[Federal Register: December 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 245)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 77568-77577]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19de08-40]
[[Page 77568]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2008-0006; 92210-1117-0000 B4]
RIN 1018-AV23
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised
Designation of Critical Habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly
(Euphydryas editha quino)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period, notice of
availability of draft economic analysis, and amended required
determinations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on our January 17, 2008, proposed
revised designation of critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot
butterfly under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We also announce the availability of the draft economic analysis (DEA),
a revision to proposed critical habitat Unit 2, and an amended required
determinations section of the proposal. We are reopening the comment
period to allow all interested parties an opportunity to comment
simultaneously on the proposed revision of critical habitat (including
the changes to proposed critical habitat Unit 2), the associated DEA,
and the amended required determinations section. If you submitted
comments previously, then you do not need to resubmit them because they
are included in the public record for this rulemaking and we will fully
consider them in preparation of our final determination.
DATES: We will accept comments received on or before January 20, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: RIN 1018-AV23; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington,
VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on
http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the ``Public Comments''
section below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010
Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011; telephone 760/431-
9440; facsimile 760/431-5901. If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS)
at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We will accept written comments and information during this
reopened comment period on our proposed revision to critical habitat
for the Quino checkerspot butterfly published in the Federal Register
on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3328), as revised by this notice, the DEA of
the proposed revised designation, and the amended required
determinations provided in this document. We will consider information
and recommendations from all interested parties. We are particularly
interested in comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
critical habitat under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
including whether there are threats to the subspecies from human
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit
of designation such that the designation of critical habitat is not
prudent.
(2) Specific information on:
The amount and distribution of Quino checkerspot butterfly
habitat,
Locations within the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing that contain features essential to the conservation of
the subspecies that we should include in the designation and why, and
Locations not within the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing that are essential to the conservation of the
subspecies and why.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed revised critical
habitat.
(4) Probable economic, national security, or other impacts of
designating particular areas as critical habitat. We are particularly
interested in any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of
including or excluding areas that exhibit these impacts.
(5) The potential exclusion of non-Federal lands covered by the
City of Chula Vista Subarea Plan (under the San Diego County Multiple
Species Conservation Program) from final revised critical habitat, and
whether such exclusion is appropriate and why.
(6) The potential exclusion of non-Federal lands covered by the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP) from final revised critical habitat, and whether such exclusion
is appropriate and why. (Please note that although Tribal lands and
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWDSC) lands are
located within the geographic boundary/area covered by the MSHCP, they
are not a part of the MSHCP).
(7) Inclusion of all proposed MWDSC lands in the final critical
habitat designation, and whether inclusion is appropriate and why.
Through a mapping error we included MWDSC lands in Figure 2 of the
proposed revised rule (73 FR 3328, January 17, 2008) that depicted
areas considered for exclusion from critical habitat. Our intent was
not to group these non-Federal lands with other lands considered for
exclusion. We did not specify in the proposed revised rule that MWDSC
would not be excluded from the final critical habitat designation. As
noted in question 6 above, MWDSC is not a signatory to the MSHCP even
though their non-Federal lands occur within the MSHCP plan area.
(8) Whether we should include or exclude Tribal lands of the
Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians (preferred name ``Cahuilla Band of
Indians'') and Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of California
(preferred name ``Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians'') in Riverside
County, and Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians (preferred name
``Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians'') in San Diego County from final
revised critical habitat and why. Economic impacts to the Cahuilla Band
of Indians and the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians are analyzed in this
DEA. During the first public comment period for proposed revisions to
critical habitat that opened January 17, 2008, and closed March 17,
2008, we received a letter from the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians
informing us that land proposed for critical habitat included tribally-
owned fee lands of the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians. These tribally
owned fee lands were classified as privately owned in Table 2 of the
proposed revisions to critical habitat, therefore economic impacts to
the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians are not analyzed in the DEA.
However,
[[Page 77569]]
economic impacts to the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians will be
analyzed in the final EA, and will be taken into consideration for
possible exclusion from the final revised critical habitat.
(9) Whether there are areas we previously designated, but did not
include in our proposed revision to critical habitat, that should be
designated as critical habitat.
(10) Information on the extent to which any Federal, State, and
local environmental protection measures we reference in the DEA were
adopted largely as a result of the subspecies' listing.
(11) Information on whether the DEA identifies all Federal, State,
and local costs and benefits attributable to the proposed revision of
critical habitat, and information on any costs or benefits that we may
have overlooked.
(12) Information on whether the DEA makes appropriate assumptions
regarding current practices and any regulatory changes that likely may
occur if we designate revised critical habitat.
(13) Information on whether the DEA correctly assesses the effect
on regional costs associated with any land use controls that may result
from the revised designation of critical habitat.
(14) Information on areas that the revised critical habitat
designation could potentially impact to a disproportionate degree.
(15) Information on whether the DEA identifies all costs that could
result from the proposed revised designation.
(16) Information on any quantifiable economic benefits of the
revised designation.
(17) Whether the benefits of excluding any particular area outweigh
the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(18) Economic data on the incremental costs of designating a
particular area as revised critical habitat.
(19) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat to provide for greater public participation and
understanding, or assist us in accommodating public concerns and
comments.
(20) Any foreseeable impacts on energy supplies, distribution, and
use resulting from the proposed designation and, in particular, any
impacts on electricity production, and the benefits of including or
excluding areas that exhibit these impacts.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed revised
rule (73 FR 3328) during the initial comment period from January 17,
2008, to March 17, 2008, please do not resubmit them. These comments
are included in the public record for this rulemaking and we will fully
consider them in the preparation of our final determination. Our final
determination concerning revised critical habitat will take into
consideration all written comments and any additional information we
receive during both comment periods. On the basis of public comments,
we may, during the development of our final determination, find that
areas within those proposed do not meet the definition of critical
habitat, that some modifications to the described boundaries are
appropriate, or that areas are appropriate for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning the proposed
revised rule or DEA by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. We will not consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an
address not listed in the ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment--including any personal identifying information--will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this information from public review. However,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy comments on http://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed revised rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
You may obtain copies of the original proposed revision of critical
habitat and the DEA on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov, or
by mail from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
For more information on previous Federal actions concerning the
Quino checkerspot butterfly, refer to the proposed revised designation
of critical habitat published in the Federal Register on January 17,
2008 (73 FR 3328). In March 2005, the Homebuilders Association of
Northern California, et al., filed suit against us challenging the
merits of the final critical habitat designations for several species,
including the Quino checkerspot butterfly. In March 2006, a settlement
was reached that required us to re-evaluate five final critical habitat
designations, including critical habitat designated for the Quino
checkerspot butterfly. The settlement (as modified by subsequent court-
approved amendments) stipulated that any proposed revisions to the
Quino checkerspot butterfly critical habitat designation would be
submitted for publication to the Federal Register on or before January
8, 2008, and the final critical habitat determination would be
submitted on or before June 6, 2009.
Section 3 of the Act defines critical habitat as the specific areas
within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is
listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species and
that may require special management considerations or protection, and
specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at
the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. If the proposed rule is
made final, section 7 of the Act will prohibit destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat by any activity funded, authorized, or
carried out by any Federal agency. Federal agencies proposing actions
affecting areas designated as critical habitat must consult with us on
the effects of their proposed actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the
Act.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from
critical habitat if we determine that the benefits of such exclusion
outweigh the benefits of including that particular area as critical
habitat, unless failure to designate that specific area as critical
habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making a
decision to exclude areas, we consider the economic impact, impact on
national security, or any other relevant impact of the designation.
Draft Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate or revise
critical habitat based upon the best scientific and commercial data
available, after taking into consideration the economic impact, impact
on national security, or any other relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. We have prepared a draft economic
analysis of our January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3328), proposed revised rule to
designate critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly.
The intent of the DEA is to identify and analyze the potential
economic impacts associated with the proposed
[[Page 77570]]
revised critical habitat designation for the Quino checkerspot
butterfly. Additionally, the economic analysis looks retrospectively at
costs incurred since the January 16, 1997 (62 FR 2313), listing of the
Quino checkerspot butterfly as endangered. The DEA quantifies the
economic impacts of all potential conservation efforts for the Quino
checkerspot butterfly; some of these costs will likely be incurred
regardless of whether we designate revised critical habitat. The
economic impact of the proposed revised critical habitat designation is
analyzed by comparing scenarios both ``with critical habitat'' and
``without critical habitat.'' The ``without critical habitat'' scenario
represents the baseline for the analysis, considering protections
already in place for the species (for example, under the Federal
listing and other Federal, State, and local regulations). The baseline,
therefore, represents the costs incurred regardless of whether critical
habitat is designated. The ``with critical habitat'' scenario describes
the incremental impacts associated specifically with the designation of
critical habitat for the species. The incremental conservation efforts
and associated impacts are those not expected to occur absent the
designation of critical habitat for the species. In other words, the
incremental costs are those attributable solely to the designation of
critical habitat above and beyond the baseline costs; these are the
costs we may consider in the final designation of critical habitat. The
analysis looks retrospectively at baseline impacts incurred since the
species was listed, and forecasts both baseline and incremental impacts
likely to occur if we finalize the proposed revised critical habitat.
The current DEA estimates the foreseeable economic impacts of the
proposed revised critical habitat designation. The economic analysis
identifies potential incremental costs as a result of the proposed
revised critical habitat designation; these are those costs attributed
to critical habitat over and above those baseline costs coextensive
with listing. The DEA describes economic impacts of Quino checkerspot
butterfly conservation efforts associated with the following categories
of activity: (1) Residential development; (2) Tribal activities; (3)
habitat management; and (4) non-residential development.
Baseline economic impacts are those impacts that result from
listing and other conservation efforts for the Quino checkerspot
butterfly. Conservation efforts related to development activities
constitute the majority of total baseline costs (approximately 97
percent) in areas of proposed revised critical habitat. Impacts to
Tribal activities and habitat management compose the remaining 3
percent of impacts. Total future baseline impacts are estimated to be
$967 to $973 million ($52.08 to $52.48 million annualized) in present
value terms using a 3 percent discount rate, and $686 to $691 million
($55.34 to $55.74 million annualized) in present value terms using a 7
percent discount rate over the next 23 years (2008 to 2030) in areas
proposed as revised critical habitat.
Almost all incremental impacts attributed to the proposed revised
critical habitat designation are expected to be related to development
(approximately 61 to 86 percent) and Tribal activities (approximately
38 to 14 percent). The DEA estimates total potential incremental
economic impacts in areas proposed as revised critical habitat over the
next 23 years (2008 to 2030) to be $18.4 million to $70.7 million
($1.09 million to $4.17 million annualized) in present value terms
using a 3 percent discount rate, and $13.1 million to $50.4 million
($1.09 to $4.18 million annualized) in present value terms using a 7
percent discount rate.
The DEA considers both economic efficiency and distributional
effects. In the case of habitat conservation, efficiency effects
generally reflect the ``opportunity costs'' associated with the
commitment of resources to comply with habitat protection measures
(e.g., lost economic opportunities associated with restrictions on land
use). The DEA also addresses how potential economic impacts are likely
to be distributed, including an assessment of any local or regional
impacts of habitat conservation and the potential effects of
conservation activities on government agencies, private businesses, and
individuals. The DEA measures lost economic efficiency associated with
residential and commercial development and public projects and
activities, such as economic impacts on water management and
transportation projects, Federal lands, small entities, and the energy
industry. Decision-makers can use this information to assess whether
the effects of the revised designation might unduly burden a particular
group or economic sector.
As we stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the
public on the DEA, as well as on all aspects of the proposed revised
critical habitat rule and our amended required determinations. The
final revised rule may differ from the proposed revised rule based on
new information we receive during the public comment periods. In
particular, we may exclude an area from critical habitat if we
determine that the benefits of excluding the area outweigh the benefits
of including the area as critical habitat, provided the exclusion will
not result in the extinction of the subspecies.
Additional Areas Currently Considered for Exclusion Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act
Tribal Lands
In the proposed revised critical habitat designation published on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3328), we identified Tribal lands in Units 6
and 9 as meeting the definition of critical habitat for the Quino
checkerspot butterfly. At that time, we indicated the inclusion of
Tribal lands in these units would serve to ensure the persistence of
Core Occurrence Complexes in those units and would contribute to the
conservation and recovery of the subspecies overall. However, we also
indicated that we recognized the importance of government-to-government
relationships with Tribes, and we solicited public comment on the
appropriateness of the inclusion or the exclusion of those lands in the
final designation of critical habitat. With the availability of the
DEA, we are now considering exclusion of approximately 1,203 acres (ac)
(487 hectares (ha)) of Tribal lands of the Cahuilla Band of Indians
within proposed Unit 6, and 3,156 ac (1277 ha) of Tribal lands of the
Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians within proposed Unit 9. As discussed in
section 6 of the DEA, socioeconomic data demonstrate a high impact to
Tribal economies and economic vulnerability of the Tribes. Using a 3
percent discount rate, approximately $7.07 to $9.81 million in
incremental impacts are anticipated to be incurred by the Campo Band of
Kumeyaay Indians over the next 23 years (2008 to 2030); using a 7
percent discount rate, those impacts are approximately $5.04 to $6.99
million. The cost of conservation efforts for the butterfly and its
habitat on the Cahuilla Band of Indians' Tribal lands are not estimated
because their development plans do not yet specify implementation
programs and dates for specific projects, thus no project modifications
can be forecast. There will likely be costs, but these cannot be
forecast at this time. Although projections provided by the Southern
California Association of Governments Western Riverside Council of
Governments for purposes of the DEA estimated no residential
development impacts to the Cahuilla Band of Indians, Tribal members
indicated to the Service at meetings and during telephone conversations
that they have economic
[[Page 77571]]
plans similar to those of the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, and the
DEA indicated similar economic vulnerability for the Cahuilla Band of
Indians as well.
Department of Defense Lands
Based on comments submitted during the initial public comment
period from January 17, 2008, to March 17, 2008, we are also
considering exclusion of the San Diego Air Force Space Surveillance
Station (Surveillance Station; 109 ac (44 ha) within the 36,726-ac
(14,862-ha) Unit 8) and the Navy-owned La Posta Mountain Warfare
Training Facility (La Posta Facility; 1,083 ac (438 ha) within the
8,393-ac (3,397-ha) Unit 9) from critical habitat. Under section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, the Secretary is prohibited from designating
as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas owned or
controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its use,
that are subject to an Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan
(INRMP) prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a),
if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a
benefit to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for
designation. However, the Surveillance Station and the La Posta
Facility do not currently have IMRMPs that meet these requirements.
Therefore, we are considering excluding these areas under section
4(b)(2) of the Act for reasons of national security, as explained
below.
The Surveillance Station is a U.S. Air Force (Air Force)
installation used for space surveillance. The Air Force's mission of
the Surveillance Station is to detect, track, and identify man-made
objects in near-earth and deep space orbits as part of a series of
receiving stations equipped with linear antenna arrays. Activities on
the grounds of the Surveillance Station consist of occasional equipment
inspection, maintenance, and mowing of nonnative plants to reduce the
risk of fire damage. The need for additional consultations and possible
conservation restrictions would limit the amount of natural
infrastructure available for ongoing and future mission execution and
training needed for national security. Short-notice, mission-critical
activities not previously analyzed may be delayed in order to conduct
section 7 consultation.
The Service already consulted with the Air Force regarding all
current and foreseen activities and issued a biological opinion
concluding that the Air Force is not likely to destroy or adversely
modify the existing critical habitat, assuming identified conservation
measures are implemented. An Integrated Natural Resources Management
Plan (INRMP) is currently being prepared in coordination with the
Service and the California Department of Fish and Game that will ensure
conservation of the subspecies. The Air Force must implement the INRMP
in accordance with the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C 670a), and must comply with
the Sikes Act to provide for the conservation and rehabilitation of
natural resources on military installations. Because the INRMP is not
yet final and approved by the Secretary, the statutory prohibition on
designation of these lands as critical habitat is inapplicable.
However, the lands may be excluded from designation as critical habitat
if the Secretary determines that the benefits of exclusion, including
the benefits with respect to national security, outweigh the benefits
of such designation.
The Navy-owned La Posta Facility provides training for Navy Special
Operations Forces (SOF) to deploy to the U.S. Pacific and Central
Commands in support of missions in the global war on terrorism. The La
Posta Facility contains areas for critical, mission-essential training
for these SOF troops prior to deployment into hostile areas of the
world. With the closure of several contract sites previously conducting
U.S. Navy Sea, Air and Land Forces (SEAL) Unit Level Training, the La
Posta Facility is now the sole training site for Naval Special Warfare
(NSW) commands and military support functions in the San Diego region
for developing small, well-trained, highly mobile, and independent
operational units. The La Posta Facility is also the only semi-remote,
NSW-controlled complex supporting Assault and Tactical Weapons
Training, and the only cold weather/mountain warfare site that provides
training in unconventional warfare and special tactical intelligence in
the San Diego region.
Delays in construction schedules due to additional environmental
regulations would disrupt mission-critical training and the ability to
acquire and perform special warfare skills. The SEAL training schedule
is extremely concentrated and does not allow for any shifting of
training blocks. By Department of Defense training policy, SEALs
require a remote range built specifically for the skill set required,
close to home, and without distractions. Attempts to duplicate this
training at sites outside the San Diego area, either by contract forces
or other military owned and operated sites, would not provide the
qualified personnel needed for the NSW commitment to the global war on
terrorism.
Aside from these additional areas now being considered for
exclusion from the final revised critical habitat designation, the
remainder of the exclusion discussion presented in the proposed rule
remains unchanged.
Changes to Proposed Revised Critical Habitat
In this document we are proposing revisions to the area of proposed
revised critical habitat in Unit 2 as described in the January 17,
2008, proposed rule (73 FR 3328). This revision involves removal of
approximately 27 acres of proposed revised critical habitat from two
areas along the shoreline of Lake Skinner in Riverside County. Based on
new GIS database information, we determined these two areas do not
contain the features essential to the conservation of the Quino
checkerspot butterfly because they are primarily wetlands. Removal of
these areas from proposed revised critical habitat does not alter the
textual description of Unit 2 as described in the January 17, 2008,
proposed rule (73 FR 3328). A revised legal description and revised map
for proposed critical habitat Unit 2 are included with this notice.
Required Determinations--Amended
In our proposed rule dated January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3328), we
indicated that we would defer our determination of compliance with
several statutes and Executive Orders until the information concerning
potential economic impacts of the designation and potential effects on
landowners and stakeholders became available in the DEA. We have now
made use of the DEA to make these determinations. In this document, we
affirm the information in our proposed rule concerning Executive Order
(E.O.) 13132, E.O. 12988, the Paperwork Reduction Act, the National
Environmental Policy Act, and the President's memorandum of April 29,
1994, ``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951). However, based on the DEA data, we revised
our required determinations concerning E.O. 12866 and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, E.O. 13211 (Energy, Supply, Distribution, and Use),
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and E.O. 12630 (Takings).
Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant and has not reviewed this proposed
rule under
[[Page 77572]]
Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its determination upon
the following four criteria:
(a) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
(b) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
(c) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(d) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5
U.S.C. 802(2)), whenever an 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 certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on our DEA of
the proposed revised designation, we provide our analysis for
determining whether the proposed rule would result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on
comments we receive, we may revise this determination as part of a
final rulemaking.
According to the Small Business Administration (SBA), small
entities include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees,
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic
impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the
types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this
designation as well as types of project modifications that may result.
In general, the term significant economic impact is meant to apply to a
typical small business firm's business operations.
To determine if the proposed revised designation of critical
habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly would affect a substantial
number of small entities, we consider the number of small entities
affected within particular types of economic activities, such as
residential and commercial development. In order to determine whether
it is appropriate for our agency to certify that this rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, we considered each industry or category individually. In
estimate the numbers of small entities potentially affected, we also
considered whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
Critical habitat designation will not affect activities that do not
have any Federal involvement; designation of critical habitat affects
activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal
agencies.
Designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted,
funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal agencies. Some kinds of
activities are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not
be affected by critical habitat designation. In areas where the species
is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult with us
under section 7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or
implement that may affect the Quino checkerspot butterfly. Federal
agencies also must consult with us if their activities may affect
critical habitat.
In the DEA of the proposed revision to critical habitat, we
evaluate the potential economic effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the
proposed revision to critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot
butterfly. The DEA identifies the estimated incremental impacts
associated with the proposed rulemaking as described in sections 2
through 7 of the DEA, and evaluates the potential for economic impacts
related to activity categories including residential development,
Tribal activities, habitat management, and non-residential development.
The DEA concludes that the incremental impacts resulting from this
rulemaking that may be borne by small businesses will be associated
only with residential development. Incremental impacts are either not
expected for the other types of activities considered or, if expected,
will not be borne by small entities.
As discussed in Appendix A of the DEA, the largest impacts of the
proposed rule on small businesses would result from section 7
consultations with the Service on development projects not subject to
an existing or proposed habitat conservation plan. In the 23-year time
frame for the analysis, 14 developers may experience significant
impacts. Furthermore, approximately 6 developers per year will
experience impacts that likely represent less than 1 percent of the
value of a new home. In the high estimate scenario, 5 projects in Unit
9 and 9 projects in Unit 10 are likely to require consultation with the
Service as a result of the proposed rule. Conservatively assuming that
each project is undertaken by a separate entity, as many as 14
developers are likely to be affected over the 23-year time frame of the
analysis. At the high-end, the one-time costs resulting from the
consultation process, including administrative time spent by the
businesses, compensation costs, and the value of time delays, total
approximately $16.1 million for the projects in Unit 9 and $26.8
million for the projects in Unit 10. Additionally, over the 23-year
time frame, a high-end estimate of 131 projects (approximately 6
projects per year) will experience additional administrative costs as a
result of the consultation. These costs result from the need to address
adverse modification in a consultation that would occur even in the
absence of critical habitat. These additional administrative costs are
estimated to be $1,000 per project. No information regarding the
probability that these businesses are small entities is available.
However, assuming they are small businesses, the number of small
entities significantly affected is not likely to be substantial.
In summary, we considered whether the proposed rule would result in
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. For the above reasons and based on currently available
information, we certify that, if promulgated, the proposed revision to
critical habitat would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
[[Page 77573]]
Executive Order 13211--Energy Supply, Distribution, and Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued E.O. 13211 on regulations
that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. E.O.
13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when
undertaking certain actions. This proposed revision to critical habitat
for the Quino checkerspot butterfly is not considered a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866. OMB's guidance for implementing
this Executive Order outlines nine outcomes that may constitute ``a
significant adverse effect'' when compared to no regulatory action. As
discussed in Appendix A, the DEA finds that none of these criteria are
relevant to this analysis. The DEA identified Calpine Corporation, San
Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison as entities
involved in the production of energy; however, designation of critical
habitat is not expected to lead to any adverse outcomes (such as a
reduction in electricity production or an increase in the cost of
energy production or distribution), and a Statement of Energy Effects
is not required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C.
1501), the Service makes the following findings:
(a) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal governments,'' with
two exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of federal assistance.'' It
also excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing
Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually
to State, local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority,''
if the provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of
assistance'' or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government's responsibility to provide funding'' and the State, local,
or Tribal governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly.
``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would
impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a
condition of Federal assistance; or (ii) a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal program.''
Critical habitat designation does not impose a legally binding duty
on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. Under the Act,
the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must ensure that
their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat under
section 7. Designation of critical habitat may indirectly impact non-
Federal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits,
or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal
agency for an action may be indirectly impacted by the designation of
critical habitat. However, the legally binding duty to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely
on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the extent that non-Federal
entities are indirectly impacted because they receive Federal
assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid program, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would critical
habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above
on to State governments.
(b) We do not believe that this rule would significantly or
uniquely affect small governments because it would not produce a
Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year; that is, it is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act. The DEA concludes incremental impacts may occur due to
project modifications that may need to be made for development and
Tribal activities; however, these are not expected to affect small
governments. Incremental impacts stemming from various species
conservation and development control are expected to be borne by the
Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians,
and the Cahuilla Band of Indians, which are not considered small
governments. Consequently, we do not believe that the revised critical
habitat designation would significantly or uniquely affect small
government entities. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not
required.
Executive Order 12630--Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of
proposing revised critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly
in a takings implications assessment. Our takings implications
assessment concludes that the proposed revision to critical habitat for
the Quino checkerspot butterfly does not pose significant takings
implications.
References Cited
A complete list of all references we cited in the proposed rule and
in this document is available on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or by contacting the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authors
The primary authors of this rulemaking are the staff members of the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to
be amended at 73 FR 3328, January 17, 2008, as follows:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas
editha quino) in Sec. 17.95(i), which was proposed to be revised on
January 17, 2008, 73 FR 3328, is proposed to be amended by revising
paragraph 7(i), and map of Units 1 and 2 (Warm Springs Unit and
Skinner/Johnson Unit).
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.
* * * * *
(i) Insects.
* * * * *
Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino)
* * * * *
(7) Unit 2, for Quino checkerspot butterfly, Skinner/Johnson Unit,
Riverside County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Murrieta,
Bachelor Mountain, Winchester, Sage, and Hemet.
(i) Unit 2, for Quino checkerspot butterfly, Skinner/Johnson Unit,
Riverside County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Murrieta,
[[Page 77574]]
Bachelor Mountain, Winchester, Sage, and Hemet. Land bounded by the
following Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) North American Datum of
1927 (NAD27) coordinates (E, N): 499998, 3720683; 500090, 3720605;
500299, 3720612; 500398, 3720607; 500579, 3720598; 500586, 3720598;
500634, 3720490; 500669, 3720410; 500666, 3720385; 500621, 3720047;
500624, 3719960; 500626, 3719917; 500628, 3719893; 500709, 3719672;
500767, 3719516; 500399, 3719573; 500318, 3719585; 500313, 3719586;
500316, 3719555; 500351, 3719141; 500362, 3719006; 500367, 3718993;
500460, 3718706; 500676, 3718678; 500697, 3718685; 500717, 3718691;
500841, 3718731; 500841, 3718731; 500851, 3718734; 500863, 3718678;
500886, 3718565; 500977, 3718127; 500979, 3718098; 500993, 3717945;
500998, 3717897; 500976, 3717895; 500945, 3717893; 500755, 3717880;
500647, 3717873; 500501, 3717863; 500501, 3717863; 500483, 3717862;
500483, 3717862; 500452, 3717860; 500350, 3717853; 500302, 3717849;
500279, 3717848; 500304, 3717761; 500401, 3717425; 500428, 3717332;
500428, 3717332; 500435, 3717307; 500466, 3717201; 500469, 3717189;
500475, 3717168; 500500, 3717082; 500500, 3717066; 500500, 3717063;
500500, 3716956; 500525, 3716907; 500525, 3716907; 500542, 3716872;
500558, 3716840; 500559, 3716838; 500607, 3716709; 500646, 3716602;
500652, 3716586; 500679, 3716428; 500683, 3716405; 500690, 3716362;
500694, 3716342; 500709, 3716188; 500711, 3716174; 500708, 3716117;
500650, 3716148; 500641, 3716153; 500586, 3716182; 500568, 3716192;
500564, 3716194; 500559, 3716192; 500515, 3716170; 500488, 3716156;
500471, 3716093; 500442, 3715981; 500440, 3715976; 500328, 3715948;
500289, 3715938; 500281, 3715937; 500261, 3715935; 500261, 3715935;
500090, 3715919; 500000, 3715874; 499900, 3715824; 499889, 3715817;
499889, 3715817; 499883, 3715814; 499883, 3715814; 499755, 3715733;
499755, 3715733; 499748, 3715730; 499640, 3715681; 499640, 3715681;
499559, 3715644; 499496, 3715636; 499495, 3715636; 499331, 3715616;
499275, 3715521; 499246, 3715474; 499238, 3715404; 499238, 3715404;
499227, 3715312; 499113, 3715161; 499104, 3715134; 499104, 3715134;
499018, 3714876; 498924, 3714838; 498848, 3714829; 498717, 3714770;
498717, 3714770; 498701, 3714763; 498669, 3714608; 498644, 3714484;
498629, 3714216; 498645, 3714094; 498629, 3714022; 498629, 3713877;
498629, 3713877; 498629, 3713724; 498542, 3713679; 498368, 3713588;
498286, 3713546; 498221, 3713590; 498186, 3713614; 498164, 3713629;
498086, 3713682; 497989, 3713748; 497959, 3713769; 497897, 3713786;
497842, 3713802; 497842, 3713802; 497691, 3713843; 497616, 3713926;
497408, 3714156; 497247, 3714175; 497195, 3714181; 497195, 3714183;
497195, 3714189; 497195, 3714287; 497198, 3714578; 497198, 3714601;
497198, 3714603; 497193, 3714603; 497189, 3714603; 495537, 3714597;
494946, 3714595; 494959, 3714662; 494938, 3714662; 494895, 3714590;
494092, 3714587; 494088, 3714587; 493983, 3714586; 493924, 3714539;
493920, 3714314; 493920, 3714302; 493948, 3714287; 494111, 3714199;
494149, 3714179; 496634, 3714183; 496643, 3714174; 496645, 3714172;
496648, 3714170; 496645, 3714160; 496588, 3713933; 496320, 3713724;
496022, 3713620; 495581, 3713496; 495568, 3713492; 495546, 3713486;
495530, 3713369; 495526, 3713338; 495516, 3713263; 495486, 3712667;
495174, 3712577; 495170, 3712573; 495156, 3712556; 495045, 3712418;
495044, 3712418; 495020, 3712388; 494920, 3712265; 494915, 3712262;
494834, 3712219; 494612, 3712103; 494525, 3712093; 494403, 3712080;
494332, 3712032; 494315, 3712021; 494284, 3712000; 494276, 3711995;
494221, 3712092; 494200, 3712131; 494129, 3712167; 494104, 3712181;
494102, 3712181; 494098, 3712178; 494059, 3712150; 493949, 3712070;
493932, 3712058; 493856, 3712110; 493801, 3712148; 493682, 3712190;
493496, 3712237; 493398, 3712152; 493241, 3712008; 493186, 3711929;
493100, 3711944; 492969, 3711967; 492891, 3711967; 492731, 3711967;
492588, 3712051; 492478, 3712116; 492418, 3712414; 492307, 3712475;
492165, 3712553; 492120, 3712577; 491808, 3712607; 491480, 3712577;
490973, 3712577; 490921, 3712582; 490848, 3712509; 490823, 3712484;
490760, 3712477; 490713, 3712505; 490704, 3712509; 490695, 3712514;
490673, 3712527; 490644, 3712527; 490622, 3712527; 490605, 3712527;
490293, 3712533; 490265, 3712557; 490225, 3712589; 490188, 3712695;
490157, 3712745; 490119, 3712782; 490069, 3712770; 490032, 3712801;
489957, 3712869; 489908, 3712901; 489864, 3712950; 489865, 3712964;
489870, 3713057; 489870, 3713069; 489881, 3713117; 489889, 3713150;
489888, 3713150; 489859, 3713162; 489796, 3713187; 489702, 3713181;
489628, 3713118; 489528, 3712963; 489441, 3712795; 489347, 3712801;
489329, 3712764; 489298, 3712733; 489204, 3712733; 489198, 3712851;
489123, 3712907; 489101, 3712923; 489101, 3712923; 489049, 3712963;
488968, 3713013; 488874, 3713006; 488850, 3713044; 488856, 3713224;
488856, 3713274; 488829, 3713276; 488713, 3713286; 488575, 3713286;
488526, 3713286; 488333, 3713311; 488306, 3713325; 488294, 3713331;
488271, 3713343; 488270, 3713342; 488202, 3713318; 488169, 3713356;
488159, 3713367; 488124, 3713446; 488115, 3713467; 488078, 3713598;
488072, 3713668; 488072, 3713672; 488073, 3713673; 488109, 3713697;
488152, 3713716; 488221, 3713822; 488277, 3713952; 488277, 3714015;
488299, 3714073; 488308, 3714096; 488308, 3714163; 488308, 3714163;
488308, 3714164; 488258, 3714189; 488171, 3714189; 488157, 3714206;
488115, 3714257; 488215, 3714587; 488321, 3714942; 488329, 3714956;
488339, 3714972; 488377, 3715035; 488426, 3715154; 488532, 3715235;
488675, 3715272; 488812, 3715291; 488930, 3715284; 488968, 3715216;
488968, 3715079; 488980, 3714979; 489005, 3714970; 489049, 3714955;
489094, 3714955; 489104, 3714955; 489105, 3714955; 489273, 3714961;
489313, 3714960; 489634, 3714955; 489764, 3714886; 489808, 3714699;
489845, 3714481; 489845, 3714345; 489796, 3714170; 489798, 3714137;
489802, 3714077; 489820, 3713909; 489823, 3713867; 489827, 3713803;
489820, 3713753; 489764, 3713741; 489702, 3713679; 489689, 3713664;
489659, 3713629; 489648, 3713638; 489584, 3713691; 489580, 3713744;
489579, 3713769; 489578, 3713784; 489553, 3713884; 489478, 3713915;
489435, 3713896; 489426, 3713839; 489422, 3713809; 489410, 3713802;
489394, 3713793; 489347, 3713766; 489198, 3713747; 489101, 3713741;
489101, 3713741; 489098, 3713741; 489049, 3713685; 489049, 3713585;
489055, 3713511; 489101, 3713495; 489101, 3713495; 489111, 3713492;
489204, 3713523; 489310, 3713535; 489405, 3713512; 489435, 3713504;
489497, 3713455; 489565, 3713436; 489634, 3713386; 489677, 3713353;
489740, 3713305; 489839, 3713274; 489866, 3713279; 489868, 3713279;
489869, 3713279; 489897, 3713284; 489932, 3713290; 489935, 3713291;
489945, 3713293; 489995, 3713367; 490007, 3713372; 490029, 3713381;
490033, 3713383; 490045, 3713387; 490057, 3713392; 490115, 3713376;
490144, 3713367; 490167, 3713348; 490177, 3713339; 490201, 3713319;
490210, 3713312; 490221, 3713302; 490225, 3713299; 490287, 3713224;
[[Page 77575]]
490333, 3713224; 490343, 3713224; 490381, 3713286; 490482, 3713282;
490491, 3713282; 490505, 3713281; 490520, 3713281; 490534, 3713280;
490536, 3713280; 490549, 3713279; 490564, 3713278; 490579, 3713276;
490593, 3713275; 490608, 3713273; 490623, 3713272; 490640, 3713270;
490667, 3713268; 490670, 3713271; 490682, 3713286; 490691, 3713296;
490704, 3713311; 490710, 3713778; 490698, 3713996; 490698, 3714114;
490698, 3714114; 490712, 3714114; 490850, 3714114; 490850, 3714120;
490851, 3714136; 490856, 3714290; 490862, 3714445; 490864, 3714517;
490869, 3714634; 490869, 3714648; 490881, 3714648; 490895, 3714647;
491085, 3714643; 491179, 3714641; 491198, 3714641; 491224, 3714640;
491236, 3714640; 491376, 3714637; 491404, 3714636; 491423, 3714636;
491453, 3714635; 491581, 3714632; 491581, 3714632; 491622, 3714631;
491622, 3714631; 491789, 3714628; 491890, 3714625; 491985, 3714623;
492080, 3714621; 492180, 3714619; 492225, 3714618; 492278, 3714655;
492380, 3714725; 492380, 3714725; 492408, 3714744; 492436, 3714763;
492766, 3714990; 492984, 3715139; 493497, 3715502; 493508, 3715510;
493515, 3715503; 493555, 3715460; 493604, 3715458; 493712, 3715456;
493716, 3715461; 493826, 3715617; 493894, 3715626; 493904, 3715627;
494051, 3715646; 494128, 3715642; 494228, 3715636; 494276, 3715634;
494359, 3715611; 494480, 3715579; 494519, 3715578; 494569, 3715576;
494653, 3715574; 494728, 3715555; 494785, 3715540; 494877, 3715476;
494929, 3715439; 494968, 3715394; 495005, 3715350; 495137, 3715413;
495340, 3715413; 495404, 3715366; 495430, 3715392; 495476, 3715439;
495525, 3715496; 495545, 3715519; 495552, 3715528; 495593, 3715535;
495697, 3715553; 495799, 3715564; 495820, 3715566; 495981, 3715562;
496021, 3715558; 496078, 3715553; 496163, 3715532; 496324, 3715523;
496375, 3715557; 496375, 3715557; 496469, 3715515; 496481, 3715514;
496553, 3715512; 496562, 3715512; 496596, 3715511; 496651, 3715535;
496710, 3715562; 496802, 3715669; 496908, 3715735; 496931, 3715750;
496981, 3715800; 497079, 3715898; 497098, 3715917; 497154, 3715973;
497167, 3716021; 497217, 3716207; 497259, 3716361; 497244, 3716539;
497159, 3716584; 497020, 3716658; 496782, 3716897; 496920, 3717018;
496991, 3717025; 497002, 3717016; 497053, 3716963; 497069, 3716935;
497129, 3716879; 497155, 3716838; 497157, 3716754; 497157, 3716734;
497177, 3716719; 497264, 3716688; 497396, 3716681; 497457, 3716655;
497493, 3716665; 497505, 3716709; 497465, 3716770; 497439, 3716798;
497310, 3716871; 497277, 3716915; 497261, 3716983; 497262, 3717085;
497231, 3717118; 497208, 3717156; 497211, 3717184; 497219, 3717198;
497220, 3717198; 497276, 3717222; 497338, 3717246; 497348, 3717247;
497363, 3717260; 497401, 3717331; 497429, 3717356; 497460, 3717410;
497460, 3717415; 497460, 3717415; 497460, 3717448; 497310, 3717532;
497292, 3717524; 497287, 3717518; 497257, 3717524; 497204, 3717515;
497154, 3717486; 497146, 3717497; 497139, 3717507; 496559, 3717478;
496201, 3717493; 496143, 3717410; 496022, 3717239; 495965, 3717214;
495888, 3717265; 495802, 3717246; 495773, 3717169; 495706, 3717135;
495571, 3717135; 495532, 3717118; 495532, 3717118; 495529, 3717116;
495432, 3717073; 495197, 3717020; 495126, 3717022; 495038, 3717025;
494885, 3717025; 494774, 3716991; 494601, 3716958; 494438, 3716943;
494323, 3716948; 494203, 3716987; 494150, 3716982; 494073, 3716953;
493958, 3717001; 493949, 3717006; 493920, 3717022; 493814, 3717083;
493713, 3717150; 493732, 3717183; 493684, 3717212; 493651, 3717179;
493526, 3717251; 493444, 3717361; 493326, 3717414; 493152, 3717492;
493124, 3717496; 492789, 3717548; 492663, 3717680; 492649, 3717813;
492817, 3718043; 492774, 3718225; 492761, 3718281; 492705, 3718371;
492677, 3718490; 492698, 3718489; 492698, 3718489; 493126, 3718460;
493342, 3718446; 493505, 3718997; 493560, 3719017; 493565, 3719019;
493662, 3719054; 493756, 3719088; 493852, 3719123; 493857, 3719125;
493926, 3719048; 493935, 3719048; 493953, 3719047; 494331, 3719034;
494331, 3719216; 494331, 3719244; 494346, 3719248; 494576, 3719307;
494489, 3719422; 494366, 3719586; 494370, 3719835; 494370, 3719844;
494373, 3720041; 494373, 3720068; 494548, 3720054; 494549, 3720068;
494565, 3720240; 494566, 3720249; 494566, 3720249; 494576, 3720354;
494751, 3720362; 494876, 3720368; 495315, 3720326; 495494, 3720257;
495555, 3720234; 495555, 3720234; 495790, 3720144; 495955, 3720036;
496195, 3719879; 496354, 3719893; 496691, 3719921; 496754, 3719909;
497154, 3719837; 497157, 3719836; 497228, 3719823; 497238, 3719820;
497512, 3719723; 497584, 3719698; 497776, 3720039; 497776, 3720039;
497807, 3720095; 497911, 3720201; 498162, 3720455; 498162, 3720455;
498268, 3720563; 498432, 3720659; 498432, 3720659; 498673, 3720800;
498721, 3720813; 499162, 3720926; 499558, 3720945; 499608, 3720947;
499811, 3720907; 499818, 3720905; 499909, 3720759; thence returning to
499998, 3720683.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 77576]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19DE08.001
[[Page 77577]]
* * * * *
Dated: December 8, 2008.
Lyle Laverty,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. E8-29671 Filed 12-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C