82 FR 60362 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Five Species
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 243 (December 20, 2017)
Fish and Wildlife Service
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 243 (December 20, 2017)
| Page Range | 60362-60366 | |
| FR Document | 2017-27389 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 20, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 60362-60366] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-27389] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [4500030115] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Five Species AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notification of petition findings and initiation of status reviews. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- day findings on several petitions to list or reclassify wildlife or plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted with respect to the species mentioned in this notification. Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we plan to initiate a review of the status of each of these species to determine if the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that these status reviews are comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information regarding these species. After completing the status reviews, we will issue 12-month findings on the petitions, which will address whether or not the petitioned action is warranted, in accordance with the Act. In addition, we announce a correction to information contained in the 90- day petition finding for the leopard (Panthera pardus), which clarifies the range and entity we are evaluating in our status review of the species. DATES: These findings were made on December 20, 2017. ADDRESSES: Summaries of the bases for the petition findings contained in this document are available on http://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Supporting information in preparing these findings is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours by contacting the appropriate person, as specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If you have new information concerning the status of, or threats to, the species for which we made these petition findings, or their habitats, please submit that information by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket number (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on the Search button. After finding the correct document, you may submit information by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your information will fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803. We request that you send information only by the methods described above. We will post all information we receive on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see Request for Information for Status Reviews, below, for more information). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [[Page 60363]] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Common name Contact person ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Oblong rocksnail....................... Brian Evans, 404-679-7118; [email protected]. Sturgeon chub and sicklefin chub....... Justin Shoemaker, 309-757-5800 x214; [email protected]. Tricolored bat......................... Krishna Gifford, 413-253-8619; [email protected]. Venus flytrap.......................... Brian Evans, 404-679-7118; [email protected]. Leopard................................ Janine Van Norman, 703-358- 2370; [email protected]. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for adding a species to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register. Last year, the Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service of the Department of Commerce revised the regulations that outline the procedures for evaluating petitions (81 FR 66462; September 27, 2016). The new regulations at 50 CFR 424.14 were effective October 27, 2016. We received the petitions referenced in this document prior to that effective date. Therefore, we evaluated these petitions under the 50 CFR 424.14 requirements that were in effect prior to October 27, 2016, as those requirements applied when the petitions were received. The regulations in effect prior to October 27, 2016, establish that the standard for substantial scientific or commercial information with regard to a 90-day petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted'' (former 50 CFR 424.14(b)). A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. The five factors are: (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A); (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (Factor B); (c) Disease or predation (Factor C); (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); or (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence (Factor E).These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued existence (i.e., threats). In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as well as for those that may ameliorate any negative effects and those that may have positive effects. In considering whether the petition presents substantial information indicating the species may be threatened or endangered, we must look beyond the exposure of the species to a threat to evaluate whether the species may respond to the threat in a way that causes actual impacts to the species. The mere identification of threats that could affect a species negatively may not be sufficient to compel a finding that the information in the petition is substantial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the species may meet the definition of an ``endangered species'' or ``threatened species'' under the Act. If we find that a petition presents such information, our subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by considering the individual, population, and species-level effects, and the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the cumulative effect of the threats on the species as a whole. We also consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions and conditions that will have positive effects on the species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or ``threatened species.'' If we find that a petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information, the Act requires us to promptly commence a review of the status of the species, and we will subsequently complete a status review in accordance with our prioritization methodology for 12-month findings (81 FR 49248; July 27, 2016). Summaries of Petition Findings The petition findings contained in this document are listed in the table below and the bases for the findings, along with supporting information, are available on http://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number. Table--Substantial Findings and Correction Announced ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL to docket on http:// Common name Docket No. www.regulations.gov ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Oblong rocksnail..................... FWS-R4-ES-2017-0042 http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R-ES-2017-0042. Sturgeon chub and sicklefin chub..... FWS-R6-ES-2017-0010 http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R6-ES-2017-0010 0010. Tricolored bat....................... FWS-R5-ES-2017-0011 http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R5-ES-2017-0011 0011. Venus flytrap........................ FWS-R4-ES-2017-0041 http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R4-ES-2017-0041 0041. Leopard.............................. FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0131 http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0131 0131. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 60364]] Evaluation of a Petition To List the Oblong Rocksnail as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Species and Range Oblong rocksnail (Leptoxis compacta): Cahaba River, Shelby County, Alabama. Petition History On June 21, 2016, we received a petition dated the same day from the Center for Biological Diversity and Cahaba Riverkeeper requesting that the oblong rocksnail be listed as endangered or threatened and that critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioners, required at former 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the oblong rocksnail, based on Factors A and E as set forth in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (for information about these factors, see Background, above). However, during our status review, we will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species, including the extent to which any protections or other conservation efforts have reduced those threats. Thus, for this species, the Service requests any information relevant to whether the species falls within the definition of either ``endangered species'' under section 3(6) of the Act or ``threatened species'' under section 3(20) of the Act, including information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) (see Request for Information for Status Reviews, below). The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2017-0042 under the Supporting Documents section. Evaluation of a Petition To List the Sturgeon Chub and Sicklefin Chub as Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Species and Range Sturgeon chub (Macrhybopsis gelida): Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wyoming (Missouri River, tributaries to the Yellowstone and Missouri Rivers, Middle and Lower Mississippi River). Sicklefin chub (Macrhybopsis meeki): Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Tennessee (Missouri River, Lower Yellowstone River, and Middle and Lower Mississippi River). Petition History On August 15, 2016, we received a petition dated August 11, 2016, from WildEarth Guardians requesting that the sturgeon chub and sicklefin chub be listed as endangered or threatened and that critical habitat be designated for these species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at former 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the sturgeon chub and sicklefin chub, based on Factors A, C, D, and E as set forth in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (for information about these factors, see Background, above). However, during our status review, we will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species, including the extent to which any protections or other conservation efforts have reduced those threats. Thus, for these species, the Service requests any information relevant to whether the species fall within the definition of either ``endangered species'' under section 3(6) of the Act or ``threatened species'' under section 3(20) of the Act, including information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) (see Request for Information for Status Reviews, below). The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2017-0010 under the Supporting Documents section. Evaluation of a Petition To List the Tricolored Bat as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Species and Range Tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus): Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin; Canada (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Quebec); Mexico (Eastern and southern regions: Coahuila to Chiapas); Central America (Guatemala) Petition History On June 14, 2016, we received a petition dated June 14, 2016, from the Center for Biological Diversity and Defenders of Wildlife requesting that the tricolored bat be listed as endangered or threatened and that critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioners, required at former 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the tricolored bat, based on Factors A, C, and E as set forth in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (for information about these factors, see Background, above). However, during our status review, we will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species, including the extent to which any protections or other conservation efforts have reduced those threats. Thus, for this species, the Service requests any information relevant to whether the species falls within the definition of either ``endangered species'' under section 3(6) of the Act or ``threatened species'' under section 3(20) of the Act, including information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) (see Request for Information for Status Reviews, below). The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R5-ES-2017-0011 under the Supporting Documents section. [[Page 60365]] Evaluation of a Petition To List the Venus Flytrap as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act Species and Range Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula Ellis): Southeastern North Carolina and northeastern South Carolina, and one introduced population each in Florida and New Jersey. Petition History On October 21, 2016, we received a petition dated the same day from Donald M. Waller, J.T. Curtis Professor of Botany and Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and 25 additional supporters requesting that the Venus flytrap be listed as endangered or threatened and that critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioners, required at former 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for the Venus flytrap, based on Factors A, B, and D as set forth in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see Background, above). However, during our status review, we will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species, including the extent to which any protections or other conservation efforts have reduced those threats. Thus, for this species, the Service requests any information relevant to whether the species falls within the definition of either ``endangered species'' under section 3(6) of the Act or ``threatened species'' under section 3(20) of the Act, including information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) (see Request for Information for Status Reviews, below). The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2017-0041 under the Supporting Documents section. Correction to our Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify the Leopard as an Endangered Species Throughout Its Range On November 30, 2016, we published a document in the Federal Register (81 FR 86315) announcing 90-day findings on three petitions to list or reclassify wildlife or plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). That document included a finding on a petition to reclassify leopard (Panthera pardus) as an endangered species throughout its range. However, in the discussion of our finding and supporting documentation, we made two errors. Therefore, with this document, we correct those errors, clarify our intent to evaluate the status of the species throughout its range. The public is welcome to submit information on the species in light of these corrections (see ADDRESSES, above). If you sent information previously, you need not resend it. The first error we made in the November 30, 2016, 90-day finding is that we mistakenly titled the action ``Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify Leopards Currently Listed as Threatened Species to Endangered Species Under the Act,'' inadvertently implying that we will evaluate the status of the species only in the countries in which it is currently listed as threatened. However, the petition requests that we reclassify leopards as endangered throughout the species' current range, and we evaluated the petition based on that request. Our finding on the petition--that the petition contains substantial information that listing the leopard as endangered throughout its range may be warranted--has not changed. Therefore, we clarify that we will evaluate the status of leopards throughout their current range in our assessment of the species' status. The second error we made in the November 30, 2016, 90-day finding is that we mistakenly described the current range of the leopard as: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Kenya, and Uganda. However, the correct current range of the species is as follows: Species and Range Leopard (Panthera pardus): 62 countries in Africa and Asia. The corrected information regarding our review of this petition can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0131 in the Supporting Documents section. Request for Information for Status Reviews When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial information indicating that listing, reclassification, or delisting of a species may be warranted, we are required to review the status of the species (a status review). For the status review to be complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, we request information on these species from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties. We seek information on: (1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including: (a) Habitat requirements; (b) Genetics and taxonomy; (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns; and (d) Historical and current population levels and current and projected trends. (2) The five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see Background, above) that are the basis for making a listing, reclassification, or delisting determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including past and ongoing conservation measures that could decrease the extent to which one or more of the factors affect the species, its habitat, or both. (3) The potential effects of climate change on the species and its habitat, and the extent to which it affects the habitat or range of the species. If, after the status review, we determine that listing is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see definition at section 3(5)(A) of the Act) for domestic (United States) species under section 4 of the Act, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time we propose to list the species. Therefore, we also request data and information (submitted as provided for in ADDRESSES, above) for the species listed in the table above on: (1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species,'' within the geographical range occupied by the species; (2) Where these features are currently found; (3) Whether or not any of these features may require special management considerations or protection; (4) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species that are ``essential for the conservation of the species''; and (5) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for designation if the species is proposed for listing, and why such habitat falls within the definition of ``critical habitat'' at section 3(5) of the Act. Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include. [[Page 60366]] Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the actions under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.'' You may submit your information concerning these status reviews by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the website. If you submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this personal identifying information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov. It is important to note that the standard for a 90-day finding differs from the Act's standard that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned action is warranted. In making a 90-day finding, we consider information in the petition and sources cited in the petition, as well as information which is readily available, and we evaluate merely whether that information constitutes ``substantial information'' indicating that the petitioned action ``may be warranted.'' In a 12-month finding, we must complete a thorough status review of the species and evaluate the ``best scientific and commercial data available'' to determine whether a petitioned action ``is warranted.'' Because the Act's standards for 90-day and 12-month findings are different, a substantial 90-day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a ``warranted'' finding. Conclusion On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the petitions under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that the petitions referenced above for the oblong rocksnail, sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub, tricolored bat, and Venus flytrap present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the requested actions may be warranted. Because we have found that these petitions present substantial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted, we are initiating status reviews to determine whether these actions are warranted under the Act. At the conclusion of each status review, we will issue a finding, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether or not the petitioned action is warranted. Authors The primary authors of this document are staff members of the Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Authority The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Dated: October 23, 2017. James W. Kurth, Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, exercising the authority of the Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2017-27389 Filed 12-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
![60362 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
PART 395—HOURS OF SERVICE OF concerning this regulatory guidance. issue 12-month findings on the
DRIVERS The FMCSA will consider comments petitions, which will address whether or
received by the closing date of the not the petitioned action is warranted,
Section 395.1 Scope of the rules in this comment period to determine whether in accordance with the Act. In addition,
part
any further clarification of these we announce a correction to
Question 34: Does the agricultural regulatory provisions is necessary. In information contained in the 90-day
commodity exception (§ 395.1(k)(1)) addition to comments concerning the petition finding for the leopard
apply to drivers while driving unloaded proposed regulatory guidance above, (Panthera pardus), which clarifies the
to a source where an agricultural including the issue of ‘‘sources’’ of range and entity we are evaluating in
commodity will be loaded, and to an agricultural commodities, as outlined our status review of the species.
unloaded return trip after delivering an above, the Agency is seeking
agricultural commodity under the These findings were made on
DATES:
information on the following: December 20, 2017.
exception? 1. Are there particular segments of the
Guidance: Yes, provided that the trip industry that would take advantage of ADDRESSES: Summaries of the bases for
does not involve transporting other this change more than others? the petition findings contained in this
cargo and the sole purpose of the trip is 2. How does the flexibility provided document are available on http://
to complete the delivery or pick up of in this guidance impact a carrier’s need www.regulations.gov under the
agricultural commodities, as defined in for an electronic logging device? appropriate docket number (see table
§ 395.2. In that case, driving and on- 3. How many carriers and drivers are under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
duty time are not limited, nor do other there transporting agricultural Supporting information in preparing
requirements of 49 CFR part 395 apply. commodities in various segments these findings is available for public
Question 35: Does the agricultural (livestock, unprocessed food, others) inspection, by appointment, during
commodity exception (§ 395.1(k)(1)) that are impacted by this guidance? normal business hours by contacting the
apply if the destination for the appropriate person, as specified in FOR
commodity is beyond the 150 air-mile Issued on: December 13, 2017.
Cathy F. Gautreaux, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If you
radius from the source? have new information concerning the
Guidance: The exception applies to Deputy Administrator.
status of, or threats to, the species for
transportation during the initial 150 air- [FR Doc. 2017–27310 Filed 12–19–17; 8:45 am]
which we made these petition findings,
miles from the source of the commodity. BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
or their habitats, please submit that
Once a driver operates beyond the 150
information by one of the following
air-mile radius of the source, part 395
methods:
applies. Starting at zero from that point, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
the driver must then begin recording his (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
or her duty time, and the limits under Fish and Wildlife Service eRulemaking Portal: http://
the 11-hour, 14-hour, and the 60-/70- www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
hour rules apply. Once the hours of 50 CFR Part 17 enter the appropriate docket number
service rules begin to apply on a given (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY
[4500030115] INFORMATION). Then, click on the Search
trip, they continue to apply for the
duration of that trip, until the driver button. After finding the correct
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
crosses back into the area within 150 document, you may submit information
and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Five
air-miles of the original source of the by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ If your
Species
commodities and is returning to that information will fit in the provided
source. If the driver is not returning to AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, comment box, please use this feature of
the original source, the HOS rules Interior. http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most
continue to apply, even if the driver ACTION: Notification of petition findings compatible with our information review
reenters the 150-mile radius. and initiation of status reviews. procedures. If you attach your
information as a separate document, our
VI. Expiration Date for the Proposed SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and preferred file format is Microsoft Word.
Regulatory Guidance Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- If you attach multiple comments (such
In accordance with section day findings on several petitions to list as form letters), our preferred format is
5203(a)(2)(A) and (a)(3) of the Fixing or reclassify wildlife or plants under the a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
America’s Surface Transportation Endangered Species Act of 1973, as (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
(FAST) Act, Public Law 114–94, 129 amended (Act). Based on our review, we or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Stat. 1312, 1535 (Dec. 4, 2015), the find that the petitions present Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate
proposed regulatory guidance will be substantial scientific or commercial docket number; see table under
posted on FMCSA’s website, information indicating that the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish
www.fmcsa.dot.gov, if finalized. It petitioned actions may be warranted and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275
would be reviewed by the Agency no with respect to the species mentioned in Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041–
later than five years after it is finalized. this notification. Therefore, with the 3803.
The Agency would consider at that time publication of this document, we
announce that we plan to initiate a We request that you send information
whether the guidance should be only by the methods described above.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
withdrawn, reissued for another period review of the status of each of these
species to determine if the petitioned We will post all information we receive
up to five years, or incorporated into the on http://www.regulations.gov. This
safety regulations. actions are warranted. To ensure that
these status reviews are comprehensive, generally means that we will post any
VII. Request for Comments we are requesting scientific and personal information you provide us
Refer to the ADDRESSES section above commercial data and other information (see Request for Information for Status
for instructions on submitting regarding these species. After Reviews, below, for more information).
comments to the public docket completing the status reviews, we will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_60605/page/1.svg)
![60366 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Submissions merely stating support determine whether these actions are complete the required fields, and enter
for or opposition to the actions under warranted under the Act. At the or attach your comments.
consideration without providing conclusion of each status review, we • Mail: Send written comments to
supporting information, although noted, will issue a finding, in accordance with Michael D. Tosatto, Regional
will not be considered in making a section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands
determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the whether or not the petitioned action is Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg.
Act directs that determinations as to warranted. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818.
whether any species is an endangered or Instructions: NMFS may not consider
threatened species must be made Authors comments sent by any other method, to
‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific The primary authors of this document any other address or individual, or
and commercial data available.’’ are staff members of the Ecological received after the end of the comment
You may submit your information Services Program, U.S. Fish and period. All comments received are a
concerning these status reviews by one Wildlife Service. part of the public record and will
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If generally be posted for public viewing
you submit information via http:// Authority
on https://www.regulations.gov change.
www.regulations.gov, your entire The authority for these actions is the All personal identifying information
submission—including any personal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential
identifying information—will be posted amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). business information, or otherwise
on the website. If you submit a Dated: October 23, 2017. sensitive information submitted
hardcopy that includes personal voluntarily by the sender will be
James W. Kurth,
identifying information, you may publicly accessible.
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
request at the top of your document that NMFS prepared an environmental
Service, exercising the authority of the
we withhold this personal identifying Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. analysis that describes the potential
information from public review. impacts on the human environment that
[FR Doc. 2017–27389 Filed 12–19–17; 8:45 am]
However, we cannot guarantee that we would result from the proposed ACL
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
will be able to do so. We will post all and AM. Copies of the environmental
hardcopy submissions on http:// analyses and other supporting
www.regulations.gov. documents are available at https://
It is important to note that the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE www.regulations.gov.
standard for a 90-day finding differs
National Oceanic and Atmospheric FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
from the Act’s standard that applies to
a status review to determine whether a Administration Sarah Ellgen, NMFS PIR Sustainable
petitioned action is warranted. In Fisheries, 808–725–5173.
making a 90-day finding, we consider 50 CFR Part 665 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Kona
information in the petition and sources crab fishery in the U.S. Exclusive
[Docket No. 170915903–7999–01]
cited in the petition, as well as Economic Zone (generally 3–200 nm
information which is readily available, RIN 0648–XF706 from shore) around Hawaii is managed
and we evaluate merely whether that under Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the
information constitutes ‘‘substantial Pacific Island Fisheries; 2017 Hawaii Hawaiian Archipelago (FEP). The
information’’ indicating that the Kona Crab Annual Catch Limit and Western Pacific Fishery Management
petitioned action ‘‘may be warranted.’’ Accountability Measure Council (Council) developed the FEP,
In a 12-month finding, we must and NMFS implemented the plan under
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
complete a thorough status review of the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
species and evaluate the ‘‘best scientific Fishery Conservation and Management
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
and commercial data available’’ to Department of Commerce.
determine whether a petitioned action The FEP contains a process for the
‘‘is warranted.’’ Because the Act’s ACTION: Proposed specification; request Council and NMFS to specify ACLs and
standards for 90-day and 12-month for comments. AMs; that process is codified at Title 50,
findings are different, a substantial 90- Code of Federal Regulations, Section
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a 2017 665.4 (50 CFR 665.4). The regulations
day finding does not mean that the 12- annual catch limit (ACL) of 3,500 lb for
month finding will result in a require NMFS to specify, every fishing
Hawaii Kona Crab, and an year, an ACL for each stock and stock
‘‘warranted’’ finding. accountability measure (AM) to correct complex of management unit species
Conclusion or mitigate any overages of catch limits. (MUS) in an FEP, as recommended by
On the basis of our evaluation of the The proposed ACL and AM support the the Council and considering the best
information presented in the petitions long-term sustainability of fishery available scientific, commercial, and
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we resources of the U.S. Pacific Islands. other information about the fishery. If a
have determined that the petitions DATES: NMFS must receive comments fishery exceeds an ACL, the regulations
referenced above for the oblong by January 4, 2018. require the Council to take action,
rocksnail, sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments which may include reducing the ACL
tricolored bat, and Venus flytrap present on this document, identified by NOAA– for the subsequent fishing year by the
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
substantial scientific or commercial NMFS–2017–0120, by either of the amount of the overage, or other
information indicating that the following methods: appropriate action.
requested actions may be warranted. • Electronic Submission: Submit all The Council recommended that
Because we have found that these electronic public comments via the NMFS specify an ACL of 3,500 lb of
petitions present substantial Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to Hawaii Kona crab for fishing year 2017,
information indicating that the http://www.regulations.gov/#! which began on January 1 and ends on
petitioned actions may be warranted, we docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017- December 31. The Council based its
are initiating status reviews to 0120, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, ACL recommendation on a
VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_60605/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-10-25 10:55:54
Document Modified: 2018-10-25 10:55:54
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notification of petition findings and initiation of status reviews. | |
| Dates | These findings were made on December 20, 2017. | |
| Contact | Common name Contact person | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 60362 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR