Region 3 Guidance for Potential PetitionersPurpose
of this Guidance On the other hand, petitioners provide the Region with an important service if they draw the Service's attention to warranted, high priority actions that are petitionable under the ESA. The value of this service is greatly enhanced, and the Service can complete the requested action more quickly, if the petitioner presents a complete, well-written petition that is prepared in a format similar to that of a Federal Register listing proposal notice. The purpose of this Guidance is to assist potential petitioners in determining if their request is petitionable under the ESA, and in preparing a document that will be more likely to achieve the requested action as efficiently and quickly as possible. Purpose
of the ESA Petition Process The petition process cannot obligate the Service to (1) take regulatory actions that are not supported by available data, (2) collect additional data to support a non-substantial petition, and (3) initiate listings or amendments to critical habitat designations if these actions are precluded by other higher priority actions being undertaken by available Service staff and funding. Petitionable
Actions Other actions related to the ESA are not specifically petitionable under that Act. Under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (§555(e)) anyone has "the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule." Therefore, petitions for actions such as designating new critical habitat or issuing or amending special rules for listed species will be treated as petitions under the APA and are not subject to the ESA's strict deadlines. However, APA petitioners should receive prompt notification of the receipt of their petition, and the Service must consider the request and notify the petitioner of any action taken as a result. Petitions for actions such as these are referred to as "near petitions." Emergency listing is not a petitionable action. Therefore, petitions requesting emergency listing will be treated as petitions for a normal listing. Finally, because the ESA was not intended by Congress to address the threats to, or the population trends of, humans, it is not possible to petition for the listing of human beings. Where
to Send Petitions Minimum Requirements
for a Petition Five
Factors to be Considered in the Listing Decision Any formal proposal by the Fish and Wildlife Service to list a species as endangered or threatened must discuss the causes of the taxon's decline in terms of these five factors. Therefore, a petition to list a taxon as endangered or threatened should discuss the documented threats in this same manner. A petition organized in this way will assist the Service's analysis and will speed the development of a formal proposal if the petitioned action is determined to be warranted. Refer to a recent Federal Register listing proposal for an example of a discussion of these five factors. Recent
and Rangewide Data This is not to say that more data is better. A petition containing reams of data may also slow the Service's determination (but not beyond the 12-month deadline) due to the time required to review it. Ideally, a single recent status report written by a credible and recognized expert (or other qualified scientist) will be submitted for each state within the taxon's range. Reliable
and Credible Data Unpublished information supplied by individuals with demonstrated and recognized knowledge in the subject area is generally considered to be reliable, as well. Uncorroborated anecdotal information and data from sources lacking established records of expertise should be avoided. Undescribed
Taxa Petition
Findings and Thresholds
In making its 90-day finding the Service will use information contained in the petition and information already available in Service files and contained in other readily available reference sources. The Service will also provide copies of the petition to any appropriate state agency or affected tribal governments and will use any information they provide prior to the deadline. The Service
will make a finding that a petition is "substantial" if: If one, or both, of these requirements are not met the Service will find the petition to be "not substantial." A notice of the Service's finding is published in the Federal Register as soon as practicable following the completion of the finding. The 90-day finding is an administrative document and is normally provided to the petitioner within 15 days of the notice preparation.
If the Service made a substantial 90-day finding a status review is immediately initiated to gather additional information on the petitioned taxon. Based upon the information gathered during the status review the Service will make a decision, within 12 months of receipt of the petition, whether the petitioned is warranted or not warranted. The same standards apply as are used during "normal" decisions on whether a species is to be listed as threatened or endangered. That is, is the taxon in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range?; or is the taxon likely to become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range (for endangered and threatened classifications, respectively)? If the petitioned action is found to be warranted, the Service prepares and publishes a listing proposal which normally also serves as the notice of the 12-month finding. Similarly, if the action is found to be not warranted, the 12-month finding is published as a notice in the Federal Register. In either case, the petitioner receives a copy of the administrative finding and a copy of the notice within 15 days of its publication in the Federal Register. If it is determined that a petitioned action is warranted the Service will assign a listing priority number in accordance with the listing priority system established in 1983 by 48 FR 43098. Priority rankings are based upon degree and immediacy of threat, as well as the taxonomic uniqueness of the biological entity. (That is, a subspecies or distinct population segment is lower priority than a full species, and a species which is the only species within its genus is the highest priority.) If the Service, due to expeditious progress being made on higher priority rules, is prevented from promptly proposing an otherwise warranted petitioned action, a warranted but precluded finding is made. Warranted but precluded petition findings must be re-evaluated annually by the lead region to determine if their listing priority number is sufficiently high so that they are no longer precluded by higher priority listing actions. This process is called "recycling," and a notice of the annual finding from the recycled petition is published in the Federal Register. Petitioners are notified of the Service's determination at the conclusion of the annual review process. Questions? |