83 FR 35174 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision of the Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 143 (July 25, 2018)

Page Range		35174-35178
FR Document		2018-15811

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to revise our regulations extending most of the prohibitions for activities involving endangered species to threatened species. For species already listed as a threatened species, the proposed regulations would not alter the applicable prohibitions. The proposed regulations would require the Service, pursuant to section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act, to determine what, if any, protective regulations are appropriate for species that the Service in the future determines to be threatened.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2018)

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35174-35178]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15811]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BC97

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision of the
Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to revise our
regulations extending most of the prohibitions for activities involving
endangered species to threatened species. For species already listed as
a threatened species, the proposed regulations would not alter the
applicable prohibitions. The proposed regulations would require the
Service, pursuant to section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act, to
determine what, if any, protective regulations are appropriate for
species that the Service in the future determines to be threatened.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
September 24, 2018. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading,
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may
submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Request for Information, below, for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bridget Fahey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Conservation and Classification, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803, telephone 703/358-2171. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay
Service at 800/877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (``ESA'' or ``Act'';
16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), states that the purposes of the Act are to
provide a means to conserve the ecosystems upon which listed species
depend, to develop a program for the conservation of listed species,
and to achieve the purposes of certain treaties and conventions.
Moreover, the Act states that it is the policy of Congress that the
Federal Government will seek to conserve threatened and endangered
species and use its authorities to further the purposes of the Act.
This proposed rulemaking action pertains primarily to

[[Page 35175]]

sections 4 and 9 of the Act: Section 9 sets forth prohibitions for
activities pertaining to species listed under the Act, and section 4(d)
pertains to protective regulations for threatened species.
This proposed rule is one of three related proposed rules that are
publishing in today's Federal Register. All of these documents propose
revisions to various regulations that implement the ESA.
In carrying out Executive Order 13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory
Reform Agenda,'' the Department of the Interior (DOI) published a
document with the title ``Regulatory Reform'' in the Federal Register
of June 22, 2017 (82 FR 28429). The document requested public comment
on how DOI can improve implementation of regulatory reform initiatives
and policies and identify regulations for repeal, replacement, or
modification. This proposed rule and the two related proposed rules in
today's Federal Register address some of the comments that DOI has
received in response to the regulatory reform docket.

Proposed Changes to Part 17

The regulations that implement the ESA are located in title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations. This proposed rule would revise
regulations found in part 17 of title 50, particularly in subpart D,
which pertains to threatened wildlife, and subpart G, which pertains to
threatened plants.
We propose to amend Sec. Sec. 17.31 and 17.71, along with
conforming amendments to other sections of title 50. Among other
changes, the proposal would add language in both sections to paragraph
(a) to specify that its provisions apply only to species listed as
threatened species on or before the effective date of this rule.
Species listed or reclassified as a threatened species after the
effective date of this rule, if finalized, would have protective
regulations only if the Service promulgates a species-specific rule
(also referred to as a special rule). In those cases, we intend to
finalize the species-specific rule concurrent with the final listing or
reclassification determination. Notwithstanding our intention, we have
discretion to revise or promulgate species-specific rules at any time
after the final listing or reclassification determination. However, we
specifically request comments on our stated intention of finalizing
species-specific rules concurrent with final listing rules, including
whether we should include any binding requirement in the regulatory
text to do so, such as setting a timeframe for finalizing species-
specific rules after a final listing or reclassification determination.
This change would make our regulatory approach for threatened
species parallel with the approach that the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) has taken since Congress added section 4(d) to the Act,
as discussed below. The protective regulations that currently apply to
threatened species would not change, unless the Service adopts a
species-specific rule in the future. As of the date of this proposal,
there are species-specific protective regulations for threatened
wildlife in subpart D of part 17, but the Service has not adopted any
species-specific protective regulations for plants. The proposed
regulations would not affect the consultation obligations of Federal
agencies pursuant to section 7 of the Act. The proposed regulations
would not change permitting pursuant to 50 CFR 17.32.
The prohibitions set forth in ESA Section 9 expressly apply only to
species listed as endangered under the Act, as opposed to threatened.
16 U.S.C. 1538(a). ESA Section 4(d), however, provides that the
Secretaries may by regulation extend some or all of the Section 9
prohibitions to any species listed as threatened. Id. Sec. 1533(d). 16
U.S.C. 1533(d). See, also S. Rep. 93-307 (July 1, 1973) (in amending
the ESA to include the protection of threatened species and creating
``two levels of protection'' for endangered species and threatened
species, ``regulatory mechanisms may more easily be tailored to the
needs of the'' species). Our existing regulations in Sec. Sec. 17.31
and 17.71, extending most of the prohibitions for endangered species to
threatened species unless altered by a specific regulation, is one
reasonable approach to exercising the discretion granted to the Service
by section 4(d) of the Act. See Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a
Great Or. v. Babbitt, 1 F.3d 1, 7 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (``regardless of the
ESA's overall design, Sec. 1533(d) arguably grants the FWS the
discretion to extend the maximum protection to all threatened species
at once, if guided by its expertise in the field of wildlife
protection, it finds it expeditious to do so''), altered on other
grounds in rehearing, 17 F.3d 1463 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
Another reasonable approach is the one that the Department of
Commerce, through NMFS, has taken in regard to the species under its
purview. NMFS did not adopt regulations that extended most of the
prohibitions for endangered species to threatened species as we did.
Rather, for each species that they list as threatened, NMFS promulgates
the appropriate regulations to put in place prohibitions, protections,
or restrictions tailored specifically to that species. In more than 40
years of implementing the Act, NMFS has successfully implemented the
provisions of the Act using this approach.
Moreover, we have gained considerable experience in developing
species-specific rules over the years. Where we have developed species-
specific 4(d) rules, we have seen many benefits, including removing
redundant permitting requirements, facilitating implementation of
beneficial conservation actions, and making better use of our limited
personnel and fiscal resources by focusing prohibitions on the
stressors contributing to the threatened status of the species. This
revision allows us to capitalize on these benefits in tailoring the
regulations to the conservation needs of the species.
For example, we finalized a species-specific 4(d) rule for the
coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) on
December 10, 1993 (58 FR 65088). In that 4(d) rule, we determined that
activities that met the requirements of the State of California's
Natural Communities Conservation Plan for the protection of coastal
sage scrub habitat would not constitute violations of section 9 of the
Act. Similarly, in 2016, we finalized the listing of the Kentucky arrow
darter (Etheostoma spilotum) with a species-specific 4(d) rule that
exempts take as a result of beneficial in-stream habitat enhancement
projects, bridge and culvert replacement, and maintenance of stream
crossings on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service in habitats
occupied by the species (81 FR 68963, October 5, 2016). As with both of
these examples, if the proposed rule is finalized, we would continue
our practice of explaining in the preamble the rationale for the
species-specific prohibitions included in each 4(d) rule.
Upon reviewing the approach NMFS has taken and in light of the
benefits we have noted in developing species-specific rules, we now
conclude these proposed changes will align our practices with those of
NMFS regarding threatened species under Department of Commerce purview,
but also that they will better tailor protections to the needs of the
threatened species while still providing meaning to the statutory
distinction between ``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.''
The proposed regulations would remove the references to subpart A
in Sec. 17.31 and Sec. 17.71. In Sec. 17.31, we propose to specify
which sections apply to wildlife, to be more transparent as to which
provisions contain exceptions to the prohibitions. In Sec. 17.71, we
propose

[[Page 35176]]

to remove all reference to subpart A, because none of those exceptions
apply to plants.
In proposing the specific changes to the regulations that follow,
and setting out the accompanying clarifying discussion in this
preamble, the Service is establishing prospective standards only.
Nothing in these proposed revised regulations is intended to require
(now or at such time as these regulations may become final) that any
previous listing, delisting, or reclassification determinations or
species-specific protective regulations be reevaluated on the basis of
any final regulations. The existing protections for currently-listed
threatened species are within the discretion expressly delegated to the
Secretary by Congress.
Pursuant to section 10(j) of the Act, members of experimental
populations are generally treated as threatened species and, pursuant
to 50 CFR 17.81, populations are designated through population-specific
regulation found in Sec. Sec. 17.84-17.86. As under our existing
practice, each such population-specific regulation will contain all of
the applicable prohibitions, along with any exceptions to prohibitions,
for that experimental population. None of the changes associated with
this rulemaking will change existing special rules for experimental
populations. Any 10(j) special rules promulgated after the effective
date of this rule which make applicable to a non-essential experimental
population some or all of the prohibitions that statutorily apply to
endangered species will not refer to 50 CFR 17.31(a); rather, they will
instead independently articulate those prohibitions or refer to 50 CFR
17.21.

Request for Information

Any final rule based on this proposal will consider information and
recommendations timely submitted from all interested parties. We
solicit comments, information, and recommendations from governmental
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry
groups, environmental interest groups, and any other interested parties
on this proposed rule. All comments and materials received by the date
listed in DATES, above, will be considered prior to the approval of a
final rule.
You may submit your information concerning this proposed rule 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
your submission is made via 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.
Information and supporting documentation that we receive in
response to this proposed rule will be available for you to review at
http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Management and
Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will
review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is
significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements. This proposed rule is consistent with
Executive Order 13563, and in particular with the requirement of
retrospective analysis of existing rules, designed ``to make the
agency's regulatory program more effective or less burdensome in
achieving the regulatory objectives.''

Executive Order 13771

This proposed rule is expected to be an Executive Order 13771
deregulatory action.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996; 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare, and make
available for public comment, a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency, or his designee, certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We certify that, if adopted as
proposed, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities. The following
discussion explains our rationale.
This rulemaking revises the regulations for 4(d) rules for species
determined to meet the definition of a ``threatened species'' under the
Act. The changes in this proposed rule are instructive regulations and
do not affect small entities.
The Service is the only entity that is directly affected by this
proposed regulation change at 50 CFR part 17 because we are the only
entity that is affected by changes to this section of the Code of
Federal Regulations. No external entities, including any small
businesses, small organizations, or small governments, will experience
any economic impacts from this rule. Consequently, this proposed
rulemaking action is not a major rule under SBREFA.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)

In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.):
(a) On the basis of information contained in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act section above, this proposed rule would not
``significantly or uniquely'' affect small governments. We have
determined and certify pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1502, that this rule would not impose a cost of $100 million or
more in any given year on local or State governments or private
entities. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. As explained
above, small governments would not be affected because the proposed
rule would not place additional requirements on any city, county, or
other local municipalities.
(b) This proposed rule would not produce a Federal mandate on
State,

[[Page 35177]]

local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or
greater in any year; that is, this proposed rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. This
proposed rule would impose no obligations on State, local, or tribal
governments.

Takings (E.O. 12630)

In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this proposed rule would
not have significant takings implications. This proposed rule would not
pertain to ``taking'' of private property interests, nor would it
directly affect private property. A takings implication assessment is
not required because this proposed rule (1) would not effectively
compel a property owner to suffer a physical invasion of property and
(2) would not deny all economically beneficial or productive use of the
land or aquatic resources. This proposed rule would substantially
advance a legitimate government interest (conservation and recovery of
endangered and threatened species) and would not present a barrier to
all reasonable and expected beneficial use of private property.

Federalism (E.O. 13132)

In accordance with Executive Order 13132, we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have significant Federalism effects
and have determined that a federalism summary impact statement is not
required. This proposed rule pertains only to prohibitions for
activities pertaining to threatened species under the Endangered
Species Act and would not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

This proposed rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and
meets the applicable standards provided in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988. This proposed rule would clarify the
prohibitions to threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and the Department
of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and
a submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) is not required.
We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

National Environmental Policy Act

We are analyzing this proposed regulation in accordance with the
criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
Department of the Interior regulations on Implementation of the
National Environmental Policy Act (43 CFR 46.10-46.450), and the
Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 8).
We anticipate that the categorical exclusion found at 43 CFR
46.210(i) likely applies to these proposed regulation changes. At 43
CFR 46.210(i), the Department of the Interior has found that the
following category of actions would not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment and are, therefore,
categorically excluded from the requirement for completion of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement: ``Policies,
directives, regulations, and guidelines: that are of an administrative,
financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature.''
We invite the public to comment on the extent to which this
proposed regulation may have a significant impact on the human
environment, or fall within one of the categorical exclusions for
actions that have no individual or cumulative effect on the quality of
the human environment. We will complete our analysis, in compliance
with NEPA, before finalizing this proposed rule.

Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (E.O. 13211)

Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. This proposed rule, if
made final, is not expected to affect energy supplies, distribution,
and use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and
no Statement of Energy Effects is required.

Clarity of the Rule

We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we hereby propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

0
. 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245,
unless otherwise noted.

0
. 2. Revise Sec. 17.31 to read as follows:

Sec. 17.31 Prohibitions.

(a) Except as provided in Sec. Sec. 17.4 through 17.8, or in a
permit issued under this subpart, all of the provisions of Sec. 17.21,
except Sec. 17.21(c)(5), shall apply to threatened species of wildlife
that were added to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
Sec. 17.11(h) on or prior to [EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE],
unless the Secretary has promulgated species-specific provisions (see
paragraph (c) of this section).
(b) In addition to any other provisions of this part 17, any
employee or agent of the Service, of the National Marine Fisheries
Service, or of a State conservation agency that is operating a
conservation program pursuant to the

[[Page 35178]]

terms of a cooperative agreement with the Service in accordance with
section 6(c) of the Act, who is designated by that agency for such
purposes, may, when acting in the course of official duties, take those
threatened species of wildlife that are covered by an approved
cooperative agreement to carry out conservation programs.
(c) Whenever a species-specific rule in Sec. Sec. 17.40 through
17.48 applies to a threatened species, none of the provisions of
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section will apply. The species-specific
rule will contain all the applicable prohibitions and exceptions.
0
3. Revise Sec. 17.71 to read as follows:

Sec. 17.71 Prohibitions.

(a) Except as provided in a permit issued under this subpart, all
of the provisions of Sec. 17.61 shall apply to threatened species of
plants that were added to the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants
in Sec. 17.12(h) on or prior to [EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE],
with the following exception: Seeds of cultivated specimens of species
treated as threatened shall be exempt from all the provisions of Sec.
17.61, provided that a statement that the seeds are of ``cultivated
origin'' accompanies the seeds or their container during the course of
any activity otherwise subject to these regulations.
(b) In addition to any provisions of this part 17, any employee or
agent of the Service or of a State conservation agency that is
operating a conservation program pursuant to the terms of a cooperative
agreement with the Service in accordance with section 6(c) of the Act,
who is designated by that agency for such purposes, may, when acting in
the course of official duties, remove and reduce to possession from
areas under Federal jurisdiction those threatened species of plants
that are covered by an approved cooperative agreement to carry out
conservation programs.
(c) Whenever a species-specific rule in Sec. Sec. 17.73 through
17.78 applies to a threatened species, the species-specific rule will
contain all the applicable prohibitions and exceptions.

Dated: July 18, 2018.
Ryan K. Zinke,
Secretary, Department of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 2018-15811 Filed 7-24-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P

35176 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules

to remove all reference to subpart A, personal identifying information, you comment, a regulatory flexibility
because none of those exceptions apply may request at the top of your document analysis that describes the effect of the
to plants. that we withhold this personal rule on small entities (i.e., small
In proposing the specific changes to identifying information from public businesses, small organizations, and
the regulations that follow, and setting review. However, we cannot guarantee small government jurisdictions).
out the accompanying clarifying that we will be able to do so. We will However, no regulatory flexibility
discussion in this preamble, the Service post all hardcopy submissions on http:// analysis is required if the head of an
is establishing prospective standards www.regulations.gov. agency, or his designee, certifies that the
only. Nothing in these proposed revised Information and supporting rule will not have a significant
regulations is intended to require (now documentation that we receive in economic impact on a substantial
or at such time as these regulations may response to this proposed rule will be number of small entities. SBREFA
become final) that any previous listing, available for you to review at http:// amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act
delisting, or reclassification www.regulations.gov in Docket No. to require Federal agencies to provide a
determinations or species-specific FWS–HQ–ES–2018–0007. statement of the factual basis for
protective regulations be reevaluated on certifying that a rule will not have a
the basis of any final regulations. The Required Determinations significant economic impact on a
existing protections for currently-listed Regulatory Planning and Review substantial number of small entities. We
threatened species are within the (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) certify that, if adopted as proposed, this
discretion expressly delegated to the proposed rule would not have a
Secretary by Congress. Executive Order 12866 provides that significant economic effect on a
Pursuant to section 10(j) of the Act, the Office of Management and Budget’s substantial number of small entities.
members of experimental populations Office of Information and Regulatory The following discussion explains our
are generally treated as threatened Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rationale.
species and, pursuant to 50 CFR 17.81, rules. OIRA has determined that this This rulemaking revises the
populations are designated through rule is significant. regulations for 4(d) rules for species
population-specific regulation found in Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the determined to meet the definition of a
§§ 17.84–17.86. As under our existing principles of E.O. 12866 while calling ‘‘threatened species’’ under the Act. The
practice, each such population-specific for improvements in the nation’s changes in this proposed rule are
regulation will contain all of the regulatory system to promote instructive regulations and do not affect
applicable prohibitions, along with any predictability, to reduce uncertainty, small entities.
exceptions to prohibitions, for that and to use the best, most innovative, The Service is the only entity that is
experimental population. None of the and least burdensome tools for directly affected by this proposed
changes associated with this rulemaking achieving regulatory ends. The regulation change at 50 CFR part 17
will change existing special rules for executive order directs agencies to because we are the only entity that is
experimental populations. Any 10(j) consider regulatory approaches that affected by changes to this section of the
special rules promulgated after the reduce burdens and maintain flexibility Code of Federal Regulations. No
effective date of this rule which make and freedom of choice for the public external entities, including any small
applicable to a non-essential where these approaches are relevant, businesses, small organizations, or small
experimental population some or all of feasible, and consistent with regulatory governments, will experience any
the prohibitions that statutorily apply to objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes economic impacts from this rule.
endangered species will not refer to 50 further that regulations must be based Consequently, this proposed rulemaking
CFR 17.31(a); rather, they will instead on the best available science and that action is not a major rule under
independently articulate those the rulemaking process must allow for SBREFA.
prohibitions or refer to 50 CFR 17.21. public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
Request for Information this rule in a manner consistent with U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
Any final rule based on this proposal these requirements. This proposed rule In accordance with the Unfunded
will consider information and is consistent with Executive Order Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
recommendations timely submitted 13563, and in particular with the seq.):
from all interested parties. We solicit requirement of retrospective analysis of (a) On the basis of information
comments, information, and existing rules, designed ‘‘to make the contained in the Regulatory Flexibility
recommendations from governmental agency’s regulatory program more Act section above, this proposed rule
agencies, Native American tribes, the effective or less burdensome in would not ‘‘significantly or uniquely’’
scientific community, industry groups, achieving the regulatory objectives.’’ affect small governments. We have
environmental interest groups, and any determined and certify pursuant to the
other interested parties on this proposed Executive Order 13771 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
rule. All comments and materials This proposed rule is expected to be U.S.C. 1502, that this rule would not
received by the date listed in DATES, an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory impose a cost of $100 million or more
above, will be considered prior to the action. in any given year on local or State
approval of a final rule. governments or private entities. A Small
You may submit your information Regulatory Flexibility Act
Government Agency Plan is not
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

concerning this proposed rule by one of Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act required. As explained above, small
the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you (as amended by the Small Business governments would not be affected
submit information via http:// Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act because the proposed rule would not
www.regulations.gov, your entire (SBREFA) of 1996; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), place additional requirements on any
submission—including any personal whenever a Federal agency is required city, county, or other local
identifying information—will be posted to publish a notice of rulemaking for municipalities.
on the website. If your submission is any proposed or final rule, it must (b) This proposed rule would not
made via a hardcopy that includes prepare, and make available for public produce a Federal mandate on State,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM 25JYP1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules 35177

local, or tribal governments or the readily acknowledge our responsibility Clarity of the Rule
private sector of $100 million or greater to communicate meaningfully with We are required by Executive Orders
in any year; that is, this proposed rule recognized Federal Tribes on a 12866 and 12988 and by the
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ government-to-government basis. Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 1998, to write all rules in plain
Paperwork Reduction Act
Act. This proposed rule would impose language. This means that each rule we
no obligations on State, local, or tribal This rule does not contain publish must:
governments. information collection requirements, (1) Be logically organized;
Takings (E.O. 12630) and a submission to the Office of (2) Use the active voice to address
Management and Budget (OMB) under readers directly;
In accordance with Executive Order the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (3) Use clear language rather than
12630, this proposed rule would not (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) is not required. jargon;
have significant takings implications. We may not conduct or sponsor and you (4) Be divided into short sections and
This proposed rule would not pertain to are not required to respond to a sentences; and
‘‘taking’’ of private property interests, collection of information unless it (5) Use lists and tables wherever
nor would it directly affect private displays a currently valid OMB control possible.
property. A takings implication number. If you feel that we have not met these
assessment is not required because this requirements, send us comments by one
proposed rule (1) would not effectively National Environmental Policy Act of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
compel a property owner to suffer a better help us revise the rule, your
physical invasion of property and (2) We are analyzing this proposed
comments should be as specific as
would not deny all economically regulation in accordance with the
possible. For example, you should tell
beneficial or productive use of the land criteria of the National Environmental
us the numbers of the sections or
or aquatic resources. This proposed rule Policy Act (NEPA), the Department of
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
would substantially advance a the Interior regulations on
which sections or sentences are too
legitimate government interest Implementation of the National
long, the sections where you feel lists or
(conservation and recovery of Environmental Policy Act (43 CFR
tables would be useful, etc.
endangered and threatened species) and 46.10–46.450), and the Department of
would not present a barrier to all the Interior Manual (516 DM 8). List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
reasonable and expected beneficial use We anticipate that the categorical Endangered and threatened species,
of private property. exclusion found at 43 CFR 46.210(i) Exports, Imports, Reporting and
likely applies to these proposed recordkeeping requirements,
Federalism (E.O. 13132) regulation changes. At 43 CFR 46.210(i), Transportation.
In accordance with Executive Order the Department of the Interior has found
13132, we have considered whether this Proposed Regulation Promulgation
that the following category of actions
proposed rule would have significant would not individually or cumulatively Accordingly, we hereby propose to
Federalism effects and have determined have a significant effect on the human amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
that a federalism summary impact environment and are, therefore, I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
statement is not required. This proposed categorically excluded from the Regulations, as set forth below:
rule pertains only to prohibitions for requirement for completion of an
activities pertaining to threatened environmental assessment or PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
species under the Endangered Species environmental impact statement: THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
Act and would not have substantial ‘‘Policies, directives, regulations, and ■ . 1. The authority citation for part 17
direct effects on the States, on the guidelines: that are of an administrative, continues to read as follows:
relationship between the Federal financial, legal, technical, or procedural
Government and the States, or on the nature.’’ Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
distribution of power and 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
We invite the public to comment on noted.
responsibilities among the various the extent to which this proposed
levels of government. ■ . 2. Revise § 17.31 to read as follows:
regulation may have a significant impact
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) on the human environment, or fall § 17.31 Prohibitions.
This proposed rule does not unduly within one of the categorical exclusions (a) Except as provided in §§ 17.4
burden the judicial system and meets for actions that have no individual or through 17.8, or in a permit issued
the applicable standards provided in cumulative effect on the quality of the under this subpart, all of the provisions
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive human environment. We will complete of § 17.21, except § 17.21(c)(5), shall
Order 12988. This proposed rule would our analysis, in compliance with NEPA, apply to threatened species of wildlife
clarify the prohibitions to threatened before finalizing this proposed rule. that were added to the List of
species under the Endangered Species Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (E.O. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
Act. 13211) § 17.11(h) on or prior to [EFFECTIVE DATE
OF THE FINAL RULE], unless the Secretary
Government-to-Government Executive Order 13211 requires has promulgated species-specific
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

Relationship With Tribes agencies to prepare Statements of provisions (see paragraph (c) of this
In accordance with the President’s Energy Effects when undertaking certain section).
memorandum of April 29, 1994, actions. This proposed rule, if made (b) In addition to any other provisions
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations final, is not expected to affect energy of this part 17, any employee or agent
with Native American Tribal supplies, distribution, and use. of the Service, of the National Marine
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive Therefore, this action is not a significant Fisheries Service, or of a State
Order 13175, and the Department of the energy action, and no Statement of conservation agency that is operating a
Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we Energy Effects is required. conservation program pursuant to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM 25JYP1

Document Created: 2018-07-25 00:44:35
Document Modified: 2018-07-25 00:44:35

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		Proposed rule.
Dates		We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before September 24, 2018. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
Contact		Bridget Fahey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Conservation and Classification, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803, telephone 703/358-2171. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at 800/877-8339.
FR Citation		83 FR 35174
RIN Number		1018-BC97
CFR Associated		Endangered and Threatened Species; Exports; Imports; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Transportation

83 FR 35174 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision of the Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORFish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 143 (July 25, 2018)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service