Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 3187 

emissions source categories, and 

compare the updated emissions 

inventory data with actual 2005 and 

2008, and projected 2011, 2014, 2017 

and 2020 attainment emissions 

inventories to verify continued 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

III. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA, EPA is proposing to approve the 

maintenance plan addressing the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard for the 

Owensboro Area, which was submitted 

by Kentucky on May 27, 2008, as 

updated in a July 15, 2009, submission, 

and which ensures continued 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS through the year 2020. EPA has 

evaluated the Commonwealth’s 

submittal and has determined that it 

meets the applicable requirements of the 

CAA and EPA regulations, and is 

consistent with EPA policy. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Ozone, Nitrogen dioxides, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: January 4, 2010. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2010–971 Filed 1–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 205, 207, 208, 209, 211, 

215, 216, 217, 219, 225, 228, 232, 237, 

246, 250, 252 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Inflation 

Adjustment of Acquisition-Related 

Thresholds (DFARS Case 2009–D003) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System. Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement Section 807 of the Ronald W. 

Reagan National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2005. Section 807 

provides for adjustment every 5 years of 

statutory acquisition-related thresholds, 

except for Davis-Bacon Act, Service 

Contract Act, and trade agreements 

thresholds. This case also reviews 

nonstatutory acquisition-related 

thresholds for adjustment in 2010. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

should be submitted in writing to the 

address shown below on or before 

March 22, 2010, to be considered in the 

formation of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by DFARS Case 2009–D003, 

using any of the following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2009–D003 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Fax: 703–602–0350. 

Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Attn: Ms. Amy Williams, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Room 3B855, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Defense 

Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal 

Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, 

Arlington, VA 22202–3402. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy Williams, (703) 602–0328. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

This rule proposes to amend multiple 

DFARS parts to implement Section 807 

of the Ronald W. Reagan National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2005 (Pub. L. 108–375). Section 

807 provides for adjustment every 5 

years (in years evenly divisible by 5) of 

statutory acquisition-related thresholds, 

except for Davis-Bacon Act, Service 

Contract Act, and trade agreements 

thresholds. This case also reviews 

nonstatutory DFARS acquisition-related 

thresholds for adjustment in 2010. FAR 

case 2008–024 proposes comparable 

changes to acquisition-related 

thresholds in the FAR. 

This is the second review of DFARS 

acquisition-related thresholds. The last 

review was conducted under DFARS 

case 2004–D022. The final rule was 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 19, 2006 (71 FR 75891). 

B. Analysis 

1. What is an acquisition-related 

threshold? 

This case builds on the review of 

DFARS thresholds in 2005 and uses the 

same interpretation of the statutory 

definition of acquisition-related 

threshold. The statute defines an 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
3188 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

acquisition-related dollar threshold as a 

dollar threshold that is specified in law 

as a factor in defining the scope of the 

applicability of a policy, procedure, 

requirement, or restriction provided in 

that law to the procurement of property 

or services by an Executive agency, as 

determined by the FAR Council. 

There are other thresholds in the 

DFARS that, while not meeting this 

statutory definition of ‘‘acquisitionrelated,’’ nevertheless meet all the other 

criteria. These thresholds may have 

their origin in Executive order or 

regulation. 

Therefore, as used in this case, an 

acquisition-related threshold is a 

threshold that is specified in law, 

Executive order, or regulation as a factor 

in defining the scope of the applicability 

of a policy, procedure, requirement, or 

restriction provided in that law, 

Executive order, or regulation to the 

procurement of property or services by 

an Executive agency, as determined by 

the FAR Council. Acquisition-related 

thresholds are generally tied to the 

value of a contract, subcontract, or 

modification. 

Examples of thresholds that are not 

viewed as ‘‘acquisition-related’’ as 

defined in this case are thresholds 

relating to claims, penalties, 

withholding, payments, required levels 

of insurance, small business size 

standards, liquidated damages, etc. This 

report does not address thresholds that 

are not acquisition-related. 

2. What acquisition-related thresholds 

are not subject to escalation adjustment 

under this case? 

The statute does not permit escalation 

of acquisition-related thresholds 

established by the Davis Bacon Act, the 

Service Contract Act, or trade 

agreements. 

The statute does not authorize DoD to 

escalate thresholds originating in 

Executive order or the implementing 

agency (such as the Department of Labor 

or the Small Business Administration), 

unless the Executive order or agency 

regulations are first amended. 

3. How did DoD analyze a statutory 

acquisition-related threshold? 

If an acquisition-related threshold is 

based on statute, the matrix at {to be 

provided in final rule} identifies the 

statute, and the statutory threshold, both 

the original threshold and any revision 

to it in 2006. 

With the exception of thresholds set 

by the Davis-Bacon Act, Service 

Contract Act, and trade agreements, the 

statute requires that the FAR Council 

adjust the acquisition-related thresholds 

for inflation using the Consumer Price 

Index (CPI) for all-urban consumers. 

Acquisition-related thresholds in 

statutes that were in effect on October 

1, 2000, are only subject to escalation 

from that date forward. For purposes of 

this proposed rule, the matrix includes 

calculation of escalation based on the 

CPI from October 2000 to April 2010. 

Inflation from the average CPI value for 

2007 to the average value for 2008 was 

3.8 percent. DoD has currently 

estimated the inflation for the next year 

at 4.2 percent, but will subsequently 

adjust as necessary before issuance of 

the final rule. Acquisition-related 

thresholds in statutes that took effect 

after October 1, 2000, are escalated from 

the date that they took effect. Once the 

escalation factor is applied to the 

acquisition-related threshold, then the 

threshold must be rounded as follows: 

<$10,000 ................... Nearest $500 

$10,000–<$100,000 .. Nearest $5,000 

$100,000– 

<$1,000,000.

Nearest $50,000 

$1,000,000 or more .. Nearest $500,000 

The calculations in this proposed rule 

are all based on the base year amount, 

because escalated amounts in the 2005 

rule were subject to rounding and using 

them as the base would distort future 

calculations. 

In 2005, thresholds of $1,000, 

$10,000, $100,000, and $1,000,000, 

although subject to inflation calculation, 

did not actually change, because the 

inflation in 2005 was insufficient to 

overcome the rounding requirements. 

These thresholds will now escalate 

because of 5 additional years of 

inflation. 

Section 807(c) of the statute states that 

this statute supersedes the applicability 

of any other provision of law that 

provides for the adjustment of any 

acquisition-related threshold that is 

adjustable under this statute. The 

thresholds for defining a major system 

were previously stated in Fiscal Year 

1990 constant dollars for DoD and in 

Fiscal Year 1980 constant dollars for 

civilian agencies. The 2005 rule 

converted these major system thresholds 

to current year dollars, as of the date 

that the statute was enacted, that will 

now be adjusted every 5 years. 

This proposed rule has been 

coordinated with the Small Business 

Administration in areas of the 

regulation for which they are the lead 

agency. 

4. How does DoD analyze a nonstatutory 

acquisition-related threshold? 

No statutory authorization is required 

to escalate thresholds that were set as 

policy within the DFARS. Escalation of 

the DFARS policy acquisition-related 

thresholds is generally recommended 

using the same formula applied to the 

statutory thresholds, unless a reason has 

been provided for not doing so. 

Escalation is calculated using the same 

procedures as were explained for the 

statutory thresholds, to provide 

consistency. 

This rule was not subject to Office of 

Management and Budget review under 

Executive Order 12866, dated 

September 30, 1993. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

DoD does not anticipate that this rule 

will have a substantial economic impact 

on small business, because the 

adjustment of acquisition-related 

thresholds for inflation is intended to 

maintain the status quo. DoD invites 

comments from small businesses and 

other interested parties. DoD invites 

comments from small business concerns 

and other interested parties on the 

expected impact of this rule on small 

entities. 

DoD will also consider comments 

from small entities concerning the 

existing regulations in subparts affected 

by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

610. Interested parties must submit such 

comments separately and should cite 5 

U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2009–D003) in 

correspondence. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

apply. The proposed changes to the 

DFARS do not impose new information 

collection requirements that require the 

approval of the Office of Management 

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et 

seq. They maintain the current 

information collection requirements at 

the status quo by adjusting the 

thresholds for inflation. Government 

procurement. 

Amy G. Williams, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 205, 207, 208, 

209, 211, 215, 216, 217, 219, 225, 228, 

232, 237, 246, 250, and 252 are 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 205, 207, 208, 209, 211, 215, 216, 

217, 219, 225, 228, 232, 237, 246, 250, 

and 252 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

Chapter 1. 

PART 205—PUBLICIZING CONTRACT 

ACTIONS 

205.303 [Amended] 

2. Section 205.303 is amended by 

removing ‘‘$5.5 million’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘$6.5 million’’ in the following 

places: 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 3189 

a. In paragraph (a)(i) introductory text, 

in the first and second sentences; 

b. In paragraph (a)(i)(A), in the second 

sentence; and 

c. In paragraph (a)(i)(B), in the first 

and second sentences. 

PART 207—ACQUISITION PLANNING 

207.170–3 [Amended] 

3. Section 207.170–3 is amended in 

paragraph (a) introductory text by 

removing ‘‘$5.5 million’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘$6 million’’. 

PART 208—REQUIRED SOURCES OF 

SUPPLIES AND SERVICES 

208.405–70 [Amended] 

4. Section 208.405–70 is amended by 

removing ‘‘$100,000’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘$150,000’’ in the following 

places: 

a. Paragraph (b) introductory text; and 

b. Paragraph (c) introductory text. 

PART 209—CONTRACTOR 

QUALIFICATIONS 

209.104–1 [Amended] 

5. Section 209.104–1 is amended in 

paragraph (g)(i)(A) introductory text by 

removing ‘‘$100,000’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘$150,000’’. 

6. Section 209.104–70 is amended in 

paragraph (a) by removing ‘‘$100,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$150,000’’. 

209.409 [Amended] 

7. Section 209.409 is amended in 

paragraph (b) by removing ‘‘$100,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$150,000’’. 

PART 211—DESCRIBING AGENCY 

NEEDS 

211.503 [Amended] 

8. Section 211.503 is amended in 

paragraph (b), in the first and second 

sentences, by removing ‘‘$550,000’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘$650,000’’. 

PART 215—CONTRACTING BY 

NEGOTIATION 

215.407–2 [Amended] 

9. Section 215.407–2 is amended in 

paragraph (e)(1) by removing ‘‘$1 

million’’ and adding in its place ‘‘$1.5 

million’’. 

PART 216—TYPES OF CONTRACTS 

216.505–70 [Amended] 

10. Section 216.505–70 is amended by 

removing ‘‘$100,000’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘$150,000’’ in the following 

places: 

a. In paragraph (a)(2); 

b. In paragraph (b) introductory text; 

and 

c. In paragraph (c) introductory text. 

PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING 

METHODS 

217.170 [Amended] 

11. Section 217.170 is amended in 

paragraph (d)(1)(i) by removing ‘‘$572.5 

million’’ and adding in its place ‘‘$637.5 

million’’. 

217.171 [Amended] 

12. Section 217.171 is amended in 

paragraph (a)(6) by removing ‘‘$572.5 

million’’ and adding in its place ‘‘$637.5 

million’’. 

PART 219—SMALL BUSINESS 

PROGRAMS 

13. Section 219.201 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d)(10)(A) to read as 

follows: 

219.201 General policy. 

(d) * * * 

(10) * * * 

(A) Reviewing and making 

recommendations for all acquisitions 

(including orders placed against Federal 

Supply Schedule contracts) over 

$10,000, except those under the 

simplified acquisition threshold that are 

totally set aside for small business 

concerns in accordance with FAR 

19.502–2. Follow the procedures at PGI 

219.201(d)(10) regarding such reviews. 

* * * * * 

219.502–1 [Amended] 

14. Section 219.502–1 is amended in 

paragraph (2) by removing ‘‘$300,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$350,000’’. 

219.502–2 [Amended] 

15. Section 219.502–2 is amended by: 

a. Removing ‘‘$1 million’’ from 

paragraph (a)(ii) and adding in its place 

‘‘$1.5 million’’; and 

b. Removing ‘‘$300,000’’ from 

paragraph (a)(iii) and adding in its place 

‘‘$350,000’’. 

219.1005 [Amended] 

16. Section 219.1005 is amended in 

paragraphs (a)(i)(B), (a)(i)(C), and 

(a)(i)(D) by removing ‘‘$300,000’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘$350,000’’. 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

225.103 [Amended] 

17. Section 225.103 is amended in 

paragraphs (a)(ii)(B)(2), (a)(ii)(B)(3), 

(b)(ii)(B), and (b)(ii)(C) by removing 

‘‘$1,000,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$1.5 million’’. 

225.7204 [Amended] 

18. Section 225.7204 is amended as 

follows: 

a. In paragraphs (a) and (b) by 

removing ‘‘$11.5 million’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘$13 million’’. 

b. In paragraph (c) by removing 

‘‘$550,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$650,000’’. 

225.7703–2 [Amended] 

19. Section 225.7703–2 is amended in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) by 

removing ‘‘$78.5 million’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘$87 million’’. 

PART 228—BONDS AND INSURANCE 

228.102–1 [Amended] 

20. Section 228.102–1 is amended in 

paragraph (1) by removing ‘‘$100,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$150,000’’. 

PART 232—CONTRACT FINANCING 

232.404 [Amended] 

21. Section 232.404 is amended in 

paragraph (a)(9) by removing ‘‘$3,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘the micropurchase threshold’’. 

232.502–1 [Amended] 

22. Section 232.502–1 is amended in 

paragraph (b)(1) by removing ‘‘$55,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$65,000’’. 

237.170–2 [Amended] 

23. Section 237.170–2 is amended in 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) by removing 

‘‘$78.5 million’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$87 million’’. 

PART 246—QUALITY ASSURANCE 

246.402 [Amended] 

24. Section 246.402 is amended in the 

introductory text by removing 

‘‘$250,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$300,000’’. 

PART 250—EXTRAORDINARY 

CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS AND THE 

SAFETY ACT 

250.102–1 [Amended] 

25. Section 250.102–1 is amended in 

paragraph (b) by removing ‘‘$55,000’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘$65,000’’. 

250.102–1–70 [Amended] 

26. Section 250.102–1–70 is amended 

in paragraph (b)(1) by removing 

‘‘$55,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$65,000’’. 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

252.211–7000 [Amended] 

27. Section 252.211–7000 is amended 

as follows: 

a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DATE)’’; and 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
3190 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

b. In paragraph (d) by removing ‘‘$1 

million’’ and adding in its place ‘‘$1.5 

million’’. 

252.225–7003 [Amended] 

28. Section 252.225–7003 is amended 

as follows: 

a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DATE)’’; 

b. In paragraph (b)(1) by removing 

‘‘$11.5 million’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$13 million’’; and 

c. In paragraph (b)(2)(i) by removing 

‘‘$550,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$650,000’’. 

252.225–7004 [Amended] 

29. Section 252.225–7004 is amended 

as follows: 

a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DATE)’’; and 

b. In paragraph (b)(1) by removing 

‘‘$550,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$650,000’’. 

252.225–7006 [Amended] 

30. Section 252.225–7006 is amended 

as follows: 

a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DATE)’’; and 

b. In paragraph (f)(1) by removing 

$550,000’’ and adding in its place 

$650,000’’. 

252.249–7002 [Amended] 

31. Section 252.249–7002 is amended 

as follows: 

a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DATE)’’; 

b. In paragraph (d)(1) by removing 

$550,000’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘$650,000’’; and 

c. In paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii) by 

removing ‘‘$100,000’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘$150,000’’. 

[FR Doc. 2010–892 Filed 1–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[FWS-R4-ES-2009-0090; 92210-1111-0000 

B2] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Initiation of Status Review 

for Agave eggersiana and Solanum 

conocarpum 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Initiation of status review and 

solicitation of new information. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), under the 

authority of the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act), announce 

the initiation of a status review for 

Agave eggersiana (no common name) 

and Solanum conocarpum (no common 

name). We conduct status reviews to 

determine whether the entities should 

be listed as endangered or threatened 

under the Act. Through this action, we 

encourage all interested parties to 

provide us information regarding the 

status of, and any potential threat to, 

these plant species. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct this review, we request that we 

receive information no later than 

February 19, 2010. After this date you 

must submit information directly to the 

Field Office (see FOR FUTHER 

INFORMATION CONTACT section 

below). Please note that we may not be 

able to address or incorporate 

information that we receive after the 

above requested date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

information by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Search for docket 

FWS-R4-ES-2009-0090 and then follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4- 

ES-2009-0090; Division of Policy and 

Directives Management; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We will post all information on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Information Solicited section below for 

more details). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edwin Muniz, Field Supervisor, 

Caribbean Ecological Services Field 

Office , P.O. Box 491, Boquero ́, Puerto 

Rico 00622, by telephone (787) 851- 

7297, or by facsimile (787) 851-7440. 

Persons who use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800-877-8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Information Solicited 

To ensure that the status review is 

complete and based on the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information, we request information on 

Agave eggersiana (no common name) 

and Solanum conocarpum (no common 

name). We request any additional 

information from governmental 

agencies, Native American Tribes, the 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested parties. We seek 

information on: 

(1) The species’ biology, range, and 

population trends, including: 

(a) Habitat requirements; 

(b) Genetics and taxonomy; 

(c) Historical and current range 

including distribution patterns; 

(d) Historical and current population 

levels, and current and projected trends; 

and 

(e) Past and ongoing conservation 

measures for the species and/or its 

habitat. 

(2) The factors that are the basis for 

making a listing determination for a 

species under section 4(a) of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 

which are: 

(a) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of the species’ habitat or 

range; 

(b) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(c) Disease or predation; 

(d) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(e) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 

(3) Propagation and planting efforts 

conducted for these species in the U.S. 

Virgin Islands. 

Please include sufficient information 

with your submission to allow us to 

verify any scientific or commercial 

information you include. 

If, after the status review, we 

determine that listing A. eggersiana and 

S. conocarpum is warranted, we will 

propose critical habitat (see definition 

in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), as per 

section 4 of the Act, to the maximum 

extent prudent and determinable at the 

time we propose to list the species. 

Therefore, we also request specific 

comments and information as to what, 

if any, critical habitat you think should 

be proposed for designation if the 

species are proposed for listing, and 

why such habitat meets the 

requirements of the Act. Specifically, for 

areas within the geographical range 

currently occupied by these species, we 

request data on: 

(1) The amount and distribution of A. 

eggersiana and S. conocarpum habitat; 

(2) The physical and biological 

features of A. eggersiana and S. 

conocarpum habitat that are essential to 

the conservation of the species; 

(3) Special management 

considerations or protections that the 

features essential to the conservation of 

A. eggersiana and S. conocarpum may 

require, including managing for the 

potential effects of climate change; 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1