Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65127 

with better understanding of patient 

coverage and benefits (including its use 

in patient medical records to help 

clarify a patient’s healthcare benefit 

package). A commenter stated that the 

HPID could be used for enforcement or 

certification of compliance of health 

plans. The adoption of a standard 

unique health plan identifier is required 

by statute, and HHS remains open to 

industry and NCVHS discussion and 

recommendations for appropriate use 

case(s) that meet the requirements of 

administrative simplification and will 

explore options for a more effective 

standard unique health plan identifier 

in the future. 

We solicit and welcome comments on 

our proposal, on the alternatives we 

have identified, and on other 

alternatives that we could consider, as 

well as on the costs and benefits of a 

health plan identifier. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Executive Order 12866, this proposed 

rule was reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects in 45 Part 162 

Administrative practice and 

procedures, Electronic Transactions, 

Health facilities, Health insurance, 

Hospitals, Medicaid, Medicare, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Department of Health and 

Human Services proposes to amend 45 

CFR part 162 to read as follows: 

PART 162—ADMINISTRATIVE 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 162 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1320d–1320d–9 and 

secs. 1104 and 10109 of Pub. L. 111–148, 124 

Stat 146–154 and 915–917. 

§ 162.103 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 162.103 is amended by 

removing the definitions of ‘‘Controlling 

health plan (CHP)’’ and ‘‘Subhealth plan 

(SHP)’’. 

Subpart E [Removed and Reserved] 

■ 3. Part 162 is amended by removing 

and reserving Subpart E. 

Dated: December 6, 2018. 

Alex M. Azar II, 

Secretary, Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27435 Filed 12–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[4500090022] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 12-Month Findings on 

Petitions to List 13 Species as 

Endangered or Threatened Species 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition 

findings. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce 12- 

month findings on petitions to list 13 

species as endangered or threatened 

species under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a 

thorough review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information, 

we find that it is not warranted at this 

time to list the Cedar Key mole skink, 

Florida sandhill crane, Fremont County 

rockcress, Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s 

peppergrass, Frisco clover, 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow, Ozark 

pyrg, pale blue-eyed grass, San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly, striped 

newt, Tinian monarch, and Tippecanoe 

darter. However, we ask the public to 

submit to us at any time any new 

information that becomes available 

relevant to the status of any of the 

species mentioned above or their 

habitats. 

DATES: The findings in this document 

were made on December 19, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the 

basis for each of these findings are 

available on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov under the 

following docket numbers: 

Species Docket No. 

Cedar Key mole skink .................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0047 

Florida sandhill crane ..................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R4–ES–2018–0099 

Fremont County rockcress ............................................................................................................................................. FWS–R6–ES–2018–0049 

Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s peppergrass, and Frisco clover .......................................................................................... FWS–R6–ES–2018–0100 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow ...................................................................................................................................... FWS–R4–ES–2018–0067 

Ozark pyrg ...................................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R4–ES–2018–0101 

Pale blue-eyed grass ...................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R1–ES–2018–0102 

San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly ...................................................................................................................... FWS–R8–ES–2015–0023 

Striped newt .................................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R4–ES–2018–0065 

Tinian monarch ............................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R1–ES–2018–0103 

Tippecanoe darter ........................................................................................................................................................... FWS–R5–ES–2018–0066 

Supporting information used to 

prepare these findings is available for 

public inspection, by appointment, 

during normal business hours, by 

contacting the appropriate person, as 

specified under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. Please submit any 

new information, materials, comments, 

or questions concerning these findings 

to the appropriate person, as specified 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Species Contact information 

Cedar Key mole skink ........................................ Jay Herrington, Field Supervisor, North Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 904–731– 

3191. 

Florida sandhill crane ......................................... Jay Herrington, Field Supervisor, North Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 904–731– 

3191. 

Fremont County rockcress ................................. Tyler Abbot, Project Leader, Wyoming Ecological Services Field Office, 307–772–2374, ext. 

231. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
65128 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Species Contact information 

Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s peppergrass, and 

Frisco clover.

Jennifer Lewinsohn, Biologist, Utah Ecological Services Field Office, 801–597–8352. 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow .......................... Thomas McCoy, Field Supervisor, South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office, 843–300– 

0431. 

Ozark pyrg .......................................................... Melvin Tobin, Field Supervisor, Arkansas Ecological Services Field Office, 501– 513–4473. 

pale blue-eyed grass .......................................... Karen Reagan, Biologist, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, 360–753–7762. 

San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly .......... Josh Hull, Recovery and Listing Division Chief, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 916–414– 

6742. 

striped newt ........................................................ Jay Herrington, Field Supervisor, Northeast Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 904–731– 

3191. 

Tinian monarch ................................................... Mary Abrams, Field Supervisor, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 808–792–9400. 

Tippecanoe darter ............................................... Robert Anderson, Field Supervisor, Pennsylvania Field Office, 814–234–4090, ext. 7447. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), please call the 

Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

We are required to make a finding 

whether or not the petitioned action is 

warranted within 12 months after 

receiving any petition we determined 

contained substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted 

(section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.)) (‘‘12-month finding’’). We 

must make a finding that the petitioned 

action is: (1) Not warranted; (2) 

warranted; or (3) warranted but 

precluded. ‘‘Warranted but precluded’’ 

means that (a) the petitioned action is 

warranted, but the immediate proposal 

of a regulation implementing the 

petitioned action is precluded by other 

pending proposals to determine whether 

species are endangered or threatened 

species, and (b) expeditious progress is 

being made to add qualified species to 

the Lists of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants (Lists) and to 

remove from the Lists species for which 

the protections of the Act are no longer 

necessary. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act 

requires that we treat a petition for 

which the requested action is found to 

be warranted but precluded as though 

resubmitted on the date of such finding, 

that is, requiring that a subsequent 

finding be made within 12 months of 

that date. We must publish these 12- 

month findings in the Federal Register. 

Summary of Information Pertaining to 

the Five Factors 

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 

and the implementing regulations at 

part 424 of title 50 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424) 

set forth procedures for adding species 

to, removing species from, or 

reclassifying species on the Lists. The 

Act defines ‘‘endangered species’’ as 

any species that is in danger of 

extinction throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)), 

and ‘‘threatened species’’ as any species 

that is likely to become an endangered 

species within the foreseeable future 

throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under 

section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may 

be determined to be an endangered 

species or a threatened species because 

of any of the following five 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. 

In considering whether a species may 

meet the definition of an endangered 

species or a threatened species because 

of any of the five factors, we must look 

beyond the mere exposure of the species 

to the stressor to determine whether the 

species responds to the stressor in a way 

that causes actual impacts to the 

species. If there is exposure to a stressor, 

but no response, or only a positive 

response, that stressor does not cause a 

species to meet the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species. If there is exposure and the 

species responds negatively, we 

determine whether that stressor drives 

or contributes to the risk of extinction 

of the species such that the species 

warrants listing as an endangered or 

threatened species. The mere 

identification of stressors that could 

affect a species negatively is not 

sufficient to compel a finding that 

listing is or remains warranted. For a 

species to be listed or remain listed, we 

require evidence that these stressors are 

operative threats to the species and its 

habitat, either singly or in combination, 

to the point that the species meets the 

definition of an endangered or a 

threatened species under the Act. 

In conducting our evaluation of the 

five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act to determine whether the Cedar 

Key mole skink (Plestiodon egregius 

insularis), Florida sandhill crane 

(Antigone canadensis pratensis), 

Boechera pusilla (Fremont County 

rockcress), Eriogonum soredium (Frisco 

buckwheat), Lepidium ostleri (Ostler’s 

peppergrass), Trifolium friscanum 

(Frisco clover), MacGillivray’s seaside 

sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus 

macgillivraii), Ozark pyrg (Marstonia 

ozarkensis), Sisyrinchium sarmentosum 

(pale blue-eyed grass), San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly 

(Rhaphiomidas trochilus), striped newt 

(Notophthalmus perstriatus), Tinian 

monarch (Monarcha takatsukasae), and 

Tippecanoe darter (Etheostoma 

tippecanoe) meet the definition of 

‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened 

species,’’ we considered and thoroughly 

evaluated the best scientific and 

commercial information available 

regarding the past, present, and future 

stressors and threats. We reviewed the 

petitions, information available in our 

files, and other available published and 

unpublished information. These 

evaluations may include information 

from recognized experts; Federal, State, 

and tribal governments; academic 

institutions; foreign governments; 

private entities; and other members of 

the public. 

The species assessment forms for the 

Cedar Key mole skink, Florida sandhill 

crane, Fremont County rockcress, Frisco 

buckwheat, Ostler’s peppergrass, Frisco 

clover, MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow, 

Ozark pyrg, pale blue-eyed grass, San 

Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, 

striped newt, Tinian monarch, and 

Tippecanoe darter contain more 

detailed biological information, a 

thorough analysis of the listing factors, 

and an explanation of why we 

determined that these species do not 

meet the definition of an endangered 

species or a threatened species. This 

supporting information can be found on 

the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov under the 

appropriate docket number (see 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65129 

ADDRESSES, above). The following are 

informational summaries for each of the 

findings in this document. 

Cedar Key Mole Skink 

Previous Federal Actions 

On July 11, 2012, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, C. Kenneth Dodd, Jr., Kenney 

Krysko, Michael J. Lannoo, Thomas 

Lovejoy, Allen Salzberg, and Edward O. 

Wilson to list 53 amphibians and 

reptiles, including the Cedar Key mole 

skink, as endangered or threatened 

species under the Act and to designate 

critical habitat. On July 1, 2015, we 

published the 90-day finding in the 

Federal Register (80 FR 37568), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

Cedar Key mole skink may warrant 

listing. This document constitutes the 

12-month finding on the July 11, 2012, 

petition to list the Cedar Key mole skink 

under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The Cedar Key mole skink is a shiny 

brown lizard reaching a total length of 

approximately 15 centimeters (5.9 

inches) with the light pink colored tail 

accounting for two-thirds of the length. 

This subspecies is semi-fossorial 

(adapted to digging, burrowing, and 

living underground) and cryptic in 

nature but has also been seen running 

along the substrate surface when 

exposed. 

The Cedar Key mole skink inhabits 

the beach berm and dry coastal 

hammock habitats on eight islands of 

the Cedar Keys along a 10-mile section 

of Levy County along Florida’s Gulf 

Coast. The Cedar Key mole skink relies 

on dry, unconsolidated soils for 

movement, cover, and nesting. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors include 

effects of sea-level rise and climate 

change-associated shifts in rainfall, 

temperature, and storm intensities. The 

continued occurrence of the Cedar Key 

mole skink in low numbers on two of 

the historically surveyed islands, as 

well as recent observations on five 

additional islands, indicates a level of 

resiliency to the stressors that have been 

acting upon the subspecies in the past 

and are currently acting on it. In 

addition, over time, the subspecies has 

persisted on multiple islands, providing 

a level of redundancy that will help the 

Cedar Key mole skink withstand the 

potential increased catastrophic events 

into the future. Finally, the subspecies 

should continue to exhibit a level of 

representation with suitable habitat 

continuing to occur on multiple islands 

in varying sizes and elevations across 

the range of the subspecies. In sum, we 

find that the continued presence of 

occupied habitat (as well as potentially 

occupied suitable habitat) and projected 

continuance of suitable habitat across 

the subspecies’ range continues to 

provide a level of resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation to the 

subspecies such that the Cedar Key 

mole skink is not presently in danger of 

extinction throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range or likely to become 

so within the foreseeable future. We 

find that the stressors acting on the 

subspecies and its habitat, either singly 

or in combination, are not of sufficient 

imminence, intensity, or magnitude to 

indicate that this subspecies meets the 

definition of an endangered species or a 

threatened species. Therefore, we find 

that listing the Cedar Key mole skink as 

an endangered species or threatened 

species is not warranted. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding 

can be found in the Cedar Key mole 

skink species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 

Florida Sandhill Crane 

Previous Federal Actions 

On April 20, 2010, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, the Alabama Rivers Alliance, 

the Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, 

the Gulf Restoration Network, 

Tennessee Forests Council, and the 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to 

list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland 

species, including the Florida sandhill 

crane, as endangered or threatened 

species under the Act. On September 

27, 2011, we published a 90-day finding 

in the Federal Register (76 FR 59836), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

Florida sandhill crane may warrant 

listing. This document constitutes the 

12-month finding on the April 20, 2010, 

petition to list the Florida sandhill crane 

under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

Florida sandhill cranes are graceful, 

monogamous, long-lived birds in the 

Gruidae family. This subspecies is one 

of six that reside in North America, and 

one of three that are non-migratory. The 

Florida sandhill crane is a single, large 

population that ranges from the 

Okefenokee Swamp in southern Georgia 

to the Everglades in southern Florida, 

overlapping with the greater sandhill 

crane subspecies during the winter 

season. Both males and females raise 

one to two chicks per nesting attempt 

and are able to re-nest two to three times 

per year, if necessary. 

Florida sandhill cranes use a variety 

of adjacent, open upland habitats, 

including grasslands, prairies, emergent 

palustrine wetlands, open pine forests, 

pastures, and forest-pasture transition 

areas. They also use the transition areas 

between wetland and upland habitats, 

and they feed in human-manipulated 

environments year-round, such as (but 

not limited to) agricultural lands, golf 

courses, airports, and suburban areas. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary threats to the 

Florida sandhill crane include habitat 

loss/conversion/degradation, changing 

climate conditions (drought and 

precipitation/heavy rain events), and 

mortalities resulting from predation, 

collisions, or human interactions/nest 

disturbances. The most significant of 

these threats for the long-term 

persistence of Florida sandhill crane is 

loss, conversion, or degradation of 

suitable habitat. Habitat has been lost 

historically and is expected to be lost or 

converted into the future. However, the 

Florida sandhill crane continues to 

currently occupy its historical range, 

and is also expected to in the future, 

albeit as a smaller (i.e., less abundant) 

population than is currently 

represented. Its demonstrated ability to 

adapt to and use agricultural and 

suburban habitats (e.g., croplands, 

pastures, golf courses, recreational 

areas) for breeding, nesting, and feeding 

activities help ensure its resiliency into 

the future. Although drought, 

precipitation changes/events, and direct 

mortalities will play a role on the 

species’ resource needs and 

reproductive success, the best available 

information suggests that any impacts 

are affecting and likely to affect the 

subspecies at the individual level as 

opposed to the population/rangewide 

level both currently and in the future. 

Therefore, we find that listing the 

Florida sandhill crane as endangered or 

threatened is not warranted. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding 

can be found in the Florida sandhill 

crane species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 

Fremont County Rockcress 

Previous Federal Actions 

On July 30, 2007, we received a 

petition from Forest Guardians (now 

WildEarth Guardians), to list 206 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
65130 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Mountain-Prairie Region species, 

including the Fremont County 

rockcress, as endangered or threatened 

species under the Act. On August 18, 

2009, we published a 90-day finding in 

the Federal Register (74 FR 41649), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

Fremont County rockcress may warrant 

listing. On June 9, 2011, we published 

a 12-month finding in the Federal 

Register (76 FR 33924), concluding that 

listing the Fremont County rockcress is 

warranted based on survey information 

indicating the species was in decline. 

However, listing the species was 

precluded at that time by higher priority 

actions, and the species was added to 

the candidate species list with a listing 

priority number of 8. We subsequently 

addressed the status of the species 

annually in our candidate notices of 

review (76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 

77 FR 69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 

70104, November 22, 2013; 79 FR 

72450, December 5, 2014; 80 FR 80584, 

December 24, 2015; 81 FR 87246, 

December 2, 2016). In 2016, we revised 

the listing priority number from an 8 to 

an 11 because we found that the threats 

affecting the species were no longer 

high in magnitude nor were they 

imminent, and were instead low in 

magnitude and non-imminent. 

Summary of Finding 

The Fremont County rockcress is a 

narrow endemic perennial herb known 

to occur on approximately 18 acres (7 

hectares) of habitat in the southern 

foothills of the Wind River Range, 

Wyoming. The species’ habitat consists 

of sparsely vegetated, course, granite 

soil pockets in exposed granitepegmatite (igneous rock solidified from 

lava or magma) outcrops, and the 

habitat faces extreme cold temperature 

and wind conditions. The species is also 

characterized by its reproductive 

system, in which individual plants 

reproduce through asexual seed 

production. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. To assess the resiliency of the 

species, we reviewed the abundance of 

flowering and non-flowering 

individuals and colonization of 

populations, which is driven by the 

species’ reproductive system, winter 

precipitation, soil availability, sunlight, 

and freedom from competition. 

Stochastic events such as severe 

precipitation events, wildfire, and 

invasions of nonnative, invasive species 

affect the resiliency of the species. 

However, we find that there are no 

stressors currently impacting the 

species; the species has demonstrated 

persistence as a narrow endemic; there 

are protections in place to benefit the 

species; and its sole occurrence has 

sufficiently high levels of flowering 

plant abundance, colonization, and 

suitable habitat factors. 

Considering that Fremont County 

rockcress presently exhibits high levels 

of resiliency, and is expected to 

continue to be resilient within the 

foreseeable future while retaining 

sufficient adaptive capacity and the 

ability to withstand catastrophic events, 

we find that the species is not presently 

in danger of extinction throughout all or 

a significant portion of its range or 

likely to become so within the 

foreseeable future. Therefore, we find 

that listing Fremont County rockcress as 

an endangered species or threatened 

species is not warranted. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding 

can be found in the Fremont County 

rockcress species assessment form and 

other supporting documents (see 

ADDRESSES, above). 

Frisco Buckwheat, Ostler’s Peppergrass, 

and Frisco Clover 

Previous Federal Actions 

On July 30, 2007, we received a 

petition from Forest Guardians (now 

WildEarth Guardians), to list 206 

Mountain-Prairie Region species, 

including the Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s 

peppergrass, and Frisco clover, as 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. On August 18, 2009, we 

published 90-day findings in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 41649), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s peppergrass, 

and Frisco clover may warrant listing. 

On February 23, 2011, we published 12- 

month findings in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 10166), concluding that listing 

the Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s 

peppergrass, and Frisco clover is 

warranted primarily due to the threat of 

habitat destruction from mining 

activities. However, listing the species 

was precluded at that time by higher 

priority actions, and the species were 

added to the candidate species list with 

listing priority numbers of 8. We 

subsequently addressed the status of 

these species annually in our candidate 

notices of review (76 FR 66370, October 

26, 2011; 77 FR 69994, November 21, 

2012; 78 FR 70104, November 22, 2013; 

79 FR 72450, December 5, 2014; 80 FR 

80584, December 24, 2015; 81 FR 87246, 

December 2, 2016). 

Summary of Finding 

The Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s 

peppergrass, and Frisco clover are rare 

endemic plants species found only in 

Utah. These species are addressed here 

together as they occupy roughly the 

same area, have similar life histories, 

and face similar potential threats. Frisco 

buckwheat and Ostler’s peppergrass 

occur together in three populations, 

occupying 297 acres (120 hectares) and 

153 acres (62 hectares) of habitat, 

respectively. The Frisco clover is known 

from six populations and occupies 360 

acres (146 hectares) of habitat. 

These three species are long-lived 

perennial plants that flower in the 

spring and summer months and likely 

require pollinators for maximum 

reproduction. Plant survival and 

successful recruitment require suitable 

intact soils with microsites for 

establishment and growth. The low 

canopy coverage of associated 

vegetation must result in low plant 

competition but also appears to provide 

sufficient floral resources to support 

pollinators. The health (long-term 

productivity) of populations is affected 

by the population size, habitat quantity, 

and habitat quality available to support 

stable or increasing populations. In 

addition to proximity between 

populations, habitat connectivity is 

important to support gene flow within 

populations. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors are 

precious metal exploration and mining; 

stone mining; nonnative, invasive 

species; and climate change. We found 

that there has been no reduction in 

redundancy or representation from 

historic conditions for these species. 

Currently, there is some stone mining 

occurring with minimum overlap with 

the plant populations and no significant 

impact on current viability. Despite 

some impacts from mining, invasive 

species, and climate change, the species 

are likely to face minimal decreases in 

population resiliency and minimal 

reduction in redundancy and 

representation, with all populations 

persisting within the foreseeable future. 

Therefore, we find that listing the Frisco 

buckwheat, Ostler’s peppergrass, and 

Frisco clover as endangered or 

threatened is not warranted. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding 

can be found in the Frisco buckwheat, 

Ostler’s peppergrass, and Frisco clover 

species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65131 

MacGillivray’s Seaside Sparrow 

Previous Federal Actions 

On April 20, 2010, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, the Alabama Rivers Alliance, 

the Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, 

the Gulf Restoration Network, 

Tennessee Forests Council, and the 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to 

list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland 

species, including the MacGillivray’s 

seaside sparrow, as endangered or 

threatened species under the Act. On 

September 27, 2011, we published a 90- 

day finding in the Federal Register (76 

FR 59836), concluding that the petition 

presented substantial information 

indicating the MacGillivray’s seaside 

sparrow may warrant listing. 

Subsequently, we entered into a 

stipulated settlement agreement with 

the Center for Biological Diversity that 

required us to submit a 12-month 

finding to the Federal Register by 

September 30, 2018. The court later 

agreed to extend this deadline until 

December 15, 2018. This document 

constitutes the 12-month finding on the 

April 20, 2010, petition to list the 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow under 

the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow is 

a subspecies of seaside sparrow that 

occurs in Atlantic coastal marshes in 

South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. 

The MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow is 

an olive-gray bird with a relatively long 

bill and short, sharp tail, and the 

subspecies reaches approximately 14 to 

15 centimeters (5.5 to 6 inches) in 

length. 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrows 

spend their entire life in coastal salt and 

brackish marshes. The subspecies is 

currently characterized by four breeding 

populations. In South Carolina, the 

subspecies breeds in lower elevation 

areas of natural high marsh and 

impoundments; in Georgia, the 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow breeds 

in higher elevation areas of natural low 

salt marsh. The subspecies needs dense 

herbaceous cover for nesting and 

sheltering, and high tide roosting sites 

in the marsh to evade flooding. Adult 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrows have 

behavioral adaptations to balance the 

trade-off in risk from predation and 

flooding to nest success, and, therefore, 

will shift nest-site placement along a 

nest height gradient to contend with 

these dual risks. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors are 

predation, tidal flooding, sea level rise, 

and increased storm frequency due to 

climate change. We conclude that the 

viability of the MacGillivray’s seaside 

sparrow will continue to be 

characterized by four breeding 

populations across most of the current 

range of coastal marshes in South 

Carolina, Georgia, and Florida in the 

near term and within the foreseeable 

future. In addition, although sea level 

rise will cause the loss of high 

abundance breeding habitat, the 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow will 

continue to occur in different habitat 

types and thus will maintain some 

adaptive capacity in the future. 

We find that the stressors acting on 

the subspecies and its habitat, either 

singly or in combination, are not of 

sufficient imminence, intensity, or 

magnitude to indicate that this 

subspecies meets the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species. Therefore, we find that listing 

the MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow as 

endangered or threatened is not 

warranted. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow species 

assessment form and other supporting 

documents (see ADDRESSES, above). 

Ozark Pyrg 

Previous Federal Actions 

On April 20, 2010, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, the Alabama Rivers Alliance, 

the Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, 

the Gulf Restoration Network, 

Tennessee Forests Council, and the 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to 

list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland 

species, including the Ozark pyrg, as 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. On September 27, 2011, we 

published a 90-day finding in the 

Federal Register (76 FR 59836), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

Ozark pyrg may warrant listing. This 

document constitutes the 12-month 

finding on the April 20, 2010, petition 

to list the Ozark pyrg under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The Ozark pyrg is a freshwater snail 

historically found in a shoal of the 

White River near Cotter, Arkansas, and 

in the North Fork White River near the 

confluence. No specific life-history data 

exist regarding the species’ 

reproduction, diet, age, growth, 

population size structure, or fecundity. 

However, many species within the same 

genus are adapted to springs, ponds, 

and other sensitive aquatic habitats. 

Some of these species also show a 

preference for gravel and pebble 

substrates and shallower water depths. 

Based on extensive surveys between 

1915, when the species was first 

described, and 2010 throughout the 

range of the species in Arkansas and 

Missouri that have yielded no 

specimens, and the extreme 

modification of the habitat at the 

species’ type locality, the best available 

science indicates there are no extant 

populations of the Ozark pyrg. 

Therefore, we determine the Ozark pyrg 

to be extinct. As a result, the Ozark pyrg 

does not meet the statutory definition of 

either an endangered species or a 

threatened species and, accordingly, 

does not warrant listing under the Act. 

A detailed discussion of the basis for 

this finding can be found in the Ozark 

pyrg species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 

Pale Blue-Eyed Grass 

Previous Federal Actions 

On July 30, 2007, we received a 

petition from Forest Guardians (now 

WildEarth Guardians), to list 206 

Mountain-Prairie Region species, 

including the pale blue-eyed grass, as 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. On August 18, 2009, we 

published a 90-day finding in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 41649), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating the 

pale blue-eyed grass may warrant 

listing. This document constitutes the 

12-month finding on the July 30, 2007, 

petition to list the pale blue-eyed grass 

under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The pale blue-eyed grass is a longlived perennial herb in the iris family 

that produces small, pale blue flowers. 

The species is a narrow endemic known 

from a limited area in the Cascade 

Range of south-central Washington and 

north-central Oregon. Individual plants 

need early seral, open habitats with cool 

temperatures to break seed dormancy, 

adequate moisture to germinate and 

establish, and warm sunny days to 

stimulate flowering. Individual plants 

need pollinators for sexual exchange of 

genetic materials and adequate seed set 

but can reproduce by self-fertilizing and 

by sprouting rhizomes to reproduce 

vegetatively. Seeds need a dispersal 

mechanism that moves them away from 

the parent plant, thereby reducing 

intraspecific competition and exposure 

to pathogens that may have infected 

older established plants. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
65132 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

For robust resiliency over time, it can 

be assumed that pale blue-eyed grass 

populations likely need numerous 

individuals representing a diversity of 

genotypes within habitat patches of 

adequate area, quality, and connectivity 

to maintain survival and reproduction 

in spite of disturbance and shifting 

environmental conditions. Redundant 

populations across the range are needed 

to increase the species’ chances of 

surviving catastrophic events. 

Representation through genetic and 

environmental diversity within and 

among populations is necessary to 

conserve long-term adaptive capability. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors affecting 

the pale blue-eyed grass’ status include 

grazing, motor vehicles, invasive plants, 

putative hybridization, camping and 

recreation, habitat-disturbing 

management activities, habitat 

encroachment, and effects of climate 

change. Despite impacts from these 

stressors at an individual level, the 

species has maintained resilient 

populations. Although we predict some 

continued impacts from these stressors 

in the future, we anticipate the species 

will continue to be viable in resilient 

populations that are distributed widely 

throughout both of its representative 

areas (Washington and Oregon). 

Therefore, we find that listing the pale 

blue-eyed grass as an endangered 

species or threatened species is not 

warranted. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

pale blue-eyed grass species assessment 

form and other supporting documents 

(see ADDRESSES, above). 

San Joaquin Valley Giant Flower-Loving 

Fly 

Previous Federal Actions 

On June 26, 2014, we received a 

petition from Gregory R. Ballmer and 

Kendall H. Osborne to list the San 

Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly as 

an endangered species under the Act. 

On April 10, 2015, we published a 90- 

day finding in the Federal Register (80 

FR 19259), concluding that the petition 

presented substantial information 

indicating that listing the San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly may be 

warranted. This document constitutes 

the 12-month finding on the June 26, 

2014, petition to list the San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly under the 

Act. 

Summary of Finding 

San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly larvae have small, foot-like 

protrusions like caterpillars, and grow 

to about 6.4 centimeters (2.5 inches). 

They burrow down to moist sands 

below the surface, where they prey on 

the burrowing larvae of other insects. 

After 1 to 2 years, the fly larva produces 

a pupa, which metamorphoses into an 

adult. Adults are strong flyers, are 2.5 to 

3.5 centimeters (1 to 1.5 inches) long, 

and live about 3 days. The species’ 

‘‘flight season’’ lasts about 7 weeks, 

from mid-August to early October. 

Males seek potential mates by sight, 

occasionally defending territories from 

other males. After mating, females lay 

eggs in shaded areas, either on the 

surface of bare sandy soil, or in shallow 

holes dug into the sand using their 

abdomens. Eggs likely hatch in about 10 

days. 

The San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly’s known historical range 

includes eight locations across the San 

Joaquin Valley, California, but it is now 

known only from Sand Ridge, a large 

stable sand dune about 24 kilometers 

(15 miles) east of Bakersfield, in Kern 

County, California. For over 20 years 

prior to discovery of the Sand Ridge 

population in 1997, the species was 

thought to be extinct. A second, smaller 

population was also discovered in 1997, 

about 16 kilometers (10 miles) south of 

Bakersfield, but no individuals have 

been observed there since 2006. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors that 

may be affecting the species include 

effects of climate change, urban and 

agricultural development, sand mining, 

vegetation overgrowth, small population 

size, off-highway vehicles, and pesticide 

drift. Despite the fly being dependent on 

rare areas of inland dune sand and 

having lost seven of eight historically 

known populations, we found that the 

remaining population provides 

sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation now and in the future. 

Further, we found that the stressors we 

assessed are not of sufficient 

imminence, intensity, or magnitude, 

either singly or in combination, to 

indicate that the fly is in danger of 

extinction throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range now or in the 

foreseeable future. Therefore, we find 

that listing the San Joaquin Valley giant 

flower-loving fly as an endangered 

species or threatened species is not 

warranted. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving 

fly species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 

Striped Newt 

Previous Federal Actions 

On July 14, 2008, we received a 

petition from Dr. D. Bruce Means, Ryan 

C. Means, and Rebecca P.M. Means of 

the Coastal Plains Institute and Land 

Conservancy, requesting that the striped 

newt be listed as a threatened species 

under the Act. On March 23, 2010, we 

published a 90-day finding in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 13720), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating that 

listing the striped newt may be 

warranted. On June 7, 2011, we 

published a 12-month finding in the 

Federal Register (76 FR 32911), 

concluding that listing the striped newt 

was warranted due to threats associated 

with habitat loss, disease, drought, and 

inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms to address those threats. 

However, listing the species was 

precluded at that time by higher priority 

actions, and the species was added to 

the candidate species list with a listing 

priority number of 8. We subsequently 

addressed the status of the species 

annually in our candidate notices of 

review (76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 

77 FR 69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 

70104, November 22, 2013; 79 FR 

72450, December 5, 2014; 80 FR 80584, 

December 24, 2015; 81 FR 87246, 

December 2, 2016). 

Summary of Finding 

The striped newt uses ephemeral 

wetlands and the upland habitat (e.g., 

scrub, mesic flatwoods, sandhills) that 

surrounds those wetlands. Striped 

newts have a lifespan of 12 to 15 years 

and use aquatic and terrestrial habitats 

during their complex life cycle. Adult 

striped newts can occur as both a gilled 

aquatic form and a terrestrial form. 

The current range of the striped newt 

extends from southern Georgia to northcentral Florida, with 105 breeding 

ponds extant in Florida and 11 in 

Georgia. Striped newts are divided into 

two regions: the Eastern Region 

(peninsular Florida and eastern Georgia) 

and the Western Region (panhandle 

Florida and western Georgia). Patterns 

in precipitation and temperature cause 

ecological differentiation between these 

two regions. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors are land 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65133 

use change, fire suppression, effects of 

climate change, and off-road vehicle 

impacts. Potential impacts associated 

with overutilization and predation were 

also analyzed but found not to affect the 

species to such an extent that they 

would have a negative impact on 

species’ viability. 

We have concluded that the threats 

currently impacting the striped newt are 

of lower magnitude than were 

previously thought. Furthermore, new 

populations of striped newt have been 

discovered since the species was added 

to the candidate species list, resulting in 

increased resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation for the species. 

Additionally, past conservation efforts, 

including captive rearing and release of 

striped newts, have helped reestablish 

striped newt populations in previously 

extirpated areas, such as in the 

Apalachicola National Forest. Finally, 

85 percent of striped newt populations 

currently occur on conserved lands. 

Based on the best available 

information, we find that the striped 

newt does not meet the definition of an 

endangered species or threatened 

species. Therefore, we find that listing 

the striped newt as an endangered 

species or threatened species is not 

warranted. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

striped newt species assessment form 

and other supporting documents (see 

ADDRESSES, above). 

Tinian Monarch 

Previous Federal Actions 

On December 12, 2013, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity requesting that the Tinian 

monarch be listed as an endangered or 

threatened species under the Act. On 

September 18, 2015, we published a 90- 

day finding in the Federal Register (80 

FR 56423), concluding that the petition 

presented substantial information 

indicating that listing the Tinian 

monarch may be warranted. This 

document constitutes the 12-month 

finding on the December 12, 2013, 

petition to list the Tinian monarch 

under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The Tinian monarch is a small 

flycatcher bird about 15 centimeters (6 

inches) bill to tail. Tinian monarchs are 

dull with light rufous underparts, olivebrown upperparts, and dark chocolate 

brown wings and tail. This species is 

endemic to the island of Tinian, which 

is part of the Northern Mariana Islands 

in the western Pacific Ocean. 

The Tinian monarch lives mainly in 

forested habitat where it shelters, 

breeds, and forages for insects. There are 

various types of forest on Tinian 

including native limestone, secondarymixed, and nonnative tangantangan 

forest, all of which are inhabited by the 

monarch. Individuals breed year round 

beginning at about 2 years of age and 

live around 10 years. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary potential 

stressors affecting the Tinian monarch 

include the risk of the invasive, 

predatory brown treesnake establishing 

on Tinian and habitat loss from civilian 

and military development, including 

loss via potential resulting wildfires. We 

find that the risk of brown treesnake 

establishing on Tinian now and in the 

future is low, because of the sufficient 

interdiction program on Guam and 

Tinian that prevents the spread of the 

snake to areas where it is not found, 

including Tinian. We also find that 

despite extensive historical impacts to 

Tinian’s forest habitat, the Tinian 

monarch is currently thriving. This is 

the result of expansive forest regrowth 

and the species’ highly resilient nature, 

which is evidenced by its rebound 

following historical periods of habitat 

loss and by its ability to forage and 

reproduce within the remaining native 

forest, abundant nonnative forest, and 

mixed forest on Tinian. Therefore, we 

find that listing the Tinian monarch as 

an endangered species or threatened 

species is not warranted. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding 

can be found in the Tinian monarch 

species assessment form and other 

supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, 

above). 

Tippecanoe Darter 

Previous Federal Actions 

On April 20, 2010, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, the Alabama Rivers Alliance, 

the Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, 

the Gulf Restoration Network, 

Tennessee Forests Council, and the 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to 

list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland 

species, including the Tippecanoe 

darter, as endangered or threatened 

species under the Act. On September 

27, 2011, we published a 90-day finding 

in the Federal Register (76 FR 59836), 

concluding that the petition presented 

substantial information indicating that 

listing the Tippecanoe darter may be 

warranted. This notice constitutes the 

12-month finding on the April 20, 2010, 

petition to list the Tippecanoe darter 

under the Act. 

Summary of Finding 

The Tippecanoe darter is one of the 

smallest species of darters (35 

millimeters (1.38 inches) in length). 

Males are distinguished by their gold or 

orange color with blue-black vertical 

bars, while females are more subdued in 

color. The fish has a relatively 

widespread, disjunct distribution with 

12 of its 15 historical populations extant 

across six States: Indiana, Kentucky, 

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and 

West Virginia. The species is expanding 

its range in some areas. 

Tippecanoe darters inhabit fourthorder and larger streams and rivers, and 

prefer riffles and runs with rocky 

bottom substrates and adequate water 

flow to keep spaces between and under 

rocks free from sediment. Individuals 

are mature within their first year, spawn 

in May to early August, and live to 

between 1 and 2 years of age. 

We evaluated all relevant factors 

under the five factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures ameliorating 

stressors. The primary stressors affecting 

the Tippecanoe darter include habitat 

fragmentation from dams and 

impairments to water quality, including 

sedimentation and agricultural and 

urban runoff. Despite impacts from 

these stressors, the species has 

maintained resilient populations and is 

increasing occupancy in some reaches, 

likely due to improved water quality or 

improved survey techniques. Although 

we predict some continued impacts 

from these stressors in the future, we 

anticipate the species will persist in 

resilient populations that are distributed 

widely throughout each of its 

representative physiographic provinces. 

In summary, we find that the stressors 

acting on the species and its habitat, 

either singly or in combination, are not 

of sufficient imminence, intensity, or 

magnitude to indicate that this species 

meets the definition of an endangered 

species or a threatened species. 

Therefore, we find that listing the 

Tippecanoe darter as an endangered 

species or threatened species is not 

warranted. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

Tippecanoe darter species assessment 

form and other supporting documents 

(see ADDRESSES, above). 

New Information 

We request that you submit any new 

information concerning the taxonomy 

of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or 

stressors to the Cedar Key mole skink, 

Florida sandhill crane, Fremont County 

rockcress, Frisco buckwheat, Ostler’s 

peppergrass, Frisco clover, 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
65134 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

MacGillivray’s seaside sparrow, Ozark 

pyrg, pale blue-eyed grass, San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly, striped 

newt, Tinian monarch, and Tippecanoe 

darter to the appropriate person, as 

specified under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it 

becomes available. New information 

will help us monitor these species and 

make appropriate decisions about their 

conservation and status. We encourage 

local agencies and stakeholders to 

continue cooperative monitoring and 

conservation efforts. 

References Cited 

Lists of the references cited in the 

petition findings are available on the 

internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

in the dockets provided above in 

ADDRESSES and upon request from the 

appropriate person, as specified under 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Authors 

The primary authors of this document 

are the staff members of the Species 

Assessment Team, Ecological Services 

Program. 

Authority 

The authority for this action is section 

4 of the Endangered Species Act of 

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

seq.). 

Dated: December 7, 2018. 

Margaret E. Everson, 

Principal Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Exercising the Authority of 

the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27467 Filed 12–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1