Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 21711

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Parts 222 and 229

[Docket No. FRA–1999–6439, Notice No. 6;

Docket No. FRA–1999–6440]

RIN 2130–AA71

Use of Locomotive Horns at HighwayRail Grade Crossings

AGENCY: Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA), Department of

Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Public Hearings.

SUMMARY: This document provides

notice of additional public hearings to

be held in Chicago, Illinois and

Madison, Wisconsin regarding FRA

Docket Nos. 1999–6439 and 1999–6440.

On January 13, 2000 (65 FR 2230), FRA

published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) on the Use of

Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail

Grade Crossings (Docket No. FRA–

1999–6439). On the same date FRA

released a Draft Environmental

Assessment (DEIS) (Docket No. FRA–

1999–6440) pertaining to the proposals

contained in the NPRM. In both

documents, FRA stated that public

hearings would be held in a number of

locations throughout the country. On

February 15, 2000 (65 FR 7483), March

22, 2000 (65 FR 15298), and March 29,

2000 (65 FR 16559) FRA published in

the Federal Register documents

regarding the locations of combined

hearings on the NPRM and DEIS to be

held in various cities. This document

provides notice of two additional public

hearings to be held in Chicago and

Madison, Wisconsin. This document

provides information pertaining to those

hearings as well as repeating

information previously published

regarding hearings to be held after the

date of this document.

DATES: Public Hearings: Public hearings

will be held in:

1. Chicago, Illinois area on the following

dates:

Western Springs, Illinois on April 25,

2000, beginning at 12 noon;

Chicago, Illinois on April 26, 2000,

beginning at 9 a.m.;

Saint Xavier University campus on

April 26, 2000, beginning at 5 p.m;

Des Plaines, Illinois on April 27,

2000; beginning at 9 a.m.;

2. Berea, Ohio on May 1, 2000,

beginning at 6 p.m; and

3. Madison, Wisconsin on May 3, 2000,

beginning at 9 a.m.

Please see SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION below for further

information concerning participation in

the public hearings.

ADDRESSES: Public Hearings: Public

hearings will be held at the following

locations:

1. Chicago, Illinois: On April 25, 2000,

beginning at 12 noon, at Lyons

Township High School, South

Campus, The Little Theater, 4900

Willow Springs Road, Western

Springs, Illinois;

On April 26, 2000, beginning at 9

a.m., at The Field Museum of

Natural History (James Simpson

Theater) 1400 South Lake Shore

Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60605;

On April 26, 2000, beginning at 5 p.m,

at Saint Xavier University (McGuire

Hall) 3700 West 103rd Street,

Chicago, Illinois 60655;

On April 27, 2000, beginning at 9

a.m., at the Federal Aviation

Administration (The Minnesota

Room), 2300 East Devon Avenue,

Des Plaines, Illinois 60018; and

2. Berea, Ohio: Baldwin-Wallace

College, Kleist Center for Art and

Drama, 95 E. Bagley Road, Berea,

Ohio 44017; and

3. Madison, Wisconsin: The Madison

Concourse Hotel and Governor’s Club

(Madison Wisconsin Room), 1 West

Dayton Street, Madison, Wisconsin

53703.

FRA Docket Clerk: Docket Clerk,

Office of Chief Counsel, Mail Stop 10,

FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20590. E-mail address

for the FRA Docket Clerk is

renee.bridgers@fra.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron

Ries, Office of Safety, FRA, 1120

Vermont Avenue, NW,Washington, DC

20590 (telephone: 202–493–6299); or

Mark Tessler, Office of Chief Counsel,

FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202–

493–6038).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any

person wishing to provide testimony at

one of the public hearings should notify

FRA’s Docket Clerk at the address above

at least three working days prior to the

date of the hearing. The notification

should also provide either a telephone

number or e-mail address at which the

person may be contacted. If a

participant will be representing an

organization, please indicate the name

of the organization.

FRA will attempt to accommodate all

persons wishing to provide testimony,

however depending on the number of

people wishing to participate, FRA may

find it necessary to limit the length of

oral comments to accommodate as many

people as possible. Participants may

wish to submit a complete written

statement for inclusion in the record,

while orally summarizing the points

made in that statement.

Issued in Washington, DC on April 18,

2000.

Michael T. Haley,

Deputy Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–10155 Filed 4–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AF79

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Notice of Proposed Critical

Habitat Determination for the Plant

Silene spaldingii (Spalding’s Catchfly)

and Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of critical

habitat determination and reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, propose a critical

habitat determination for Silene

spaldingii (Spalding’s catchfly)

pursuant to the Endangered Species Act

of 1973, as amended (Act) and reopen

the comment period on the proposed

rule to list this species. On December 3,

1999, we proposed to list S. spaldingii

as a threatened species. The proposed

rule stated that we would publish a

critical habitat determination for S.

spaldingii in the Federal Register

subsequent to the proposed rule. We

now propose that designation of critical

habitat is prudent for S. spaldingii. We

request comments on this proposed

prudency determination and reopen the

comment period for the proposed

listing. We will make the final prudency

determination with the final listing

determination for S. spaldingii. If this

final determination is that a critical

habitat designation is prudent, we will

develop a proposal to designate critical

habitat for S. spaldingii as soon as

feasible, considering our workload

priorities and budgetary capabilities.

DATES: Comments from all interested

parties must be received by June 23,

2000. Public hearing requests must be

received by June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials

concerning this proposal should be sent

to the Supervisor, Snake River Basin

Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

21712 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules

1387 S. Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise,

Idaho 83709. Comments and materials

received will be available for public

inspection, by appointment, during

normal business hours at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Ruesink, Supervisor, at the above

address (telephone 208/378–5243;

facsimile 208/378–5262).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Silene spaldingii is a long-lived

perennial herb currently known from a

total of 52 populations that are

primarily restricted to mesic (neither

extremely wet nor extremely dry)

grasslands (prairie or steppe vegetation)

that make up the Palouse region (a

Pacific Northwest bunchgrass habitat

type). Seven populations occur in westcentral Idaho; 7, in northeastern Oregon;

9, in western Montana; 28, in eastern

Washington; and 1, in adjacent British

Columbia, Canada. This taxon is

threatened by a variety of factors

including habitat destruction and

fragmentation from agricultural and

urban development, grazing and

trampling by domestic livestock and

native herbivores, herbicide treatment,

and competition from nonnative plant

species.

Critical habitat is defined in section 3

of the Act as: (i) The specific areas

within the geographical area occupied

by a species, at the time it is listed in

accordance with the Act, on which are

found those physical or biological

features (I) essential to the conservation

of the species and (II) that may require

special management considerations or

protection; and (ii) specific areas

outside the geographic area occupied by

a species at the time it is listed, upon

a determination that such areas are

essential for the conservation of the

species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use

of all methods and procedures needed

to bring the species to the point at

which listing under the Act is no longer

necessary.

Critical habitat designation, by

definition, directly affects only Federal

agency actions through consultation

under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Section

7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to

ensure that activities they authorize,

fund, or carry out are not likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of a

listed species or destroy or adversely

modify its critical habitat.

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as

amended, and implementing regulations

(50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the

maximum extent prudent and

determinable, we designate critical

habitat at the time the species is

determined to be endangered or

threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR

424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation

of critical habitat is not prudent when

one or both of the following situations

exist—(1) the species is threatened by

taking or other human activity, and

identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat

to the species, or (2) such designation of

critical habitat would not be beneficial

to the species.

In the December 3, 1999, proposed

rule, we did not propose a critical

habitat determination for Silene

spaldingii. We stated that we would

publish a critical habitat determination

for S. spaldingii in the Federal Register

subsequent to the proposed rule. The

Final Listing Priority Guidance for FY

1999/2000 (64 FR 57114) states that the

processing of critical habitat

determinations (prudency and

determinability decisions) and proposed

or final designations of critical habitat

‘‘will no longer be subject to

prioritization under the Listing Priority

Guidance. Critical habitat

determinations, which were previously

included in final listing rules published

in the Federal Register, may now be

processed separately, in which case

stand-alone critical habitat

determinations will be published as

notices in the Federal Register. We will

undertake critical habitat

determinations and designations during

FY 2000 as conservation efforts demand

and in light of resource constraints.’’ As

explained in detail in the Listing

Priority Guidance, our listing budget is

currently insufficient to allow us to

immediately complete all of the listing

actions required by the Act.

We now propose that designation of

critical habitat is prudent for Silene

spaldingii. In the last few years, a series

of court decisions have overturned

Service determinations regarding a

variety of species that designation of

critical habitat would not be prudent

(e.g., Natural Resources Defense Council

v. U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F.

3d 1121 (9th Cir. 1997); Conservation

Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp.

2d 1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the

standards applied in those judicial

opinions, we believe that designation of

critical habitat would be prudent for S.

spaldingii.

Due to the small number of

populations, Silene spaldingii is

vulnerable to unrestricted collection,

vandalism, or other disturbance. We are

concerned that these threats might be

exacerbated by the publication of

critical habitat maps and further

dissemination of locational information.

However, at this time we do not have

specific evidence for S. spaldingii of

taking, vandalism, collection, or trade of

this species or any similarly situated

species. Consequently, consistent with

applicable regulations (50 CFR

424.12(a)(1)(i)) and recent case law, we

believe that the identification of critical

habitat is unlikely to increase the degree

of threat to this species of taking or

other human activity.

In the absence of a finding that

identification of critical habitat would

increase threats to a species, if any

benefits would result from a critical

habitat designation, then a prudent

finding is warranted. In the case of this

species, designation of critical habitat

may provide some benefits. The primary

regulatory effect of critical habitat is the

section 7 requirement that Federal

agencies refrain from taking any action

that destroys or adversely modifies

critical habitat. While a critical habitat

designation for habitat currently

occupied by this species would not be

likely to change the section 7

consultation outcome because an action

that destroys or adversely modifies such

critical habitat would also be likely to

result in jeopardy to the species, in

certain instances, section 7 consultation

might be triggered only if critical habitat

is designated. Examples could include

unoccupied habitat or occupied habitat

that may become unoccupied in the

future. Designating critical habitat may

also provide some educational or

informational benefits. Therefore, we

propose that designation of critical

habitat is prudent for Silene spaldingii.

However, deferral of a critical habitat

designation for S. spaldingii would

allow us to concentrate our limited

resources on higher priority critical

habitat and other listing actions,

without delaying the final listing

decision. We anticipate in FY 2000 and

beyond giving higher priority to critical

habitat designation, including

designations deferred pursuant to the

Listing Priority Guidance, such as the

designation for this species, than we

have in recent fiscal years.

We plan to employ a priority system

for deciding which outstanding critical

habitat designations should be

addressed first. We will focus our efforts

on those designations that will provide

the most conservation benefit, taking

into consideration the efficacy of critical

habitat designation in addressing the

threats to the species, and the

magnitude and immediacy of those

threats. We will make the final critical

habitat determination with the final

listing determination for Silene

spaldingii. If this final critical habitat

determination is that designation of

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 21713

critical habitat is prudent, we will

develop a proposal to designate critical

habitat for S. spaldingii as soon as

feasible, considering our workload

priorities and budgetary capabilities.

Unfortunately, for the immediate future,

most of Region 1’s listing budget must

be directed to complying with

numerous court orders and settlement

agreements, as well as due and overdue

final listing determinations.

Public Comments Solicited

We intend that any final action

resulting from this proposal will be as

accurate and as effective as possible.

Therefore, we are soliciting comments

or suggestions from the public, other

concerned governmental agencies, the

scientific community, industry, or any

other interested party concerning this

proposed prudency determination and

the proposed listing of Silene spaldingii

as threatened. We are particularly

seeking comments concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to this species;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of this species and the

reasons why any habitat should or

should not be determined to be critical

habitat pursuant to section 4 of the Act;

(3) Additional information concerning

the range, distribution, and population

size of this species; and

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on this species.

We will take into consideration for

any decision on this proposal the

comments and additional information

we receive, and such communications

may lead to a final regulation that

differs from this proposal.

National Environmental Policy Act

We have determined that an

environmental assessment and

environmental impact statement, as

defined under the authority of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969, need not be prepared in

connection with regulations adopted

pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. We

published a notice outlining our reasons

for this determination in the Federal

Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR

49244).

Required Determinations

This rule does not contain any

information collection requirements for

which Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) approval under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq., is required. An information

collection related to the rule pertaining

to permits for endangered and

threatened species has OMB approval

and is assigned clearance number 1018–

0094. This rule does not alter that

information collection requirement. For

additional information concerning

permits and associated requirements for

threatened plants, see 50 CFR 17.72.

Authority

The authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531

et seq.).

Dated: April 5, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–10049 Filed 4–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P