the as those terms are defined by the Act. magnitude with potential to affect few combination of the water budget and the This does not necessarily require white fringeless orchid populations in storage capacity of a wetland) in empirical proof of a threat. The the foreseeable future. wetlands located at the heads of combination of exposure and some streams, such as those typically Silvicultural Practices corroborating evidence of how the occupied by white fringeless orchids, species is likely impacted could suffice. Direct and indirect effects of when they are embedded in a matrix of The mere identification of factors that silvicultural practices have adversely pine plantations. While more could impact a species negatively is not affected habitat conditions and information on indirect effects of pine sufficient to compel a finding that abundance of many white fringeless plantations on hydroperiods of wetlands listing is appropriate; we require orchid populations. Incompatible occupied by white fringeless orchid is evidence that these factors are operative silviculture has taken the form of needed, evidence suggests that restoring threats that act on the species to the clearcutting, both of swamps occupied native hardwood forest vegetation may point that the species meets the by the species and of surrounding be needed to restore wetland hydrology definition of an endangered or upland forests. Shea (1992, p. 15) in some sites, and that this would be a threatened species under the Act. reported that white fringeless orchid challenging and long-term process.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55312 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

At least four extant occurrences in 1997, p. 340). To the extent that moderate magnitude to white fringeless Alabama, two in Georgia, and four in increases in VAM might lead to orchid populations. Tennessee are located in wetlands that decreases in abundance of the orchid’s Excessive Shading are either located in pine plantations or mycorrhizal fungus, Epulorhiza bordered by them in surrounding inquilina, negative effects on Despite the fact that white fringeless uplands; one Tennessee occurrence of germination and growth would be orchid habitat has been described as uncertain status is similarly situated. expected for white fringeless orchid. shaded (Luer 1975, p. 186; Zettler and Fourteen percent of native forest, in In addition to threats posed by Fairey 1990, p. 212; Shea 1992, p. 19), seven counties of the southern nonnative plant species, at two extant excessive shading due to vegetation Cumberland Plateau in Tennessee that white fringeless orchid sites, a native succession has been recognized as a are occupied by white fringeless orchid, species, Lygodium palmatum (American factor associated with population was lost between 1981 and 2000. The climbing fern), has demonstrated declines (Shea 1992, pp. 26, 55, 61, 69; majority (74 percent) of this lost native invasive tendencies. Both sites are on Richards 2013, pers. comm.; Schotz forest was converted to nonnative public lands, and USFS attempts to 2015, p. 4), and succession of woody loblolly pine plantations, and the control spread of the species at one of vegetation has been named as the annual rate of conversion doubled the sites met limited success. At the site primary factor in the decline of during the last 3 years (1997–2000) on National Park Service lands, Tennessee populations (TDEC 2012, p. (McGrath et al. 2004, p. 13). Given that American climbing fern blankets 3). One Tennessee occurrence was there are three extant Tennessee vegetation along both sides of a dirt road extirpated due to woody vegetation occurrences and two of uncertain status that is in close proximity to a white succession in a right-of-way that that are located on private industrial fringeless orchid site, and the fern vines occurred following removal of a forest lands, which have not yet been have spread into adjacent forests, powerline (TDEC 2014). Available data converted to nonnative pine plantations, including the wetland where white indicate that this threat has been noted conversion of lands surrounding fringeless orchid occurs. Left at 19 extant occurrences and 5 of additional white fringeless orchid unmanaged, encroachment of nonnative uncertain status across the species’ occurrences represents a foreseeable plants and American climbing fern geographic range (Richards 2013, pers. future threat to the species. could reduce potential for exposure of comm.; Sullivan 2014, pers. comm.; Based on our review of the best seeds to light before being incorporated KSNPC 2014; TDEC 2014; Schotz 2015, commercial and scientific data into the soil, which enhances pp. 10–35). The threat of shading has available, silvicultural practices are a germination rates (Zettler and McInnis been most often noted in instances threat of moderate magnitude to white 1994, p. 137). where woody succession followed fringeless orchid populations. Based on available data, logging in or adjacent to sites occupied encroachment by native and nonnative by white fringeless orchid. As noted Invasive Plant Species invasive plants is a threat of moderate above, white fringeless orchid The presence of invasive, nonnative magnitude to white fringeless orchid occurrences often exhibit short-term plant species, including Microstegium populations. increases in flower production vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass), following canopy removal, but the Feral Hogs Ligustrum sinense (Chinese privet), and longer-term response typically is a Perilla frutescens (beefsteak plant), has Ground disturbance by rooting of feral decline in abundance as woody been documented at 10 extant white hogs has been observed at 13 extant vegetation succession ensues (Shea fringeless orchid occurrences and one of white fringeless orchid occurrences, in 1992, pp. 26, 96; Birchenko 2001, p. 33; unknown status (U.S. Forest Service Georgia and Tennessee, including two TDEC 2012, pp. 2–3). It has been (USFS) 2008, p. 53; Richards 2013, pers. of the largest known occurrences, both suggested that fire could play a role in comm.; KSNPC 2014; TDEC 2014). on protected lands (Zettler 1994, p. 687; regulating woody vegetation growth in Chinese privet has been negatively USFS 2008, p. 54; Richards 2013 pers. uplands surrounding white fringeless correlated with cover, abundance, and comm.; Richards 2014, pers. comm.; orchid habitats, allowing greater light richness of native herbaceous species in Tackett 2015, pers. comm.). These penetration into swamps where the riparian wetlands of the Piedmont disturbances have affected specific species grows (Schotz 2015, p. 4). physiographic province (Greene and microsites where white fringeless orchid Based on our review of the best Blossey 2012, p. 143). Japanese stiltgrass had previously been observed growing, commercial and scientific data has been shown to increase pH and as well as surrounding wetland habitat. available, excessive shading is a threat phosphorous availability in Cumberland Disturbance by feral hogs has been of moderate magnitude to white Plateau forest soils (McGrath and shown to affect plant communities by fringeless orchid populations. Binkley 2009, pp. 145–153) and to causing decreases in plant cover, increase abundance of vesicular diversity, and regeneration; effects to Altered Hydrology arbuscular mycorrhiza (VAM; fungi from feral hogs are also known to Several factors have been identified as mycorrhizal fungi that grow into the occur (Barrios-Garcia and Ballari 2012, causes for altered hydrology in white roots of host plants and form specialized p. 2295), suggesting potential for fringeless orchid habitat, including structures called arbuscules and adverse effects to white fringeless pond construction (TDEC 2008, p. 4), vesicles) in other sandstone-derived orchid via disruption of the symbiotic ditching (Sullivan 2014, pers. comm.), soils (Kourtev et al. 2002, p. 3163) as interactions with mycorrhizal fungi that development, logging (Shea 1992, p. 26; compared to native vegetation. While enhance seed germination and promote Taylor 2014, pers. comm.), and woody the effect of these soil alterations on seedling development and vegetation succession following logging white fringeless orchid has not been establishment (Zettler and McInnis (Hoy 2012, p. 13). In Tennessee, three investigated, the species is associated 1992, pp. 157–160; Rasmussen and white fringeless orchid sites have been with acidic (i.e., lower pH) soils (Zettler Whigham 1993, p. 1374). destroyed by pond construction, one as and Fairey 1990, p. 213) and is Based on our review of the best recently as 2006 (TDEC 2008, p. 4). One dependent upon a specific mycorrhizal commercial and scientific data site in Cobb County, Georgia, was fungus that is not a VAM (Currah et al. available, feral hogs are a threat of destroyed by pond construction

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55313

(Richards 2014, pers. comm.). In numerous other sites where canopy protected at the site where the largest Winston County, Alabama, hydrology removal has occurred due to logging. occurrence is present. At the Daniel was altered by the removal of beaver Based on our review of the best Boone NF, the installation of check dams to facilitate a logging operation, commercial and scientific data dams (small, often temporary, dam causing the extirpation of a white available, altered hydrology is a threat constructed across a swale, drainage fringeless orchid occurrence (Shea 1992, of moderate magnitude to white ditch, or waterway to counteract erosion p. 25). fringeless orchid populations. by reducing water flow velocity) in 2005 Altered hydrology has been noted as Right-of-Way Maintenance has been somewhat effective in restoring a threat at five extant occurrences and suitable conditions for white fringeless four of unknown status (Taylor 2014, Eleven extant white fringeless orchid orchid at a site where wetland pers. comm.; Sullivan 2014, pers. occurrences and one of uncertain status hydrology had been altered. Efforts to comm.; GDNR 2014; KSNPC 2014; are located in transportation or utility control invasion by Japanese stiltgrass TDEC 2014). Conversion of surrounding rights-of-way (Richards 2013, pers. by repeatedly weeding at one site on uplands to a pine plantation was noted comm.; KSNPC 2014; TDEC 2014). Daniel Boone NF have been hampered as the cause for hydrologic alteration at Vegetation management practices in by a seed source that exists on private one extant site in Georgia (GDNR 2014), such habitats prevent advanced lands upslope of the site (Taylor 2014, and as noted above, is a condition that succession of woody vegetation, which pers. comm.). is present at nine other extant can benefit white fringeless orchid by Efforts have been made to restore occurrences and one of unknown status. periodically reducing shading. On the suitable habitat conditions at one site on Logging in surrounding uplands is other hand, mechanical clearing in these KSNPC lands, by reducing woody stem suspected of contributing to altered habitats can alter hydrology by causing encroachment in 2012, following a hydrology at two Kentucky occurrences, rutting of soils and hastening channel timber harvest, and by placing log dams one extant and one of uncertain status development, as discussed in the to slow surface runoff and minimize (Taylor 2014, pers. comm.; KSNPC preceding section (Taylor 2014, pers. channel development. To date, white 2014), by causing increased surface comm.). Mowing during the flowering fringeless orchid has not shown a runoff during heavy precipitation events period for white fringeless orchid is measureable response to this and accelerating channel development detrimental, given the low flowering management effort; despite large in wetlands at stream heads. In addition rates that have been observed in this numbers of vegetative Platanthera spp. to loss of white fringeless orchid habitat species and the fact that individual leaves being present, fewer than 30 and occurrences due to pond plants will not regenerate flowers flowering plants per year have been construction at the three Tennessee sites during a growing season once they are observed in recent years at this site, discussed above, hydrology has been lost to herbivory or other causes where 530 plants were observed altered in wetland habitats down slope (Sheviak 1990, p. 195). Also, it is likely flowering in 1998 (KSNPC 2014). of ponds at two other Tennessee sites, that indiscriminate herbicide Summary of Factor A where white fringeless orchid’s status is application would cause mortality of now uncertain (TDEC 2014). In white fringeless orchid plants. However, The threats to white fringeless orchid Mississippi, ditching has altered we have knowledge of one event in from habitat destruction and hydrology at a site where white which the species responded favorably modification are occurring throughout fringeless orchid was discovered in following selective herbicide much of the species’ range. These 2011, leaving the species’ status application to control woody plant threats include development, uncertain at this location (Sullivan succession in a Tennessee Valley silvicultural practices, invasive plant 2014, pers. comm.). Ditching has also Authority transmission line right-of- species, disturbance by feral hogs, altered hydrology at an extant way, reaching record numbers of shading due to understory and canopy occurrence located adjacent to a State flowering plants documented at the site closure, altered hydrology, and right-of- highway in Tennessee. Disturbance by within 2 years following the herbicide way maintenance. While the species is heavy equipment in an adjacent treatment. The lack of adverse effect to present in a number of sites on powerline right-of-way is thought to white fringeless orchid in this instance conservation lands, few conservation have altered hydrology at an extant site is likely attributable to the targeted actions have been undertaken to address in Kentucky, by causing rutting of soils application of herbicides to woody these threats to the species’ habitat, and and hastening channel development at plants only. those that are described above have met the stream head (Taylor 2014, pers. Based on our review of the best with limited success. The population- comm.). commercial and scientific data level impacts of habitat destruction and While most observations of threats available, right-of-way maintenance is a modification are expected to continue. related to logging activity have threat of moderate magnitude to white Threats related to silvicultural practices concerned habitat disturbance or fringeless orchid populations. could increase in the future, given that increased shading caused by woody some occurrences are located on private vegetation regrowth, Hoy (2012, p. 26) Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat industrial forest lands, where logging suggests that high stem densities that Destruction, Modification, or and future conversion of native occur during succession following Curtailments of Its Range hardwood forests to pine plantation are canopy removal shorten the The USFS has undertaken efforts to likely to occur. In addition to physical hydroperiod of wetlands at an extant restore or protect habitat at a number of disturbances that alter hydrology, white fringeless orchid site in Kentucky. white fringeless orchid sites located on predicted changes in precipitation and This results from increased National Forest (NF) lands. At the drought frequency and severity (see evapotranspiration, due to greater leaf Cherokee NF, the USFS constructed Factor E, below) may contribute to surface area, causing faster rates of fences to exclude feral hogs at two sites, increased loss of suitable habitat in the water loss. While only empirically one of which is the largest known future. documented in wetlands where a single occurrence of the species. These fences Based on our review of the best white fringeless orchid occurrence is are effective when maintained; however, commercial and scientific data located, this process likely has affected only the main concentration of plants is available, we conclude that the present

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55314 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

or threatened destruction, modification, online vendor in 2004 (Richards 2014, herbivores were not discussed, but and curtailment of its habitat or range is pers. comm.). The plants were sold as disease was attributed to pathogenic currently a threat to white fringeless nursery grown Platanthera fungi that were isolated from necrotic orchid and is expected to continue and blephariglottis (white fringed orchid), a tissue, including species of Alternaria, possibly increase in the future. taxon of which white fringeless orchid Pestalotia, Nigrospora, and Cercospora was once treated as a variety (Correll (Zettler and Fairey 1990, p. 214). Factor B. Overutilization for 1941, pp. 153–157); however, when the Zettler (1994, p. 687) also reported Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or plants later flowered in a greenhouse, it observations of tuber herbivory by feral Educational Purposes was apparent they were white fringeless hogs at the largest white fringeless White fringeless orchid was first orchids. When the seller was questioned orchid occurrence in McMinn County, collected from a site in McCreary about the origin of the plants, she Tennessee. The USFS constructed County, Kentucky, but had disappeared initially insisted they had come from a fences to exclude hogs from the greatest from the site by the 1940s, apparently friend’s private lands. The seller later concentration of plants at this site and due to the collection of hundreds of refused to respond to additional at a smaller occurrence in Polk County, specimens to be deposited in herbaria inquiries from the buyer. A recent but found the fence at the McMinn (Ettman and McAdoo 1979 cited in online search for commercially County site in need of repair in 2002, Zettler and Fairey 1990, p. 212). Shea available, native Platanthera orchids when they discovered that (1992, p. 27) cites personal revealed that three species, which often approximately half of the flowering communications from R. Smartt and P. co-occur with white fringeless orchid, white fringeless orchids and many Somers, the latter of whom was a were being offered for sale on the online vegetative orchids had been uprooted botanist with Tennessee’s Natural auction and shopping Web site eBay (USFS 2008, p. 54). As noted above, Heritage Program, reporting that two (www.ebay.com, accessed on September evidence of feral hog disturbance has nurseries in Tennessee had collected 17, 2014). The unintended purchase of been observed at 10 extant white white fringeless orchid plants for resale. white fringeless orchid from an online fringeless orchid sites. While we are not able to independently vendor, combined with the offering of Numerous observers have reported verify these historical reports, they three other Platanthera orchids for sale herbivory by deer as a threat to white suggest that collecting for various via eBay, provides additional evidence fringeless orchids, specifically removal purposes has long been a threat to white that demand exists for native orchids of of inflorescences from white fringeless fringeless orchid. Evidence of recent this genus. orchid plants (Zettler and Fairey 1990, plant collecting (for unknown Due to the species’ rarity, the small p. 212; Shea 1992, pp. 27, 61, 71–77, purposes), at two separate locations, is sizes of most known populations, and 95–97; TDEC 2012, p. 3; KSNPC 2014; presented below. the fact that most of the populations are TDEC 2014). From these sources, we The first of these occurred in 2004, located in remote sites that are found observations of inflorescence alongside a State highway in Chattooga infrequently monitored by conservation herbivory at 21 extant occurrences and County, Georgia. Botanists discovered organizations or law enforcement, 5 where the status is now uncertain. It many flowering plants at the site, but collection is a threat to P. integrilabia. is likely that this threat affects most when they later returned to the site they In small populations, the collection of white fringeless orchid occurrences found that most of the plants had been even a few individuals would diminish (TDEC 2012, p. 3), despite not having dug out and removed. During 2014, only reproductive output and likely reduce been specifically documented in every a single non-flowering white fringeless genetic diversity. instance. orchid was seen at this site (Richards Based on our review of the best Using material supplied by the 2014, pers. comm.). The second incident commercial and scientific data Service, TDEC biologists installed took place during 2014, alongside a available, overutilization for plastic deer control fencing around two State highway in Sequatchie County, commercial, scientific, or recreational areas with concentrations of white Tennessee. A Service biologist observed purposes is currently a threat of low fringeless orchids at a site on Tennessee 83 flowering white fringeless orchids at magnitude to white fringeless orchid State Park lands in 2013. During 2014, this site on August 13, 2014, but 2 and is expected to continue in the there were 105 flowering plants at the weeks later only 31 plants bearing future. If the Service were to publish a site, plus 31 plants with browsed flowers or fruiting capsules were found proposal to designate critical habitat for inflorescences found outside of the during a survey with TDEC botanists. In this species, which would include fenced enclosures and one browsed the location where the greatest detailed maps and descriptions of plant inside one of the enclosures where concentration of flowering plants had locations where the species is present, the fence had partially collapsed. Inside been observed on August 13, there were the magnitude and severity of this of the enclosures were 45 flowering areas where mats of sphagnum moss activity would increase, and it would plants that were unharmed. and roots of woody plants had been become a threat of moderate to high Approximately one-third of the scraped away from the surface and magnitude. flowering plants outside of the fenced shallow depressions were present in the areas suffered inflorescence herbivory. mineral soil beneath. Because no Factor C. Disease or Predation The high frequency at which wildlife tracks were present in the area Zettler and Fairey (1990, p. 214) inflorescence herbivory has been where the surface disturbance had reported that both herbivory and disease observed at white fringeless orchid occurred and no partial stems were affected two white fringeless orchid occurrences likely contributes to present to indicate that the loss resulted populations they studied in Georgia and population declines in this species. from herbivory, the Service and TDEC South Carolina. At the Georgia site, 16.5 Orchid growth is initiated each spring botanists concluded that the plants had percent of the white fringeless orchids from overwintered buds, similar to most been collected. suffered from herbivory and 11.5 perennial plants; however, orchids While the fate of plants that have been percent from disease; at the South differ from most other plants by lacking collected is not known, we received Carolina site, herbivory and disease the capacity to replace tissues lost to information about white fringeless were evident on 22.5 and 23.9 percent herbivory or other causes until the orchids having been purchased via an of the plants, respectively. The specific following year. In addition, in several

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55315

species of Platanthera, the usual conserve, or enhance protected plant hinder any development or use of response to loss of the shoot is death of species; and regulate the sale or public or private land. Furthermore, the the plant (Sheviak 1990, p. 195). distribution of protected plant species. intent of this statute is not to ameliorate Based on our review of the best The NCPPCA forbids any person from the threats identified for the species, but commercial and scientific data uprooting, digging, taking or otherwise it does provide information on the available, predation is a threat of disturbing or removing protected plant species. moderate to high magnitude to white species from the lands of another The Tennessee Rare Plant Protection fringeless orchid and is expected to without a written permit and prescribes and Conservation Act of 1985 (TRPPCA; continue in the future. Pathogenic fungi penalties for violations. Tennessee Code Annotated 11–26–201) have been documented in only two The law that provides official authorizes the Tennessee Department of populations, though their presence has protection to designated species of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) likely been overlooked by most plants in Georgia is known as the to, among other things: Conduct observers, and therefore they are a low Wildflower Preservation Act of 1973. investigations on species of rare plants magnitude threat. Under this State law, no protected plant throughout the State of Tennessee; may be collected without written maintain a listing of species of plants Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing landowner permission. No protected determined to be endangered, Regulatory Mechanisms plant may be transported within Georgia threatened, or of special concern within Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act requires without a transport tag with a permit the State; and regulate the sale or export the Service to take into account ‘‘those number affixed. Permits are also used to of endangered species via a licensing efforts, if any, being made by any State regulate a wide array of conservation system. The TRPPCA forbids persons or foreign nation, or any political activities, including plant rescues, sale from knowingly uprooting, digging, subdivision of a State or foreign nation, of protected species, and propagation taking, removing, damaging, destroying, to protect such species. . . .’’ In efforts for augmenting natural possessing, or otherwise disturbing for relation to Factor D under the Act, we populations and establishing new ones. any purpose, any endangered species interpret this language to require the No protected plants may be collected from private or public lands without the Service to consider relevant Federal, from State-owned lands without the written permission of the landowner, State, and tribal laws, plans, regulations, express permission of the GDNR. The lessee, or other person entitled to and other such mechanisms that may Georgia Environmental Policy Act possession and prescribes penalties for minimize any of the threats we describe (GEPA), enacted in 1991, requires that violations. The TDEC may use the list of in threat analyses under the other four impacts to protected species be threatened and special concern species factors, or otherwise enhance addressed for all projects on State- when commenting on proposed public conservation of the species. We give owned lands, and for all projects works projects in Tennessee, and the strongest weight to statutes and their undertaken by a municipality or county department encourages voluntary efforts implementing regulations and to if funded half or more by State funds, to prevent the plants on this list from management direction that stems from or by a State grant of more than becoming endangered species. This those laws and regulations. An example $250,000. The provisions of GEPA do authority is not, however, to be used to would be State governmental actions not apply to actions of non- interfere with, delay, or impede any enforced under a State statute or governmental entities. On private lands, public works project. constitution, or Federal action under the landowner has ultimate authority on Thus, despite the fact that the white statute. what protection efforts, if any, occur fringeless orchid is listed as special Having evaluated the significance of with regard to protected plants (Patrick concern, threatened, or endangered by the threat as mitigated by any such et al. 1995, p. 1 of section titled ‘‘Legal the States of Georgia, North Carolina, conservation efforts, we analyze under Overview’’). and Tennessee and the Commonwealth Factor D the extent to which existing The Kentucky Rare Plants Recognition of Kentucky, these designations confer regulatory mechanisms are inadequate Act, Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS), no guarantee of protection to the to address the specific threats to the chapter 146, sections 600–619, directs species’ habitat, whether on privately species. Regulatory mechanisms, if they the KSNPC to identify plants native to owned or State-owned lands, unless exist, may reduce or eliminate the Kentucky that are in danger of such protections are voluntarily impacts from one or more identified extirpation within Kentucky and report extended to the species, and only threats. In this section, we review every 4 years to the Governor and prohibit unauthorized collection in existing State and Federal regulatory General Assembly on the conditions and Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee. mechanisms to determine whether they needs of these endangered or threatened Section 404 of the Clean Water Act effectively reduce or remove threats to plants. This list of endangered or (CWA; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) the white fringeless orchid. threatened plants in Kentucky is found establishes a Federal program for The white fringeless orchid is listed in Kentucky Administrative regulating the discharge of dredged or as special concern, with historical Regulations, title 400, chapter 3:040. fill material into waters of the United status, by the State of North Carolina, as The statute (KRS 146:600–619) States, including wetlands. threatened by the State of Georgia, and recognizes the need to develop and Additionally, section 401 of the CWA as endangered by the Commonwealth of maintain information regarding forbids Federal agencies from issuing a Kentucky and State of Tennessee. distribution, population, habitat needs, permit or license for activities that may The North Carolina Plant Protection limiting factors, other biological data, result in a discharge to waters of the and Conservation Act (NCPPCA; North and requirements for the survival of United States until the State or Tribe Carolina General Statutes 106–202) plants native to Kentucky. This statute where the discharge would originate has authorizes the North Carolina Plant does not include any regulatory granted or waived certification. All of Conservation Board, within the prohibitions of activities or direct the States where white fringeless orchid Department of Agriculture and protections for any species included in occurs maintain regulatory programs Consumer Services, to among other the list. It is expressly stated in KRS providing a framework for issuance of things: Maintain a list of protected plant 146.615 that this list of endangered or section 401 certifications related to species; adopt regulations to protect, threatened plants shall not obstruct or applications for section 404 permits.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55316 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

This legislation does not prohibit the Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade populations occurring in isolation on discharge of these materials into Factors Affecting Its Continued the landscape can lose genetic variation wetlands; rather, it provides a regulatory Existence due to the potentially strong influence of genetic drift, i.e., the random change framework that requires permits prior to Small Population Size such action being taken. The U.S. Army in allele frequency from generation to Corps of Engineers (Corps) reviews The low number of individuals that generation (Barrett and Kohn 1991, p. individual permits for potentially have been seen at most white fringeless 8). Smaller populations experience orchid occurrences (Figure 1, above) significant impacts; however, most greater changes in allele frequency due increases the species’ vulnerability to to drift than do larger populations discharges are considered to have threats, discussed under Factors A minimal impacts and may be covered by (Allendorf and Luikart 2007, pp. 121– through D, above, by diminishing its 122). Loss of genetic variation due to a general permit that does not require resilience to recover from demographic genetic drift heightens susceptibility of individual review. reductions caused by habitat small populations to adverse genetic Due to their typical position in non- disturbance or modification, collecting, effects, including inbreeding depression navigable heads of streams located or herbivory. Despite the fact that white and loss of evolutionary flexibility remotely from traditional navigable fringeless orchid has been shown to be (Primack 1998, p. 283). Deleterious waters, where flow is ephemeral or self-compatible, higher rates of fruit set effects of loss of genetic variation intermittent and channels are poorly have been observed in larger through drift have been termed drift defined, if present at all, wetlands populations, presumably due to higher load, which is expressed as a decline in where white fringeless orchid occurs rates of cross-pollination (Zettler and mean population performance of have been considered to not exhibit a Fairey 1990, p. 214; Zettler et al. 1996, offspring in small populations (Willi et significant nexus with traditional p. 20). Zettler et al. (1996, p. 22) al. 2005, p. 2260). attributed the lower fruiting rates in the navigable waters. Therefore, these types smaller populations to inbreeding Climate Change of wetlands typically do not meet the depression, noting that in a separate Our analyses under the Act include definition of waters of the United States study both germination rates and consideration of ongoing and projected given in the Environmental Protection propagation success were greater in changes in climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ Agency (EPA) and Corps joint white fringeless orchid seeds collected and ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the memorandum Clean Water Act from the largest of the three populations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme they studied (Zettler and McInnis 1992, Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United p. 160). Johnson et al. (2009, p. 3) found mean and variability of different types States & Carabell v. United States that higher proportions of self- of weather conditions over time, with 30 (December 2, 2008). However, on June pollination occurred in smaller years being a typical period for such 29, 2015, the EPA and Corps published populations of a moth-pollinated measurements, although shorter or a final rule (80 FR 37054) that revises orchid, Satyrium longicauda (no longer periods also may be used (IPCC the definition of ‘‘Waters of the United common name), presumably due to 2014, pp. 119–120). The term ‘‘climate States.’’ Specific guidance on pollinators visiting more flowers per change’’ thus refers to a change in the implementation of this revised plant in smaller populations and more mean or variability of one or more definition is currently lacking, but it frequently transferring pollen among measures of climate (e.g., temperature or appears that the revised definition now flowers within a single inflorescence, precipitation) that persists for an includes the habitats where white rather than frequently moving among extended period, typically decades or fringeless orchid occurs among waters separate inflorescences on different longer, whether the change is due to individuals. To the extent that rates of natural variability, human activity, or of the United States. cross-pollination, fruit set, germination, both (IPCC 2014, pp. 119–120). A recent While the wetland habitats occupied and propagation success are lower for compilation of climate change and its by white fringeless orchid are now white fringeless orchid populations of effects is available from reports of the likely to be included within the small size, demographic reductions IPCC (IPCC 2014, entire). definition of waters of the United States, resulting from other threats place the Various types of changes in climate as noted above, section 404 of the CWA species at greater risk of localized can have direct or indirect effects on does not necessarily prevent extinctions. species. These effects may be positive, degradation to such habitats from the While the results of genetic analyses neutral, or negative and they may discharge of dredge or fill material. It did not demonstrate that genetic change over time, depending on the simply provides a regulatory program variability in populations of white species and other relevant for permitting activities that would fringeless orchid has been eroded by considerations, such as the effects of result in such a discharge. Further, restricted gene flow, Birchenko (2001, interactions of climate with other discharges associated with normal pp. 34–40) cautioned that interactions variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) between demographic and ecological (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). Projected farming, ranching, and forestry factors could be a cause for some of the changes in climate and related impacts activities, such as plowing, cultivating, declines in white fringeless orchid can vary substantially across and within minor drainage, and harvesting for the population sizes and could ultimately different regions of the world (e.g., IPCC production of food, fiber, and forest cause declines in the species’ genetic 2014, pp. 11–13). Therefore, we use products are exempt from the variation and increase differentiation ‘‘downscaled’’ projections when they requirement to obtain a permit. Thus, among its populations. The ability of are available and have been developed potential impacts to wetland habitats populations to adapt to environmental through appropriate scientific from silvicultural activities such as change is dependent upon genetic procedures (see Glick et al. 2011, pp. those described above in the Factor A variation, a property of populations that 58–61, for a discussion of downscaling). discussion are not regulated under derives from its members possessing In our analyses, we use our expert section 404 of the CWA. different forms (i.e., alleles) of the same judgment to weigh relevant information, gene (Primack 1998, p. 283). Small including uncertainty, in our

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55317

consideration of various aspects of Depending on timing and intensity of purposes (Factor B) has been attributed climate change. drought events, white fringeless orchid as the cause for extirpation of white The IPCC concluded that evidence of occurrences could be adversely affected fringeless orchid at its type locality, and warming of the climate system is by increased mortality rates, reduced recent evidence demonstrates that this unequivocal (IPCC 2014, pp. 2, 40). reproductive output due to loss or activity remains a threat to this species. Numerous long-term climate changes reduced vigor of mature plants, and Fungal pathogens have been identified have been observed including changes reduced rates of seed germination and as a threat to white fringeless orchid, in arctic temperatures and ice, seedling recruitment. Further, white but a threat with potentially greater widespread changes in precipitation fringeless orchid’s dependence upon a impact associated with Factor C is amounts, ocean salinity, and aspects of limited number of large Lepidoptera for inflorescence herbivory, presumably by extreme weather including heavy pollination (Zettler et al. 1996, pp.16– deer, which has been reported at over precipitation and heat waves (IPCC 22) and, potentially, on a single species one-third of extant occurrences and 2014, pp. 40–44). While continued of mycorrhizal fungi to complete its life likely is a factor threatening most white change is certain, the magnitude and cycle (Currah et al. 1997, p. 340) place fringeless orchid occurrences, especially rate of change is unknown in many the species at higher risk of extinction where low numbers of plants are cases. Species that are dependent on due to environmental changes that present. Tuber herbivory by feral hogs specialized habitat types, are limited in could diminish habitat suitability for it has been reported at the largest known distribution, or have become restricted or the other species upon which it white fringeless orchid occurrence. The to the extreme periphery of their range depends (Swarts and Dixon 2009, p. effects of these threats are intensified by will be most susceptible to the impacts 546). the small population sizes that of climate change. While climate has changed in recent characterize a majority of occurrences Estimates of the effects of climate decades in the southeastern United throughout the species’ geographic change using available climate models States and the rate of change likely will range (Factor E), due to their diminished lack the geographic precision needed to continue to increase into the future, we resilience to recover from demographic predict the magnitude of effects at a do not have data to determine reductions caused by loss of individuals scale small enough to discretely apply specifically how the habitats where or low reproductive output from other to the range of white fringeless orchid white fringeless orchid occurs will be threats. Further, the species’ (i.e., there are no ‘‘downscaled’’ affected by, or how the species will dependence on a limited number of projections available). However, data on respond to, these changes. However, the Lepidoptera and a single species of recent trends and predicted changes for potential for adverse effects to white fungi to complete its life cycle, make it the Southeast United States (Karl et al. fringeless orchid, either through vulnerable to disturbances that diminish 2009, pp. 111–122) provide some changes in habitat suitability or by habitat suitability for these taxa as well insight for evaluating the potential affecting populations of pollinators or (Factor E). Existing regulatory threat of climate change to the species. mycorrhizal fungi, is likely to increase mechanisms have not led to a reduction White fringeless orchid’s geographic as climate continues to change at an or removal of threats posed to the range lies within the geographic area accelerating rate. species from these factors (see Factor D included by Karl et al. (2009, pp. 111– Based on our review of the best discussion). 116) in their summary of regional commercial and scientific data climate impacts affecting the Southeast available, diminished resilience of many The Act defines an endangered region. occurrences due to small population species as any species that is ‘‘in danger Since 1970, the average annual sizes and the species’ dependence on a of extinction throughout all or a temperature across the Southeast has limited number of Lepidoptera and a significant portion of its range’’ and a increased by about 2 degrees Fahrenheit single species of fungi to complete its threatened species as any species ‘‘that (°F), with the greatest increases life cycle are currently threats of is likely to become endangered occurring during winter months. The moderate magnitude to white fringeless throughout all or a significant portion of geographic extent of areas in the orchid. These threats are expected to its range within the foreseeable future.’’ Southeast region affected by moderate to continue and, in light of climate change We find that white fringeless orchid is severe spring and summer drought has projections, possibly increase in the likely to become endangered throughout increased over the past three decades by future. all or a significant portion of its range 12 and 14 percent, respectively (Karl et within the foreseeable future based on al. 2009, p. 111). These trends are Proposed Determination the low to moderate threats currently expected to increase. Rates of warming We have carefully assessed the best impacting the species. The species is are predicted to more than double in scientific and commercial information known to be extant at 58 locations, but comparison to what the Southeast has available regarding the past, present, low numbers of individuals have been experienced since 1975, with the and future threats to the white fringeless observed at more than half of these (see greatest increases projected for summer orchid. Habitat destruction and Figure 1, above), distributed across the months. Depending on the emissions modification (Factor A) from species’ range, and their persistence into scenario used for modeling change, development, silvicultural practices, the future is uncertain. Furthermore, the average temperatures are expected to excessive shading, and altered threats of habitat destruction or increase by 4.5 °F to 9 °F by the 2080s hydrology (i.e., pond construction, modification and herbivory are present (Karl et al. 2009, p. 111). While there is beaver dam removal) have resulted in throughout the species’ geographic considerable variability in rainfall extirpation of the species from 10 sites. range. Left unmanaged, these threats predictions throughout the region, These threats, in addition to invasive will likely lead to further reductions in increases in evaporation of moisture plant species, feral hogs, and right-of- the species’ geographic range and from soils and loss of water by plants in way maintenance, are associated with abundance at individual sites, response to warmer temperatures are habitat modifications affecting dozens of increasing the risk of extinction to the expected to contribute to increased other occurrences that are extant or of point of endangerment. Therefore, on frequency, intensity, and duration of uncertain status. Collecting for the basis of the best available scientific drought events (Karl et al. 2009, p. 112). scientific, recreational, or commercial and commercial information, we

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55318 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

propose listing the white fringeless maximum extent prudent and in terms of reducing their viability, if orchid as threatened in accordance with determinable, the Secretary shall not causing outright extirpation. These sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. The designate critical habitat at the time the threats would be exacerbated by the species does not currently meet the species is determined to be an publication of maps and descriptions definition of endangered, because a endangered or threatened species. Our outlining the specific locations of this sufficient number of robust populations regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state imperiled orchid in the Federal Register are present on publicly owned or that the designation of critical habitat is and local newspapers. Maps and managed lands. Conservation efforts not prudent when one or both of the descriptions of critical habitat, such as have been initiated that could be following situations exist: those that would appear in the Federal effective in reducing threats by (1) The species is threatened by Register if critical habitat were increasing population sizes and taking, collection, or other human designated, are not now available to the improving habitat conditions across activity, and identification of critical general public. much of the species’ geographic range. habitat can be expected to increase the We have discussed evidence related Under the Act and our implementing degree of threat to the species, or to poaching and commercial sale of regulations, a species may warrant (2) Such designation of critical habitat white fringeless orchid and other listing if it is endangered or threatened would not be beneficial to the species. congeners above (see Factor B, above). throughout all or a significant portion of We have determined that white Due to the species’ rarity, the small sizes its range. The threats to the survival of fringeless orchid is threatened by taking, of most known populations, and the fact white fringeless orchid occur collection, or other human activity and that most of the populations are located throughout the species’ range and are that identification of critical habitat in remote sites that are infrequently not restricted to any particular would be expected to increase this monitored by conservation significant portion of that range. threat. We also have determined that organizations or law enforcement, Accordingly, our assessment and little measurable benefit to the species collection is a threat to white fringeless proposed determination applies to the would result from designation of critical orchid. In small populations, the species throughout its entire range. habitat. This determination involves collection of even a few individuals Therefore, because we have determined weighing the expected increase in would diminish reproductive output that white fringeless orchid is threats associated with a critical habitat and likely reduce genetic diversity. threatened throughout all of its range, designation against the benefits gained Identification of critical habitat would no portion of its range can be by a critical habitat designation. An increase the magnitude and severity of ‘‘significant’’ for purposes of the explanation of this ‘‘balancing’’ this threat by spatially depicting exactly definitions of ‘‘endangered species’’ and evaluation follows. where the species may be found and ‘‘threatened species.’’ See the Final Increased Threat to the Species by widely publicizing this information, Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase Designating Critical Habitat exposing these fragile populations and their habitat to greater risks. We have ‘‘Significant Portion of Its Range’’ in the Designation of critical habitat requires Endangered Species Act’s Definitions of reviewed management plans and other publication of maps and a narrative documents produced by Federal and ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened description of specific critical habitat Species’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014). State conservation agencies and areas in the Federal Register. The scientific literature, and detailed Critical Habitat and Prudency degree of detail in those maps and information on the specific locations of Determination boundary descriptions is far greater than white fringeless orchid sites is not the general location descriptions Critical habitat is defined in section 3 currently available. provided in this listing proposal. Also, of the Act as: while general location data (e.g., names Benefits to the Species From Critical (1) The specific areas within the Habitat Designation geographic area occupied by the species, of administrative units of the National at the time it is listed in accordance Park Service (NPS), USFS, or State It is true that designation of critical with the Act, on which are found those conservation agencies where the species habitat for endangered or threatened physical or biological features: occurs) concerning white fringeless species could have some beneficial (a) Essential to the conservation of the orchid are available, maps or detailed effects. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act species, and descriptions are not found in scientific requires Federal agencies, including the (b) Which may require special or popular literature, current agency Service, to ensure that actions they management considerations or management plans, or other readily fund, authorize, or carry out are not protection; and available sources. One exception is the likely to jeopardize the continued (2) Specific areas outside the availability online of a now expired existence of any endangered or geographical area occupied by the management plan for a site in Alabama threatened species or result in the species at the time it is listed, upon a with maps depicting two locations of destruction or adverse modification of determination that such areas are the species. Location information can that species’ critical habitat. Critical essential for the conservation of the also be found in a journal article for a habitat only provides protections where species. site in North Carolina, where the species there is a Federal nexus, that is, those Conservation, as defined under is no longer extant. Designation of actions that come under the purview of section 3 of the Act, means to use and critical habitat would more widely section 7 of the Act. Critical habitat the use of all methods and procedures announce the exact location of the white designation has no application to that are necessary to bring an fringeless orchid to poachers, collectors, actions that do not have a Federal endangered or threatened species to the and vandals and further facilitate nexus. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act point at which the measures provided unauthorized collection. Due to its mandates that Federal agencies, in pursuant to the Act are no longer rarity (low numbers of individuals in consultation with the Service, evaluate necessary. most populations), this orchid is highly the effects of its proposed action on any Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as vulnerable to collection. Removal of designated critical habitat. Similar to amended, and implementing regulations individuals from extant populations the Act’s requirement that a Federal (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the would have devastating consequences agency action not jeopardize the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55319

continued existence of listed species, affected land managers. Agencies, Recognition through listing results in Federal agencies have the responsibility organizations, and stakeholders are public awareness, and conservation by not to implement actions that would actively engaged in efforts to raise Federal, State, Tribal, and local destroy or adversely modify designated awareness for the orchid and its agencies, private organizations, and critical habitat. Critical habitat conservation needs. For example, the individuals. The Act encourages designation alone, however, does not Atlanta Botanical Garden received a cooperation with the States and other require that a Federal action agency Five Star Urban Habitat Restoration countries and calls for recovery actions implement specific steps toward species grant to improve habitat at several white to be carried out for listed species. The recovery. fringeless orchid sites in Georgia, protection required by Federal agencies Available data indicate that white propagate the species for and the prohibitions against certain fringeless orchid is known from 58 reintroductions or augmentations, and activities are discussed, in part, below. extant occurrences and from 22 others establish educational bog gardens at The primary purpose of the Act is the whose current status is uncertain. Of Chattahoochee Nature Center and the conservation of endangered and these 80 occurrences, 17 are located on Atlanta Botanical Garden. This project, threatened species and the ecosystems Federal lands managed by the USFS which is separate from the USFS upon which they depend. The ultimate (12), NPS (3), and the Service (2), where agreement discussed above, involves goal of such conservation efforts is the they currently receive protection from seven official partners, including two recovery of these listed species, so that adverse effects of management actions local high schools and Georgia State they no longer need the protective and, in some cases, receive management University. In addition, designation of measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of specifically to benefit the species and its critical habitat could inform State the Act calls for the Service to develop habitat. Management efforts have taken agencies and local governments about and implement recovery plans for the place to control feral hogs and invasive areas that could be conserved under conservation of endangered and plants, increase light availability by State laws or local ordinances. However, threatened species. The recovery reducing woody vegetation cover, and as awareness and education involving planning process involves the restore hydrology. In addition, the USFS white fringeless orchid is already well identification of actions that are recently entered a Master Stewardship underway and the species currently necessary to halt or reverse the species’ Agreement with the Atlanta Botanical receives protection from adverse effects decline by addressing the threats to its Garden to provide for habitat of management activities where it survival and recovery. The goal of this management, captive propagation, and occurs on public and privately owned process is to restore listed species to a reintroduction or augmentation of conservation lands, designation of point where they are secure, self- populations on USFS lands, where critical habitat would likely provide sustaining, and functioning components appropriate. Some of the populations on only minimal incremental benefits. of their ecosystems. Federal lands are the largest known, and Recovery planning includes the any future activity involving a Federal Increased Threat to the Species development of a recovery outline action that would destroy or adversely Outweighs the Benefits of Critical shortly after a species is listed and modify critical habitat at these sites Habitat Designation preparation of a draft and final recovery would also likely jeopardize the species’ Upon reviewing the available plan. The recovery outline guides the continued existence. Consultation with information, we have determined that immediate implementation of urgent respect to critical habitat would provide the designation of critical habitat would recovery actions and describes the additional protection to a species only increase the threat to white fringeless process to be used to develop a recovery if the agency action would result in the orchid from unauthorized collection plan. Revisions of the plan may be done destruction or adverse modification of and trade. At the same time, designation to address continuing or new threats to the critical habitat but would not of critical habitat is likely to confer little the species, as new substantive jeopardize the continued existence of measurable benefit to the species information becomes available. The the species. In the absence of a critical beyond that provided by listing. Overall, recovery plan also identifies recovery habitat designation, areas that support the risk of increasing significant threats criteria for review of when a species white fringeless orchid will continue to to the species by publishing detailed may be ready for downlisting or be subject to conservation actions location information in a critical habitat delisting, and methods for monitoring implemented under section 7(a)(1) of designation greatly outweighs the recovery progress. Recovery plans also the Act and to the regulatory protections benefits of designating critical habitat. establish a framework for agencies to afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy In conclusion, we find that the coordinate their recovery efforts and standard, as appropriate. designation of critical habitat is not provide estimates of the cost of Another possible benefit to white prudent, in accordance with 50 CFR implementing recovery tasks. Recovery fringeless orchid from designating 424.12(a)(1), because white fringeless teams (composed of species experts, critical habitat would be that it could orchid is threatened by collection, and Federal and State agencies, serve to educate landowners; State and designation can reasonably be expected nongovernmental organizations, and local government agencies; visitors to to increase the degree of this threat to stakeholders) are often established to National Forests, National Parks, and the species and its habitat. However, we develop recovery plans. If the species is National Wildlife Refuges; and the seek public comment on our listed, the recovery outline, draft general public regarding the potential determination that designation of recovery plan, and the final recovery conservation value of the areas. critical habitat is not prudent. plan, when completed, would be However, through the process of available on our Web site (http:// recognizing white fringeless orchid as a Available Conservation Measures www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our candidate for Federal listing, much of Conservation measures provided to Tennessee Ecological Services Field this educational benefit has already species listed as endangered or Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION been realized and designating critical threatened under the Act include CONTACT). habitat would do little to increase recognition, recovery actions, Implementation of recovery actions awareness about the species’ presence requirements for Federal protection, and generally requires the participation of a and need for conservation among prohibitions against certain practices. broad range of partners, including other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 55320 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules

Federal agencies, States, Tribes, agency must enter into consultation extent practicable at the time a species nongovernmental organizations, with the Service. is listed, those activities that would or businesses, and private landowners. Federal agency actions within the would not constitute a violation of Examples of recovery actions include species’ habitat that may require section 9 of the Act. The intent of this habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of conference or consultation or both as policy is to increase public awareness of native vegetation), research, captive described in the preceding paragraph the effect of a proposed listing on propagation and reintroduction, and include management and any other proposed and ongoing activities within outreach and education. The recovery of landscape-altering activities on Federal the range of species proposed for listing. many listed species cannot be lands administered by the U.S. Fish and Based on the best available accomplished solely on Federal lands Wildlife Service, USFS, and NPS; information, the following activities because their range may occur primarily issuance of section 404 CWA permits by may potentially result in a violation of or solely on non-Federal lands. To the Corps; powerline right-of-way section 9 the Act; this list is not achieve recovery of these species construction and maintenance by the comprehensive: requires cooperative conservation efforts Tennessee Valley Authority; and (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, on private, State, and Tribal lands. If construction and maintenance of roads possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, this species is listed, funding for or highways by the Federal Highway or transporting of white fringeless recovery actions will be available from Administration. orchid, including import or export a variety of sources, including Federal With respect to threatened plants, 50 across State lines and international budgets, State programs, and cost share CFR 17.71 provides that all of the boundaries, except for properly grants for non-Federal landowners, the provisions at 50 CFR 17.61 shall apply documented antique specimens of this academic community, and to threatened plants. These provisions species at least 100 years old, as defined nongovernmental organizations. In make it illegal for any person subject to by section 10(h)(1) of the Act; addition, pursuant to section 6 of the the jurisdiction of the United States to (2) Unauthorized removal, damage, or Act, the State(s) of Georgia, South import or export, transport in interstate destruction of white fringeless orchid Carolina, and Tennessee and the or foreign commerce in the course of a plants from populations located on Commonwealth of Kentucky would be commercial activity, sell or offer for sale Federal land (USFS, NPS, and Service eligible for Federal funds to implement in interstate or foreign commerce, or to lands); and management actions that promote the remove and reduce to possession any (3) Unauthorized removal, damage, or protection or recovery of the white such plant species from areas under destruction of white fringeless orchid fringeless orchid. Information on our Federal jurisdiction. In addition, the Act plants on private land in violation of grant programs that are available to aid prohibits malicious damage or any State regulation, including criminal species recovery can be found at: destruction of any such species on any trespass. http://www.fws.gov/grants. area under Federal jurisdiction, and the At this time, we are unable to identify Although the white fringeless orchid removal, cutting, digging up, or specific activities that would not be is only proposed for listing under the damaging or destroying of any such considered to result in a violation of Act at this time, please let us know if species on any other area in knowing section 9 of the Act because white you are interested in participating in violation of any State law or regulation, fringeless orchid occurs in a variety of conservation efforts for this species. or in the course of any violation of a habitat conditions across its range and Additionally, we invite you to submit State criminal trespass law. However, it is likely that site-specific conservation any new information on this species there is the following exception for measures may be needed for activities whenever it becomes available and any threatened plants. Seeds of cultivated that may directly or indirectly affect the information you may have for specimens of species treated as species. conservation planning purposes (see threatened shall be exempt from all the Questions regarding whether specific FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). provisions of 50 CFR 17.61, provided activities would constitute a violation of Section 7(a) of the Act requires that a statement that the seeds are of section 9 of the Act should be directed Federal agencies to evaluate their ‘‘cultivated origin’’ accompanies the to the Tennessee Ecological Services actions with respect to any species that seeds or their container during the Field Office (see FOR FURTHER is proposed or listed as an endangered course of any activity otherwise subject INFORMATION CONTACT). or threatened species and with respect to these regulations. Exceptions to these to its critical habitat, if any is prohibitions are outlined in 50 CFR Required Determinations designated. Regulations implementing 17.72. Clarity of the Rule this interagency cooperation provision We may issue permits to carry out of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part otherwise prohibited activities We are required by Executive Orders 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires involving threatened plants under 12866 and 12988 and by the Federal agencies to confer with the certain circumstances. Regulations Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Service on any action that is likely to governing permits are codified at 50 1998, to write all rules in plain jeopardize the continued existence of a CFR 17.72. With regard to threatened language. This means that each rule we species proposed for listing or result in plants, a permit issued under this publish must: destruction or adverse modification of section must be for one of the following: (1) Be logically organized; proposed critical habitat. If a species is Scientific purposes, the enhancement of (2) Use the active voice to address listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the propagation or survival of readers directly; the Act requires Federal agencies to threatened species, economic hardship, (3) Use clear language rather than ensure that activities they authorize, botanical or horticultural exhibition, jargon; fund, or carry out are not likely to educational purposes, or other activities (4) Be divided into short sections and jeopardize the continued existence of consistent with the purposes and policy sentences; and the species or destroy or adversely of the Act. (5) Use lists and tables wherever modify its critical habitat. If a Federal It is our policy, as published in the possible. action may affect a listed species or its Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR If you feel that we have not met these critical habitat, the responsible Federal 34272), to identify to the maximum requirements, send us comments by one

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55321

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES References Cited 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section. To better help us revise the as set forth below: rule, your comments should be as A complete list of references cited in specific as possible. For example, you this rulemaking is available on the PART 17—ENDANGERED AND should tell us the numbers of the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS sections or paragraphs that are unclearly and upon request from the Tennessee Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR written, which sections or sentences are ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). too long, the sections where you feel continues to read as follows: lists or tables would be useful, etc. Authors Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– National Environmental Policy Act The primary authors of this proposed 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise We have determined that rule are the staff members of the noted. environmental assessments and Tennessee Ecological Services Field ■ 2. In § 17.12(h), add an entry for Office. environmental impact statements, as Platanthera integrilabia (white defined under the authority of the List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 fringeless orchid) to the List of National Environmental Policy Act Endangered and Threatened Plants in (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not Endangered and threatened species, alphabetical order under FLOWERING be prepared in connection with listing Exports, Imports, Reporting and PLANTS to read as follows: a species as an endangered or recordkeeping requirements, threatened species under the Transportation. § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. Endangered Species Act. We published Proposed Regulation Promulgation * * * * * a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register Accordingly, we propose to amend (h) * * * on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title

Species Historic range Family Status When listed Critical Special Scientific name Common name habitat rules

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Platanthera White fringeless or- U.S.A. (AL, GA, KY, Orchidaceae ...... T ...... NA NA integrilabia. chid. MS, NC, SC, TN).

*******

* * * * * Dated: August 14, 2015. Stephen Guertin, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2015–22973 Filed 9–14–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:46 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS