25112 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: February 1, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10103 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 12–92; RM–11650; DA 

12–552] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; 

Centerville and Midway, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This document requests 

comments on a petition for rulemaking 

filed by Katherine Pyeatt, proposing the 

allotment of Channel 267A at Midway, 

Texas, as its first local service; and the 

substitution of Channel 232A for vacant 

Channel 267A at Centerville, Texas to 

accommodate the proposed Midway 

allotment. Channel 267A can be allotted 

to Midway consistent with the 

minimum distance separation 

requirements of the Rules with a site 

restriction 7.6 kilometers (4.7 miles) 

northwest of the community. The 

reference coordinates for Channel 267A 

at Midway are 31–03–42 NL and 95–49– 

06 WL. Additionally, Channel 232A can 

be allotted to Centerville consistent with 

the minimum distance separation 

requirement of the Rules with a site 

restriction 10.6 kilometers (6.6 miles) 

northwest of Centerville. The reference 

coordinates for Channel 232A at 

Centerville are 31–19–03 NL and 96– 

03–54 WL. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before May 29, 2012, and reply 

comments on or before June 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. In 

addition to filing comments with the 

FCC, interested parties should serve the 

petitioner as follows: Katherine Pyeatt, 

2215 Cedar Springs Road, #1605, Dallas, 

Texas 75201. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) 

418–2700. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 

12–92, adopted April 5, 2012, and 

released April 6, 2012. The full text of 

this Commission decision is available 

for inspection and copying during 

normal business hours in the FCC’s 

Reference Information Center at Portals 

II, CY–A257, 445 Twelfth Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. This document 

may also be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractors, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone 

1–800–378–3160 or via email 

www.BCPIWEB.com. This document 

does not contain proposed information 

collection requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

proposed information collection burden 

‘‘for small business concerns with fewer 

than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to 

this proceeding. 

Members of the public should note 

that from the time a Notice of Proposed 

Rule Making is issued until the matter 

is no longer subject to Commission 

consideration or court review, all ex 

parte contacts are prohibited in 

Commission proceedings, such as this 

one, which involve channel allotments. 

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules 

governing permissible ex parte contacts. 

For information regarding proper 

filing procedures for comments, see 47 

CFR 1.415 and 1.420. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Radio, Radio broadcasting. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Nazifa Sawez, 

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media 

Bureau. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 73 as follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 and 

339. 

§ 73.202 [Amended] 

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM 

Allotments under Texas, is amended by 

removing Channel 267A and by adding 

Channel 232A at Centerville; and by 

adding Midway, Channel 267A. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10269 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[FWS–R8–ES–2012–N073; FF0800000– 

FXES11130800000C4–123] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 5-Year Reviews of Species 

in California and Nevada 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 5-year reviews. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, are initiating 5-year 

reviews for 25 species under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We conduct these 

reviews to ensure that our classification 

of species on the Lists of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants as 

threatened or endangered is accurate. A 

5-year review assesses the best scientific 

and commercial data available at the 

time of the review. We are requesting 

any information that has become 

available since our last 5-year review of 

each of these species. Based on review 

results, we will determine whether we 

should change the listing status of any 

of these species. In this notice, we also 

announce 5-year reviews that were 

completed for 28 species in California 

and Nevada between March 17, 2011, 

and February 29, 2012. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written information by June 

26, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: For how and where to send 

comments or information, see ‘‘VIII., 

Contacts.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

species-specific information, contact the 

appropriate person listed under ‘‘VIII., 

Contacts.’’ For contact information 

about completed 5-year reviews, see 

‘‘IX., Completed 5-Year Reviews.’’ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25113 

Individuals who are hearing-impaired or 

speech-impaired may call the Federal 

Relay Service at (800) 877–8337 for TTY 

assistance. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why do we conduct 5-year reviews? 

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

we maintain Lists of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants (which 

we collectively refer to as the List) in 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 

50 CFR 17.11 (for animals) and 17.12 

(for plants). Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act 

requires us to review each listed 

species’ status at least once every 5 

years. Then, under section 4(c)(2)(B), we 

determine whether to remove any 

species from the List (delist), to 

reclassify it from endangered to 

threatened, or to reclassify it from 

threatened to endangered. Any change 

in Federal classification requires a 

separate rulemaking process. 

In classifying, we use the following 

definitions, from 50 CFR 424.02: 

(A) Species includes any species or 

subspecies of fish, wildlife, or plant, 

and any distinct population segment of 

any species of vertebrate, that 

interbreeds when mature; 

(B) Endangered species means any 

species that is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range; and 

(C) Threatened species means any 

species that is likely to become an 

endangered species within the 

foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range. 

We must support delisting by the best 

scientific and commercial data 

available, and only consider delisting if 

data substantiate that the species is 

neither endangered nor threatened for 

one or more of the following reasons (50 

CFR 424.11(d)): 

(A) The species is considered extinct; 

(B) The species is considered to be 

recovered; or 

(C) The original data available when 

the species was listed, or the 

interpretation of data, were in error. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 

require that we publish a notice in the 

Federal Register announcing the species 

we are reviewing. 

II. What species are under review? 

This notice announces our active 5- 

year status reviews of the species in 

Table 1. 

TABLE 1—CURRENT LISTING STATUS OF SPECIES UNDER 5-YEAR STATUS REVIEW, INCLUDING 5 ANIMAL SPECIES AND 20 

PLANT SPECIES IN CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA

Common name Scientific name Status Where listed Final listing rule 

ANIMALS 

Independence Valley speckled 

dace.

Rhinichthys osculus lethoporus ... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (NV) ...... October 10, 1989 (54 FR 41448). 

Paiute cutthroat trout .................... Oncorhynchus clarki seleniris ...... Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ....... July 16, 1975 (40 FR 29863). 

Riverside fairy shrimp .................. Streptocephalus woottoni ............. Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... August 3, 1993 (58 FR 41384). 

San Diego fairy shrimp ................ Branchinecta sandiegonensis ...... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... February, 3 1997 (62 FR 4925). 

Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep ...... Ovis canadensis sierrae ............... Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ....... January 3, 2000 (65 FR 20). 

PLANTS 

Ben Lomond wallflower ................ Erysimum teretifolium ................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ...... February 4, 1994 (59 FR 5499). 

Burke’s goldfields ......................... Lasthenia burkei ........................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... December 2, 1991 (56 FR 

61173). 

Butte County meadowfoam .......... Limnanthes floccosa subsp. 

californica.

Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... June 8, 1992 (57 FR 24192). 

Colusa grass ................................ Neostapfia colusana ..................... Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ....... March 26, 1997 (62 FR 14338). 

Contra Costa goldfields ................ Lasthenia conjugens .................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... June 18, 1997 (62 FR 33029). 

Few-flowered navarretia ............... Navarretia leucocephala subsp. 

pauciflora.

Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... June 18, 1997 (62 FR 33029). 

Greene’s tuctoria .......................... Tuctoria greenei ........................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ...... March 26, 1997 (62 FR 14338). 

Island barberry ............................. Berberis pinnata subsp. insularis Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ...... July 31, 1997 (62 FR 40954). 

Island phacelia ............................. Phacelia insulars var. insularis .... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... July 31, 1997 (62 FR 40954). 

Lyon’s pentachaeta ...................... Pentachaeta lyonii ........................ Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... January 29, 1997 (62 FR 4172). 

Marsh sandwort ............................ Arenaria paludicola ...................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... August 3, 1993 (58 FR 41378). 

Menzies’ wallflower ...................... Erysimum menziesii ..................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... June 22, 1992 (50 FR 27848). 

Peirson’s milk-vetch ..................... Astragalus magdalenae var. 

peirsonii.

Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ...... October 6, 1998 (63 FR 53596). 

Purple amole ................................ Chlorogalum purpureum .............. Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ....... March 20, 2000 (65 FR 14878). 

Sacramento Orcutt grass ............. Orcuttia viscida ............................. Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... March 28, 1997 (62 FR 14338). 

San Bernardino bluegrass ........... Poa atropurpurea ......................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... September 14, 1998 (63 FR 

49006). 

Sebastopol meadowfoam ............. Limnanthes vinculans ................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... December 2, 1991 (56 FR 

61173). 

Sonoma sunshine ........................ Blennosperma bakeri ................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... December 2, 1991 (56 FR 

61173). 

Vail Lake ceanothus ..................... Ceanothus ophiochilus ................. Threatened ....... U.S.A. (CA) ....... October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54956). 

Willowy monardella ...................... Monardella viminea ...................... Endangered ...... U.S.A. (CA) ....... October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54938). 

III. What information do we consider in 

our review? 

We consider all new information 

available at the time we conduct a 5- 

year status review. We consider the best 

scientific and commercial data that has 

become available since our current 

listing determination or most recent 

status review, such as: 

(A) Species biology, including but not 

limited to population trends, 

distribution, abundance, demographics, 

and genetics; 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25114 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(B) Habitat conditions, including but 

not limited to amount, distribution, and 

suitability; 

(C) Conservation measures that have 

been implemented that benefit the 

species; 

(D) Threat status and trends (see five 

factors under heading ‘‘IV., How Do We 

Determine Whether a Species Is 

Endangered or Threatened?’’); and 

(E) Other new information, data, or 

corrections, including but not limited to 

taxonomic or nomenclatural changes, 

identification of erroneous information 

contained in the List, and improved 

analytical methods. 

We specifically request information 

regarding data from any systematic 

surveys, as well as any studies or 

analysis of data that may show 

population size or trends; information 

pertaining to the biology or ecology of 

these species; information regarding the 

effects of current land management on 

population distribution and abundance; 

information on the current condition of 

habitat; and recent information 

regarding conservation measures that 

have been implemented to benefit the 

species. Additionally, we specifically 

request information regarding the 

current distribution of populations and 

evaluation of threats faced by the 

species in relation to the five listing 

factors (as defined below and in section 

4(a)(1) of the Act) and the species’ listed 

status as judged against the definition of 

threatened or endangered. Finally, we 

request recommendations pertaining to 

the development of, or potential updates 

to, recovery plans and additional 

actions or studies that would benefit 

these species in the future. 

IV. How do we determine whether a 

species is endangered or threatened? 

Section 4(a)(1) of the Act requires that 

we determine whether a species is 

endangered or threatened based on one 

or more of the five following factors: 

(A) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its 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. 

Under section 4(b)(1) of the Act, we 

must base our assessment of these 

factors solely on the best scientific and 

commercial data available. 

V. What could happen as a result of our 

review? 

For each species under review, if we 

find new information that indicates a 

change in classification may be 

warranted, we may propose a new rule 

that could do one of the following: 

(A) Reclassify the species from 

threatened to endangered (uplist); 

(B) Reclassify the species from 

endangered to threatened (downlist); or 

(C) Remove the species from the List 

(delist). 

If we determine that a change in 

classification is not warranted, then the 

species remains on the List under its 

current status. 

VI. Request for New Information 

To ensure that a 5-year review is 

complete and based on the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information, we request new 

information from all sources. See ‘‘III., 

What Information Do We Consider in 

Our Review?’’ for specific criteria. If you 

submit information, support it with 

documentation such as maps, 

bibliographic references, methods used 

to gather and analyze the data, and/or 

copies of any pertinent publications, 

reports, or letters by knowledgeable 

sources. 

Submit your comments and materials 

to the appropriate Fish and Wildlife 

Office listed under ‘‘VIII., Contacts.’’ 

VII. Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. Comments and materials received 

will be available for public inspection, 

by appointment, during normal business 

hours at the offices where the comments 

are submitted. 

VIII. Contacts 

Send your comments and information 

on the following species, as well as 

requests for information, to the 

corresponding contacts/addresses. You 

may view information we receive in 

response to this notice, as well as other 

documentation in our files, at the 

following locations by appointment, 

during normal business hours. 

For the Menzies’ wallflower, send 

information to Field Supervisor, 

Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, 

Arcata, CA 95521. Information may also 

be submitted electronically at 

arcata@fws.gov. To obtain further 

information, contact Kathleen Brubaker 

at (707) 822–7201. 

For the Peirson’s milk-vetch, 

Riverside fairy shrimp, San Bernardino 

bluegrass, San Diego fairy shrimp, Vail 

Lake ceanothus, and Willowy 

monardella, send information to Field 

Supervisor, Attention: 5-Year Review, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad 

Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden 

Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 

92011. Information may also be 

submitted electronically at 

fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov. To obtain 

further information, contact Bradd 

Baskerville-Bridges at the Carlsbad Fish 

and Wildlife Office at (760) 431–9440. 

For the Independence Valley speckled 

dace and Paiute cutthroat trout, send 

information to State Supervisor, 

Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Nevada Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 1340 Financial Blvd., 

Suite 234, Reno, Nevada 89502–7147. 

Information may also be submitted 

electronically at fw1nfwo_5yr@fws.gov. 

To obtain further information, contact 

Jill Ralston at the Nevada Fish and 

Wildlife Office at (775) 861–6300. 

For the Burke’s goldfields, Butte 

County meadowfoam, Colusa grass, 

Contra Costa goldfields, few-flowered 

navarretia, Greene’s tuctoria, 

Sacramento Orcutt grass, Sebastopol 

meadowfoam, and Sonoma sunshine, 

send information to Field Supervisor, 

Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, 

Room W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825. 

Information may also be submitted 

electronically at fw1sfo5year@fws.gov. 

To obtain further information, contact 

Josh Hull at the Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office at (916) 414–6600. 

For the Ben Lomond wallflower, 

island barberry, island phacelia, Lyon’s 

pentachaeta, marsh sandwort, purple 

amole, and Sierra Nevada bighorn 

sheep, send information to Field 

Supervisor, Attention: 5-Year Review, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura 

Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola 

Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. 

Information may also be submitted 

electronically at fw8vfwo5year@fws.gov. 

To obtain further information on the 

animal species, contact Mike McCrary at 

the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office at 

(805) 644–1766. To obtain further 

information on the plant species, 

contact Connie Rutherford at the 

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office at 

(805) 644–1766. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25115 

All electronic information must be 

submitted in Text format or Rich Text 

format. Include the following identifier 

in the subject line of the email: 

Information on 5-year review for [NAME 

OF SPECIES], and include your name 

and return address in the body of your 

message. 

IX. Completed 5-Year Reviews 

We also take this opportunity to 

inform the public of 5-year reviews that 

we completed between March 17, 2011, 

and February 29, 2012, for 28 species in 

California and Nevada (Table 2). 

Reviews for these 28 species can be 

found at http://www.fws.gov/

endangered/species/index.html. Any 

recommended change in listing status 

resulting from these completed reviews 

will require a separate rulemaking 

process. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF 28 SPECIES IN CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA FOR WHICH 5-YEAR REVIEWS WERE COMPLETED

BETWEEN MARCH 17, 2011 AND FEBRUARY 29, 2012 

Common name Scientific name Recommendation Lead fish and 

wildlife office Contact 

ANIMALS 

Alameda whipsnake (=striped 

racer).

Masticophis lateralis 

euryxanthus.

No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Buena Vista Lake shrew ........ Sorex ornatus relictus ........... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

California freshwater shrimp .. Syncaris pacifica ................... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Little Kern golden trout .......... Oncorhynchus aguabonita 

whitei.

No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Lotis blue butterfly ................. Lycaeides argyrognomon 

lotis.

No status change .................. Arcata ............... Kathleen Brubaker, (707) 

822–7201. 

Morro Bay kangaroo rat ......... Dipodomys heermanni 

morroensis.

No status change .................. Ventura ............. Mike McCrary, (805) 644– 

1766. 

Peninsular bighorn sheep ...... Ovis Canadensis ................... No status change .................. Carlsbad ........... Bradd Baskerville-Bridges, 

(760) 431–9440. 

Stephens’ kangaroo rat ......... Dipodomys stephensi ............ Downlist ................................. Carlsbad ........... Bradd Baskerville-Bridges, 

(760) 431–9440. 

PLANTS 

Ash Meadows sunray ............ Enceliopsis nudicaulis var. 

corrugata.

No status change .................. Nevada ............. Jill Ralston, (775) 861–6300. 

Bakersfield cactus .................. Opuntia treleasei ................... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Beach layia ............................ Layia carnosa ........................ Downlist ................................. Arcata ............... Kathleen Brubaker, (707) 

822–7201. 

Ben Lomond spineflower ....... Chorizanthe pungens var. 

hartwegiana.

No status change .................. Ventura ............. Connie Rutherford, (805) 

644–1766. 

Coyote ceanothus .................. Ceanothus ferrisae ................ No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Encinitas baccharis ................ Baccharis vanessae .............. No status change .................. Carlsbad ........... Bradd Baskerville-Bridges, 

(760) 431–9440. 

Fleshy owl’s-clover ................ Castilleja campestris subsp. 

succulenta.

No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Gambel’s watercress ............. Nasturtium gambelii .............. No status change .................. Ventura ............. Connie Rutherford, (805) 

644–1766. 

Gaviota tarplant ..................... Deinandra increscens subsp. 

villosa.

No status change .................. Ventura ............. Connie Rutherford, (805) 

644–1766. 

Hoffmann’s rock-cress ........... Arabis hoffmannii .................. No status change .................. Ventura ............. Connie Rutherford, (805) 

644–1766. 

Howell’s spineflower .............. Chorizanthe howellii .............. No status change .................. Arcata ............... Kathleen Brubaker, (707) 

822–7201. 

Kneeland prairie pennycress Thlaspi californicum .............. No status change .................. Arcata ............... Kathleen Brubaker, (707) 

822–7201. 

Marin dwarf-flax ..................... Hesperolinon congestum ...... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Pedate checkermallow ........... Sidalcea pedata .................... No status change .................. Carlsbad ........... Bradd Baskerville-Bridges, 

(760) 431–9440. 

Pennell’s bird’s-beak .............. Cordylanthus tenuis subsp. 

capillaris.

No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

San Mateo woolly sunflower .. Eriophyllum latilobum ............ No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Sonoma alopecurus ............... Alopecurus aequalis 

var.sonomensis.

No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Tiburon mariposa lily .............. Calochortus tiburonensis ...... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Vine Hill clarkia ...................... Clarkia imbricata ................... No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

Yellow larkspur ...................... Delphinium luteum ................ No status change .................. Sacramento ...... Josh Hull, (916) 414–6600. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25116 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

X. Authority 

We publish this notice under the 

authority of the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). 

Dated: March 30, 2012. 

Margaret T. Kolar, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest 

Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10212 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 640 

RIN 0648–BB44 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Spiny 

Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic; Amendment 11 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the 

Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 

Fishery Management Councils 

(Councils) have submitted Amendment 

11 to the Fishery Management Plan for 

the Spiny Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of 

Mexico and South Atlantic (FMP) for 

review, approval, and implementation 

by NMFS. Amendment 11 proposes to 

limit spiny lobster fishing using trap 

gear in certain areas in the exclusive 

economic zone off the Florida Keys to 

protect threatened species of corals. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before June 26, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the amendment identified by 

‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2011–0223’’ by any of 

the following methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Submit 

electronic comments via the Federal 

e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

‘‘Instructions’’ for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Susan Gerhart, Southeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter 

N/A in the required field if you wish to 

remain anonymous). 

To submit comments through the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, enter ‘‘NOAA– 

NMFS–2011–0223’’ in the search field 

and click on ‘‘search.’’ After you locate 

the document ‘‘Fisheries of the 

Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South 

Atlantic; Spiny Lobster Fishery of the 

Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic; 

Amendment 11,’’ click the ‘‘Submit a 

Comment’’ link in that row. This will 

display the comment web form. You can 

then enter your submitter information 

(unless you prefer to remain 

anonymous), and type your comment on 

the web form. You can also attach 

additional files (up to 10MB) in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 

Adobe PDF file formats only. 

Comments received through means 

not specified in this notice will not be 

considered. 

For further assistance with submitting 

a comment, see the ‘‘Commenting’’ 

section at http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!faqs or the Help section at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Electronic copies of Amendment 11 

may be obtained from the Southeast 

Regional Office Web site at http:// 

sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Gerhart, telephone: 727–824– 

5305, or email: 

Susan.Gerhart@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The spiny 

lobster fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 

(Gulf) and the South Atlantic is 

managed under the FMP. The FMP was 

prepared by the Councils and 

implemented through regulations at 50 

CFR parts 622 and 640 under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

Background 

As required under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA), NMFS completed a 

formal consultation, and resulting 

biological opinion, on the continued 

authorization of the Gulf of Mexico and 

South Atlantic spiny lobster fishery in 

2009 (http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/esa/

Fishery%20Biops/Final%20SL%20

BO.pdf). The biological opinion 

contained specific terms and conditions 

required to implement the prescribed 

reasonable and prudent measures 

(RPMs), including creation of new or 

expansion of existing closed areas to 

protect coral and implementation of trap 

line-marking requirements. These 

actions were originally included in 

Amendment 10 to the FMP; however, 

the Councils chose to take no action in 

Amendment 10 to the FMP to allow for 

additional stakeholder input into the 

development of any potential areas 

closed to spiny lobster harvest and trap 

line-marking requirments. 

Actions Contained in Amendment 11 

Amendment 11 considered actions to 

prohibit spiny lobster trap fishing in 

designated areas in the Florida Keys to 

protect threatened Acropora species of 

coral and to require markings on lobster 

trap lines unique to the spiny lobster 

fishery. 

Lobster Trap Gear Closed Areas 

The ESA requires analyses to 

determine whether, and to what extent, 

fishing operations impact threatened 

species such as threatened staghorn and 

elkhorn corals. The 2009 biological 

opinion on the spiny lobster fishery 

requires NMFS and the Councils to 

work together to protect areas of 

staghorn and elkhorn coral. RPMs 

included expansion of existing or 

creation of new areas closed to lobster 

trap fishing where colonies of these 

threatened coral species are present. 

Staff from the Councils and NMFS 

worked with various stakeholders to 

develop the proposed lobster trap gear 

closed areas. Areas were chosen to 

protect colonies with high conservation 

value and areas of high coral density. 

Lobster trap fishing would be prohibited 

in the proposed closed areas. The 60 

proposed closed areas would cover 5.9 

mi 2 (15.3 km 2) and are distributed 

throughout the Florida Keys. 

Spiny Lobster Trap Line Markings 

As described in Amendment 11, trap 

lines or rope are consistently found as 

marine debris and most frequently 

recovered without the buoys or traps 

still attached. These conditions cause 

significant difficulty for NMFS and 

other agencies when determining if line 

found in the environment, or entangling 

protected species, originated from the 

spiny lobster trap fishery. Trap line 

marking requirements are intended to 

allow greater accuracy in identifying 

fishery interaction impacts to benthic 

habitats and protected species by 

leading to more targeted measures to 

reduce the level and severity of those 

impacts. However, costs and labor for 

the spiny lobster fishery to mark their 

lobster trap gear could be high, with 

little evidence of the durability of the 

markings. The Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission is currently 

conducting a study of various methods 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS