62238 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

• Agency Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail: Mr. Robert D. Sachs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

code 1807T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

Washington, DC 20460 telephone 

number 202–566–2884; fax number 

202–566–0966; e-mail address: 

sachs.robert@epa.gov.

• Hand Delivery: Office of 

Environmental Information Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

West Building, Room B102, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. OA–2004–0004. EPA’s 

policy is that all comments received 

will be included in the public docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http://www.epa.gov/

edocket, including any personal 

information provided, unless the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA 

EDOCKET and the federal 

regulations.gov Web sites are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at the Office of Environmental 

Information Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Office of Environmental 

Information Docket is (202) 566–1752.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert D. Sachs, Performance Incentives 

Division, Office of Business and 

Community Innovation, Office of Policy, 

Economics and Innovation, Office of 

Administrator, Mail Code 1807T, United 

States Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

Washington, DC 20460 telephone 

number 202–566–2884; fax number 

202–566–0966; e-mail address: 

sachs.robert@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document concerns revisions to the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act to address an inconsistency between 

the preamble and regulatory language at 

67 FR 52674 and 69 FR 21737, and to 

correct three inadvertently omitted 

applicable regulatory provisions at 69 

FR 21737. The revisions proposed here 

are identical to those contained in the 

Direct Final Rule located in the ‘‘Rules 

and Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register publication. Please refer to the 

preamble and regulatory text of the 

direct final action for further 

information and the actual text of the 

revisions. Additionally, all information 

regarding Statutory and Executive 

Orders for this proposed rule can be 

found in the Statutory and Executive 

Order Review section of the direct final 

action.

Dated: October 19, 2004. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 04–23841 Filed 10–22–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AT57 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Reopening of the Public 

Comment Period for the Draft 

Economic Analysis and Proposed 

Designation of Critical Habitat for the 

Santa Ana Sucker

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

reopening of the public comment period 

for the draft economic analysis on the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus 

santaanae) and on the proposed 

designation itself. The comment period 

will provide the public, Federal, State, 

and local agencies, and tribes with an 

additional opportunity to submit 

written comments on this proposal and 

its respective draft economic analysis. 

Comments previously submitted for this 

proposed rule and draft economic 

analysis need not be resubmitted as they 

have already been incorporated into the 

public record and will be fully 

considered in any final decision.

DATES: The public comment period on 

the proposed designation and draft 

economic analysis is now reopened 

until November 24, 2004. We will 

accept comments and information until 

5 p.m. p.s.t. on that date.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

materials may be submitted to us by one 

of the following methods: 

1. You may submit written comments 

and information to the Field Supervisor, 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010 

Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, 

California, 92009. 

2. You may hand-deliver written 

comments and information to our 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at the 

above address, or fax your comments to 

(760) 431–9618. 

3. You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to 

fw1sasu@r1.fws.gov. Please see the 

Public Comments Solicited section 

below for file format and other 

information about electronic filing. 

Comments and materials received, as 

well as supporting documentation used 

in preparation of the proposed critical 

habitat rule for the Santa Ana sucker 

and the draft economic analysis on the

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Proposed Rules 62239

proposed designation, will be available 

for public inspection, by appointment, 

during normal business hours at the 

above address. Any comments received 

after the closing date may not be 

considered in the final decisions on this 

action. You may obtain copies of the 

proposed critical habitat designation by 

contacting the Carlsbad Fish and 

Wildlife Office at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad 

Fish and Wildlife Office, at the above 

address (telephone (760) 431–9440; 

facsimile (760) 431–9618).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited 

We solicit comments or suggestions 

from the public, other concerned 

governmental agencies, tribes, the 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested parties concerning our 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the Santa Ana sucker and our draft 

economic analysis for the proposed 

critical habitat designation. We 

particularly seek comments concerning: 

(1) The reasons why any habitat 

should or should not be determined to 

be critical habitat as provided by section 

4 of the Act, including whether the 

benefit of designation will outweigh any 

threats to the species due to designation; 

(2) Specific information on the 

amount and distribution of Santa Ana 

sucker habitat, and what habitat is 

essential to the conservation of the 

species and why; 

(3) Land use designations and current 

or planned activities in the subject areas 

and their possible impacts on proposed 

critical habitat; 

(4) Any foreseeable economic, 

national security or other potential 

impacts resulting from the proposed 

designation and, in particular, any 

impacts on small entities or families; 

(5) Whether the economic analysis 

adequately addresses the likely effects 

and resulting costs arising from the 

California Environmental Quality Act 

and other State laws as a result of the 

proposed critical habitat designation; 

(6) Whether the economic analysis 

makes appropriate assumptions, and is 

consistent with the Service’s listing 

regulations regarding current practices 

and likely regulatory changes imposed 

as a result of the designation of critical 

habitat for the Santa Ana sucker; 

(7) The benefits of including or 

excluding lands covered by a Natural 

Community Conservation Plan or 

Habitat Conservation Plan or any other 

lands covered by an adequate 

management plan; 

(8) Whether the analysis adequately 

addresses the indirect effects, e.g., 

property tax losses due to reduced home 

construction, losses to local business 

due to reduced construction activity; 

(9) Whether the economic analysis 

appropriately identifies land and water 

use regulatory controls that could result 

from the proposed critical habitat 

designation for this species; 

(10) Whether the analysis accurately 

defines and captures opportunity costs; 

(11) Whether the economic analysis 

correctly assesses the effect on regional 

costs (e.g., housing costs) associated 

with land use controls that could arise 

from the designation of critical habitat 

for this species; 

(12) Whether the designation of 

critical habitat for the sucker will result 

in disproportionate economic or other 

impacts to specific areas that should be 

evaluated for possible exclusion from 

the final designation;

(13) Whether the economic analysis is 

consistent with the Service’s listing 

regulations because this analysis should 

identify all costs related to the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Santa Ana sucker and this designation 

was intended to take place at the time 

this species was listed; and 

(14) The draft economic analysis 

includes an appendix which provides 

an assessment of the potential benefits 

that may accrue to homeowners 

resulting from the amenity associated 

from living in the vicinity of a protected 

riparian corridor. 

a. Please comment on the 

appropriateness of including the 

analysis of amenities as identified in the 

appendix as a potential benefit 

associated with critical habitat 

designation without doing a complete 

analysis of that class of economic effect 

(such as stigma effects) in general and 

the Santa Ana sucker designation in 

particular. 

b. Please comment on the method 

employed to estimate this effect which 

relies on the combined results of two 

studies that measure the premium to 

homes located near protected or 

restored urban streams (Colby and 

Wishart 2002, Streiner and Loomis 

1995). 

c. Please comment on the 

appropriateness of the application itself, 

which applied the benefits to all areas 

of the designation. 

(15) Whether our approach to critical 

habitat designation could be improved 

or modified in any way to provide for 

greater public participation and 

understanding, or to assist us in 

accommodating public concern and 

comments. 

If you wish to comment, you may 

submit your comments and materials 

concerning this rule by any one of 

several methods (see ADDRESSES

section). Please submit Internet 

comments to fw1sasu@r1.fws.gov in 

ASCII file format and avoid the use of 

special characters or any form of 

encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn: 

Santa Ana Sucker Critical Habitat’’ in 

your e-mail subject header and your 

name and return address in the body of 

your message. If you do not receive a 

confirmation from the system that we 

have received your Internet message, 

contact us directly by calling our 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section). 

Our practice is to make comments, 

including names and home addresses of 

respondents, available for public review 

during regular business hours. 

Individual respondents may request that 

we withhold their home address, which 

we will honor to the extent allowable by 

law. There also may be circumstances in 

which we would withhold a 

respondent’s identity, as allowable by 

law. If you wish us to withhold your 

name and/or address, you must state 

this prominently at the beginning of 

your comments. However, we will not 

consider anonymous comments. To the 

extent consistent with applicable law, 

we will make all submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, available 

for public inspection in their entirety. 

Background 

On February 26, 2004, we 

concurrently published in the Federal 

Register a final rule (69 FR 8839) and 

a proposed rule (69 FR 8911) to 

designate critical habitat for the Santa 

Ana sucker. In order to comply with the 

designation deadline established by the 

district court in California Trout v. DOI, 

No. 97–3779 (N.D. Cal.), we were unable 

to open a public comment period, hold 

a public hearing, or complete an 

economic analysis of the final rule. We 

refer the reader to the final rule (69 FR 

8839) for a complete explanation of our 

reasons for dispensing with the notice 

and comment procedures generally 

required under the Administrative 

Procedure Act. To give the public an 

opportunity to comment on the critical 

habitat designation, including the 

opportunity to request and hold a public 

hearing, and to enable us to complete 

and circulate for public review an 

economic analysis of critical habitat 

designation, we published and solicited 

comment on a proposed rule (69 FR 

8911) to designate critical habitat for the 

Santa Ana sucker on approximately 

21,129 acres (ac) (8,550 hectares (ha)) of 

62240 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

land in Los Angeles and San Bernardino 

Counties, California. We indicated that, 

after taking public comment, we would 

issue a new final designation that would 

replace the designation put into place 

on February 26, 2004. The original 

comment period on the proposed rule 

closed on April 26, 2004. 

On August 19, 2004, we published a 

notice in the Federal Register that 

announced the reopening of the 

comment period on the proposed 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Santa Ana sucker and the scheduling of 

a public hearing on September 9, 2004, 

in Pasadena, California (69 FR 58876). 

The comment period was open until 5 

p.m. p.s.t on September 20, 2004. 

In order to eliminate any confusion as 

to the current status of the February 26, 

2004 final rule designating critical 

habitat, we reiterate our determination 

and supporting reasons presented in 

that rule; that rule will remain in effect 

during the short period of time 

necessary to allow this reopened 

comment period on the February 26, 

2004 proposed critical habitat rule, and 

associated draft economic analysis, and 

to make a final determination on that 

rule. 

Economic Analysis 

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that 

we designate or revise critical habitat on 

the basis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available, after taking 

into consideration economic and any 

other relevant impacts of specifying any 

particular area as critical habitat. Based 

upon the February 26, 2004, proposed 

rule to designate critical habitat for the 

Santa Ana sucker, we prepared a draft 

economic analysis on the proposed 

critical habitat designation. 

Retrospective costs total $4.2 million, 

with transportation comprising $3.4 

million of those costs. The remainder of 

retrospective costs was split among 

OHV recreation, flood control agencies, 

and Federal agencies. Total prospective 

costs are $30.5 million assuming a three 

percent discount rate and $21.8 million 

with a seven percent discount rate. 

Annual prospective costs are estimated 

to be $2.0 million. Costs associated with 

transportation contribute 49 percent of 

the annual costs and overall prospective 

costs. Other leading activities include 

water supply, flood control agencies, 

and residential and commercial 

development. The draft economic 

analysis also includes an appendix 

which provides an assessment of the 

potential benefits that may accrue to 

homeowners resulting from the amenity 

associated from living in the vicinity of 

a protected riparian corridor. The 

method employed to estimate this effect 

relies on the combined results of two 

studies that measure the premium to 

homes located near protected or 

restored urban streams (Colby and 

Wishart 2002, Streiner and Loomis 

1995). 

On October 1, 2004, we published a 

notice in the Federal Register

announcing the reopening of the 

comment period on the proposed 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Santa Ana sucker and on the draft 

economic analysis for the proposal (69 

FR 51416). The comment period was 

open until 5 p.m. p.s.t on October 12, 

2004. 

In order to give the public, Federal, 

State, and local agencies, and Tribes 

additional time to review and comment 

on the draft economic analysis, we are 

reopening the public comment period 

for another 30 days. We are now 

soliciting public comment on the draft 

economic analysis and appendix until 

the date specified above in DATES. We 

will also continue to accept comments 

concerning our proposed designation of 

critical habitat for the Santa Ana sucker 

during this period.

References Cited 

Colby, Bonnie and Steve Wishart. 2002. 

Quantifying the Influence of Desert Riparian 

Areas on Residential Property Values, The 

Appraisal Journal, July. 

Streiner, Carol and John B. Loomis. 1995. 

Estimating the Benefits of Urban Stream 

Restoration Using the Hedonic Price Method, 

Rivers 5(4).

Author 

The primary authors of this notice are 

the staff of the Carlsbad Fish and 

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: October 20, 2004. 

Paul Hoffman, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks.

[FR Doc. 04–23968 Filed 10–22–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P