Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75189 

mistakes, including misspellings; 

adding species based on new evidence 

of occurrence in the United States or 

U.S. territories; removing species no 

longer known to occur within the 

United States; and changing names 

based on new taxonomy. The net 

increase of 140 species (152 added and 

12 removed) would bring to 972 the 

total number of species protected by the 

MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703–711). 

We regulate most aspects of the 

taking, possession, transportation, sale, 

purchase, barter, exportation, and 

importation of migratory birds. An 

accurate and up-to-date list of species 

protected by the MBTA is essential for 

regulatory purposes. 

The comment period for the proposed 

rule ended October 23, 2006. We are 

reopening the comment period for an 

additional 15 days (see DATES) to allow 

interested persons additional time to 

prepare and submit comments. We will 

also consider all comments received 

between October 24, 2006 (the day after 

the close of the original comment 

period) and the date of this notice. 

Dated: December 5, 2006. 

David M. Verhey, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. E6–21313 Filed 12–13–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AU83 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Monterey Spineflower 

(Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In response to a settlement 

agreement, we, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

revise currently designated critical 

habitat for the Monterey spineflower 

(Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens) 

pursuant to the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, 

approximately 11,032 acres (ac) (4,466 

hectares (ha)) fall within the boundaries 

of the proposed revision to the critical 

habitat designation. The proposed 

revision to critical habitat is located in 

Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties, 

California. 

DATES: We will accept comments from 

all interested parties until February 12, 

2007. We must receive requests for 

public hearings, in writing, at the 

address shown in the ADDRESSES section 

by January 29, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, 

you may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposal by 

any one of several methods: 

1. You may mail or hand-deliver 

written comments and information to 

Diane Noda, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and 

Wildlife Office (VFWO), 2493 Portola 

Road, Suite B, Ventura, California 

93003. 

2. You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to 

fw8mosp@fws.gov. Please see the Public 

Comments Solicited section below for 

file format and other information about 

electronic filing. 

3. You may fax your comments to 

805/644–3958. 

4. You may go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments and materials received, as 

well as supporting documentation used 

in the preparation of this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection, 

by appointment, during normal business 

hours at the VFWO 2493 Portola Road, 

Suite B, Ventura, California 93003 

(telephone 805/644–1766). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diane Noda, Field Supervisor, VFWO, 

2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, 

California 93003, (telephone 805/644–

1766, ext. 319; facsimile 805/644–3958). 

Persons who use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800–877–8339, 7 days a week 

and 24 hours a day. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposal will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, comments or suggestions 

from the public, other concerned 

governmental agencies, the scientific 

community, industry, or any other 

interested party concerning this 

proposed rule are hereby solicited. 

Comments particularly are sought 

concerning: 

(1) The reasons 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 Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens habitat, and what 

areas should be included in the 

designations that were occupied at the 

time of listing that contain the features 

that are essential for the conservation of 

the species and why, and what areas 

that were not occupied at the time of 

listing are 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; 

(5) Whether our approach to 

designating critical habitat could be 

improved or modified in any way to 

provide for greater public participation 

and understanding, or to assist us in 

accommodating public concerns and 

comments; 

(6) This proposed designation’s 

revised criteria for determining essential 

features and critical habitat boundaries; 

and 

(7) The existence of any conservation 

or management plans being 

implemented by California State Parks, 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on 

former Fort Ord, or other public or 

private land management agencies or 

owners that we should consider for 

exclusion from the designation pursuant 

to section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Please 

include information on any benefits 

(educational, regulatory, etc.) of 

including or excluding lands from this 

proposed revised designation. 

If you wish to comment, you may 

submit your comments and materials 

concerning this proposal by any one of 

several methods (see ADDRESSES

section). Please submit Internet 

comments to fw8mosp@fws.gov in ASCII 

file format and avoid the use of special 

characters or any form of encryption. 

Please also include ‘‘Attn: Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens’’ 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 VFWO 

at phone number 805/644–1766, ext. 

333. Please note that the Internet 

address, fw8mosp@fws.gov, will be 

closed out at the termination of the 

public comment period. 

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 names and home 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75190 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

addresses, etc., but if you wish us to 

consider withholding this information, 

you must state this prominently at the 

beginning of your comments. In 

addition, you must present rationale for 

withholding this information. This 

rationale must demonstrate that 

disclosure would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. 

Unsupported assertions will not meet 

this burden. In the absence of 

exceptional, documentable 

circumstances, this information will be 

released. We will always make 

submissions from organizations or 

businesses, and from individuals 

identifying themselves as 

representatives of or officials of 

organizations or businesses, available 

for public inspection in their entirety. 

Role of Critical Habitat in Actual 

Practice of Administering and 

Implementing the Act 

Attention to and protection of habitat 

is paramount to successful conservation 

actions. The role that designation of 

critical habitat plays in protecting 

habitat of listed species, however, is 

often misunderstood. As discussed in 

more detail below in the discussion of 

exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, there are significant limitations on 

the regulatory effect of designation 

under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. In brief, 

(1) designation provides additional 

protection to habitat only where there is 

a Federal nexus; (2) the protection is 

relevant only when, in the absence of 

designation, destruction or adverse 

modification of the critical habitat 

would in fact take place (in other words, 

other statutory or regulatory protections, 

policies, or other factors relevant to 

agency decision-making would not 

prevent the destruction or adverse 

modification); and (3) designation of 

critical habitat triggers the prohibition 

of destruction or adverse modification 

of that habitat, but it does not require 

specific actions to restore or improve 

habitat. 

Currently, only 476 species, or 36 

percent of the 1,311 listed species in the 

U.S. under the jurisdiction of the 

Service, have designated critical habitat. 

We address the habitat needs of all 

1,311 listed species through 

conservation mechanisms such as 

listing, section 7 consultations, the 

Section 4 recovery planning process, the 

Section 9 protective prohibitions of 

unauthorized take, Section 6 funding to 

the States, the Section 10 incidental take 

permit process, and cooperative, 

nonregulatory efforts with private 

landowners. The Service believes that it 

is these measures that may make the 

difference between extinction and 

survival for many species. 

In considering exclusions of areas 

proposed for designation, we evaluated 

the benefits of designation in light of 

Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th 

Cir 2004) (hereinafter Gifford Pinchot). 

In that case, the Ninth Circuit 

invalidated the Service’s regulation 

defining ‘‘destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat.’’ In 

response, on December 9, 2004, the 

Director issued guidance to be 

considered in making section 7 adverse 

modification determinations. This 

proposed critical habitat designation 

does not use the invalidated regulation 

in our consideration of the benefits of 

including areas. The Service will 

carefully manage future consultations 

that analyze impacts to designated 

critical habitat, particularly those that 

appear to be resulting in an adverse 

modification determination. Such 

consultations will be reviewed by the 

Regional Office prior to finalizing to 

ensure that an adequate analysis has 

been conducted that is informed by the 

Director’s guidance. 

On the other hand, to the extent that 

designation of critical habitat provides 

protection, that protection can come at 

significant social and economic cost. In 

addition, the mere administrative 

process of designation of critical habitat 

is expensive, time-consuming, and 

controversial. The current statutory 

framework of critical habitat, combined 

with past judicial interpretations of the 

statute, make critical habitat the subject 

of excessive litigation. As a result, 

critical habitat designations are driven 

by litigation and courts rather than 

biology, and made at a time and under 

a time frame that limits our ability to 

obtain and evaluate the scientific and 

other information required to make the 

designation most meaningful. 

In light of these circumstances, the 

Service believes that additional agency 

discretion would allow our focus to 

return to those actions that provide the 

greatest benefit to the species most in 

need of protection. 

Procedural and Resource Difficulties in 

Designating Critical Habitat 

We have been inundated with 

lawsuits for our failure to designate 

critical habitat, and we face a growing 

number of lawsuits challenging critical 

habitat determinations once they are 

made. These lawsuits have subjected the 

Service to an ever-increasing series of 

court orders and court-approved 

settlement agreements, compliance with 

which now consumes nearly the entire 

listing program budget. This leaves the 

Service with little ability to prioritize its 

activities to direct scarce listing 

resources to the listing program actions 

with the most biologically urgent 

species conservation needs. 

The consequence of the critical 

habitat litigation activity is that limited 

listing funds are used to defend active 

lawsuits, to respond to Notices of Intent 

(NOIs) to sue relative to critical habitat, 

and to comply with the growing number 

of adverse court orders. As a result, 

listing petition responses, the Service’s 

own proposals to list critically 

imperiled species, and final listing 

determinations on existing proposals are 

all significantly delayed. 

The accelerated schedules of courtordered designations have left the 

Service with limited ability to provide 

for public participation or to ensure a 

defect-free rulemaking process before 

making decisions on listing and critical 

habitat proposals, due to the risks 

associated with noncompliance with 

judicially imposed deadlines. This in 

turn fosters a second round of litigation 

in which those who fear adverse 

impacts from critical habitat 

designations challenge those 

designations. The cycle of litigation 

appears endless, and is very expensive, 

thus diverting resources from 

conservation actions that may provide 

relatively more benefit to imperiled 

species. 

The costs resulting from the 

designation include legal costs, the cost 

of preparation and publication of the 

designation, the analysis of the 

economic effects and the cost of 

requesting and responding to public 

comment, and in some cases the costs 

of compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 

U.S.C. 4371 et seq.). These costs, which 

are not required for many other 

conservation actions, directly reduce the 

funds available for direct and tangible 

conservation actions. 

Background 

It is our intent to discuss only those 

topics directly relevant to the 

designation of critical habitat in this 

proposed revision to the critical habitat 

designation. Detailed background 

information covering the appearance, 

seed ecology, habitat requirements, and 

the historical and current distribution 

for Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

was published in the final designation 

of critical habitat for Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens on May 29, 2002 

(67 FR 37498). Additional information 

on C. p. var. pungens is also available 

in the final listing rule published in the 

Federal Register on February 4, 1994 

(59 FR 5499). 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75191 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

(Monterey spineflower) is endemic to 

sandy soils in active dune systems, and 

bluffs featuring deposited windblown 

sands, in coastal areas in southern Santa 

Cruz and northern Monterey Counties 

(Reveal and Hardham 1989, pp. 124–

125; Ertter 1990, p. 5). These areas 

feature open spaces between dominant 

vegetative elements that are dynamic 

and generally maintained through time 

via wind, fire, or other types of 

disturbance. Populations are also found 

in grassland, scrub, chaparral, and 

woodland habitats, featuring sandy soils 

and openings that are free of other 

vegetation. The furthest inland 

population is found in the Salinas 

Valley in interior Monterey County. 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is 

one of two varieties of the species C. 

pungens. The other variety, C. p. var. 

hartwegiana (Ben Lomond spineflower) 

is restricted to the Santa Cruz 

Mountains, generally between Scotts 

Valley and Ben Lomond. The ranges of 

these two varieties of C. pungens do not 

overlap. The range of C. p. var. pungens 

partially overlaps with another closely 

related taxon, Chorizanthe robusta var. 

robusta (robust spineflower), in 

southern Santa Cruz County. 

Chorizanthe pungens var. hartwegiana 

and C. r. var. robusta are both listed as 

federally-endangered species (59 FR 

5499). A detailed description of these 

related taxa is available in the Recovery 

Plan for Seven Coastal Plants and the 

Myrtle’s Silverspot Butterfly (Service 

1998), the Recovery Plan for Insect and 

Plant Taxa in the Santa Cruz Mountains 

in California (Service 1998), the 

Recovery Plan for the Robust 

Spineflower (Service 2004), and 

scientific literature cited within these 

plans. A recent study on the genetic 

relationships between various 

spineflower taxa in the central coast 

region of California noted genetic 

variability between populations of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

located at four sites between Sunset 

State Beach and Marina State Beach 

(Brinegar 2006, pp. 6–10). 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is 

an annual species that produces one 

seed per flower, and depending on the 

vigor of an individual plant, dozens to 

over one hundred seeds can be 

produced (Abrams 1944, F35–1; Fox et 

al. 2006, pp. 162–163). Seed dispersal in 

C. p. var. pungens is likely facilitated by 

hooked spines on the structure 

surrounding the seed. In the 

Chorizanthe genus, these are believed to 

attach to passing animals and disperse 

seed between plant colonies and 

populations (Reveal 2001, unpaginated). 

Wind also disperses seed within 

colonies and populations. 

New information concerning the seed 

bank of Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens was published in 2006 (Fox et 

al. 2006, pp. 157–170). This 5-year 

study found that the density of C. p. var 

pungens was directly related to the 

previous year’s seed set and, based on 

these observations, suggests that C. p. 

var. pungens apparently germinates well 

under most winter conditions and does 

not develop an extensive persistent soil 

seed bank. Consequently, this new 

information suggests that protection of 

existing plants in any year is important 

to the long-term conservation of C. p. 

var. pungens because the species 

persistence relies primarily on the 

previous year’s seed set as opposed to 

a large dormant seed bank that remains 

viable for decades. If this hypothesis is 

correct, loss of above-ground 

individuals prior to seed set could 

ultimately have more of an impact on 

populations than was previously 

thought. However, there exist anecdotal 

reports of C. p. var. pungens reappearing 

in several areas after habitat restoration 

efforts removed dense cover of iceplant. 

This tends to support the idea that, 

under some conditions, at least, a soil 

seed bank that persists for several years 

may be present and substantial enough 

to repopulate a site. 

A pollination ecology study was 

conducted on the related Chorizanthe 

robusta var. robusta in Santa Cruz 

County that compared the pollination 

ecology of coastal and inland 

populations (Murphy 2003b, pp. 1–78). 

The study found that, although this 

species may self-pollinate, pollinator 

access to flowers increased seed set 

significantly, indicating that pollinators 

increase plant reproductive success. 

This same study noted a high diversity 

of pollinators and correlated that 

diversity, in part, to variation in 

microhabitat conditions, including 

exposure; proximity to the coast; and 

structure, composition, and density of 

the surrounding vegetation (Murphy 

2003b, pp. 28–63). Results suggest that 

protecting pollinator habitat and 

diversity is likely to be important to the 

survival of this taxon. These results can 

be inferred to C. p. var. pungens as these 

two taxa occur in proximity to each 

other at several locations (Sunset and 

Manresa State Beaches), occupy similar 

habitats and plant communities, and are 

similar genetically (Brinegar 2006, p. 13) 

and phenotypically (the outward 

appearance of the plant). 

The historical range of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens was more 

extensive than what it is now known to 

occupy. Collections from the late 1800s 

and the first half of the 1900s indicate 

that the species occurred along the coast 

as far south as the San Simeon area in 

San Luis Obispo County (Consortium of 

California Herbaria 2006). In Monterey 

County, numerous collections were 

made from the Salinas Valley. However, 

this area has been largely converted to 

agriculture and habitat no longer 

remains; the last collection was made in 

1920 (Consortium of California Herbaria 

2006). This taxon currently occupies the 

entire range identified in the final 

listing rule (59 FR 5499). 

Current information concerning the 

presence of populations throughout its 

range is summarized here. Current 

information about populations on 

former Fort Ord, is from surveys 

conducted between 1992 and 2004, and 

provides more detail than the 

information available at the time of 

listing (e.g., BLM 2006). Former Fort 

Ord is a closed military installation 

which is in the process of being 

remediated and transferred for reuse. 

Reuse will include residential, 

recreational, and commercial 

development, as well as conservation of 

lands in habitat reserves. A response to 

our request for information (Service 

2006) from the California Department of 

Parks and Recreation (CDPR) (CDPR 

2006a) confirms that populations at 

Manresa and Sunset State Beaches are 

stable and that the Sunset State Beach 

population is expanding due to habitat 

restoration activities (primarily removal 

of nonnative European beachgrass 

(Ammophila arenaria)). Occurrence 

records for the eastern Prunedale unit 

were provided by the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 

from surveys conducted for the 

Highway 101 re-route study in 2001 

(Caltrans 2001). A small population 

which was thought to be extirpated at 

the former U.S. Coast Guard’s Light 

Station, Point Pinos property, very close 

to the northern boundary of the 

Asilomar unit, was rediscovered during 

recent surveys (Kephart 2004, p. 1). 

Also, recent surveys at the Monterey 

Peninsula Airport (Environmental 

Science Associates 2004, pp. 3.12–3.13) 

and leased properties surrounding the 

Monterey Peninsula Airport provide 

information about populations in the 

Del Rey Oaks area. Records that have 

been prepared, but not yet submitted, 

for entry into the CNDDB database were 

reviewed for some areas, including the 

Armstrong Ranch, Prunedale, Elkhorn 

Slough, and Aromas. Service staff also 

conducted site visits at various locations 

between 2001 and the present. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75192 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Previous Federal Actions 

For more information on previous 

Federal actions concerning Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens, refer to the final 

listing rule published in the Federal 

Register on February 4, 1994 (59 FR 

5499), and the designation of critical 

habitat for C. p. var. pungens published 

in the Federal Register on May 29, 2002 

(67 FR 37498). In September 1998, we 

published a recovery plan for seven 

coastal plants and the Myrtle’s 

silverspot butterfly which included C. p. 

var. pungens. On May 29, 2002, we 

designated critical habitat for 

approximately 18,829 acres (ac) (7,620 

hectares (ha)) of land in Santa Cruz and 

Monterey Counties, California. In March 

2005, the Homebuilders Association of 

Northern California, et al., filed suit 

against the Service (CV–013630LKK–

JFM) challenging final critical habitat 

rules for several species, including 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. In 

March 2006, a settlement was reached 

that requires the Service to re-evaluate 

five final critical habitat designations, 

including critical habitat designated for 

C. p. var. pungens. The settlement 

stipulated that any proposed revisions 

to the C. p. var. pungens designation 

would be submitted to the Federal 

Register for publication on or before 

December 7, 2006. 

Critical Habitat 

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 geographical 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, as defined under 

section 3 of the Act means to use and 

the use of all methods and procedures 

which are necessary to bring any 

endangered species or threatened 

species to the point at which the 

measures provided under the Act are no 

longer necessary. Such methods and 

procedures include, but are not limited 

to, all activities associated with 

scientific resources management such as 

research, census, law enforcement, 

habitat acquisition and maintenance, 

propagation, live trapping, and 

transplantation, and, in the 

extraordinary case where population 

pressures within a given ecosystem 

cannot be otherwise relieved, may 

include regulated taking. 

Critical habitat receives protection 

under section 7 of the Act through the 

prohibition against destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat 

with regard to actions carried out, 

funded, or authorized by a Federal 

agency. Section 7 requires consultation 

on Federal actions that are likely to 

result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat. The 

designation of critical habitat does not 

affect land ownership or establish a 

refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or 

other conservation area. Such 

designation does not allow government 

or public access to private lands. 

Section 7 is a purely protective measure 

and does not require implementation of 

restoration, recovery, or enhancement 

measures. 

To be included in a critical habitat 

designation, the habitat within the area 

occupied by the species must first have 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species. Critical 

habitat designations identify, to the 

extent known using the best scientific 

data available, habitat areas that provide 

essential life cycle needs of the species 

(i.e., areas on which are found the 

primary constituent elements, as 

defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)). 

Habitat occupied at the time of listing 

may be included in critical habitat only 

if the essential features thereon may 

require special management or 

protection. Thus, we do not include 

areas where existing management is 

sufficient to conserve the species. (As 

discussed below, such areas may also be 

excluded from critical habitat under 

section 4(b)(2).) Accordingly, when the 

best available scientific data do not 

demonstrate that the conservation needs 

of the species require additional areas, 

we will not designate critical habitat in 

areas outside the geographical area 

occupied by the species at the time of 

listing. An area currently occupied by 

the species but was not known to be 

occupied at the time of listing will 

likely, but not always, be essential to the 

conservation of the species and, 

therefore, typically included in the 

critical habitat designation. 

The Service’s Policy on Information 

Standards Under the Endangered 

Species Act, published in the Federal 

Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271), 

and Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (P.L. 106–554; 

H.R. 5658) and the associated 

Information Quality Guidelines issued 

by the Service, provide criteria, 

establish procedures, and provide 

guidance to ensure that decisions made 

by the Service represent the best 

scientific data available. They require 

Service biologists to the extent 

consistent with the Act and with the use 

of the best scientific data available, to 

use primary and original sources of 

information as the basis for 

recommendations to designate critical 

habitat. When determining which areas 

are critical habitat, a primary source of 

information is generally the listing 

package for the species. Additional 

information sources include the 

recovery plan for the species, articles in 

peer-reviewed journals, conservation 

plans developed by States and counties, 

scientific status surveys and studies, 

biological assessments, or other 

unpublished materials and expert 

opinion or personal knowledge. All 

information is used in accordance with 

the provisions of Section 515 of the 

Treasury and General Government 

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 

(Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 5658) and the 

associated Information Quality 

Guidelines issued by the Service. 

Section 4 of the Act requires that we 

designate critical habitat and make 

revisions thereto on the basis of the best 

scientific data available. Habitat is often 

dynamic, and species may move from 

one area to another over time. 

Furthermore, we recognize that 

designation of critical habitat may not 

include all of the habitat areas that may 

eventually be determined to be 

necessary for the recovery of the 

species. For these reasons, critical 

habitat designations do not signal that 

habitat outside the designation is 

unimportant or may not be required for 

recovery. 

Areas that support populations, but 

are outside the critical habitat 

designation, will continue to be subject 

to conservation actions implemented 

under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and to 

the regulatory protections afforded by 

the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as 

determined on the basis of the best 

available information at the time of the 

action. Federally funded or permitted 

projects affecting listed species outside 

their designated critical habitat areas 

may still result in jeopardy findings in 

some cases. Similarly, critical habitat 

designations made on the basis of the 

best available information at the time of 

designation will not control the 

direction and substance of future 

recovery plans, habitat conservation 

plans, or other species conservation 

planning efforts if new information 

available to these planning efforts calls 

for a different outcome. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75193 

Methods 

As required by section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, we used the best scientific data 

available in determining areas that 

contain the features that are essential to 

the conservation of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens. This includes 

information from the final listing rule; 

data from research and survey 

observations published in peerreviewed articles; reports and survey 

forms prepared for Federal, State, local 

agencies, and private corporations; site 

visits; regional Geographic Information 

System (GIS) layers, including soil and 

species coverages; and data submitted to 

the California Natural Diversity 

Database (CNDDB). We have also 

reviewed available information that 

pertains to the ecology, life history, and 

habitat requirements of this species. 

This material included information and 

data in peer-reviewed articles; reports of 

monitoring and habitat 

characterizations; reports submitted 

during section 7 consultations; our 

recovery plan for the species; and 

information received from local species 

experts. We are not proposing to 

designate as critical habitat any areas 

not occupied at the time of listing and 

presently occupied by the species. 

At the time of the final listing in 1994, 

it was thought that approximately 70 

percent of the range of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens occurred on Fort 

Ord; C. p. var. pungens was reported 

from approximately two-thirds of the 

installation at varying densities (U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) 1992, 

Figure F–3). Fort Ord was considered 

the most important inland occurrence of 

C. p. var. pungens because of the extent 

of habitat the species occupied at this 

location. Further refined mapping of 

occurrences in the Prunedale area, north 

of Fort Ord, and extensions of inland 

occurrences (that were reported at the 

time of the final listing) have been 

identified over the last few years. This 

more complete information on the 

relative distribution of the species 

within its known range has led us to 

conclude that preserving the population 

on Fort Ord, as well as several inland 

sites is important to the long-term 

conservation of the species. 

Primary Constituent Elements 

In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) 

of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12, in determining which areas to 

propose as critical habitat, we consider 

those physical and biological features 

(PCEs) that are essential to the 

conservation of the species, and within 

areas occupied by the species at the 

time of listing, that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. These include, but are not 

limited to space for individual and 

population growth and for normal 

behavior; food, water, air, light, 

minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; cover or 

shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, 

and rearing (or development) of 

offspring; and habitats that are protected 

from disturbance or are representative of 

the historic geographical and ecological 

distributions of a species. 

The specific primary constituent 

element required for Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens is derived from 

the biological needs of C. p. var. 

pungens as described in the Background 

section of this proposal and referenced 

in the previous designation for critical 

habitat published in the Federal 

Register. 

Space for Individual and Population 

Growth, Including Sites for Seed 

Dispersal and Germination; and for the 

Seed Bank 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

readily grows where suitable sandy 

substrates occur and, like other 

Chorizanthe species, where competition 

with other plant species is minimal 

(Harding Lawson Associates 2000, p. 1; 

Reveal 2001, unpaginated). Where C. p. 

var. pungens occurs within native plant 

communities, along the coast as well as 

at more interior sites, it occupies 

microhabitat sites found between shrub 

stands where there is little cover from 

other herbaceous species. Where C. p. 

var. pungens occurs within grassland 

communities, the density of C. p. var. 

pungens may decrease with an increase 

in the density of other herbaceous 

species. Conserved areas should be of 

sufficient size to maintain the native 

plant communities that support C. p. 

var. pungens which include coastal 

dune, coastal scrub, grassland, maritime 

chaparral, oak woodland, and interior 

floodplain dune communities and have 

a structure with openings between the 

dominant elements (Service 1998, p. 

20). 

These openings within the vegetation 

community should be free of nonnative 

invasive plant species. Not only do 

invasive, non-native plants physically 

exclude C. p. var. pungens seedlings, 

but many of the hymenopteran 

(members of the insect order that 

includes bees, wasps, and ants) 

pollinators important to Chorizanthe 

pollination (e.g., sphecid wasps, 

bumblebees, and bees from the families, 

Halictidae and Anthophoridae), require 

bare ground for nesting (Murphy 2003a, 

p 4). Removal of invasive non-native 

species may help to maintain existing 

rates of pollinator visitation. Although 

areas with little or no cover of nonnative invasive species may be optimal 

for the conservation of C. p. var. 

pungens, seeds that subsequently 

germinate may still be present beneath 

the canopy of the non-native invasive 

plants. 

Conservation of Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens depends not only on 

adequate space for growth, but also on 

maintaining the dynamic nature of C. p. 

var. pungens habitat, which ensures the 

availability of microsites appropriate for 

germination and growth. Coastal dune 

communities are subject to natural 

dynamic processes that create suitable 

openings in scrub and chaparral 

communities (Cooper 1967, pp. 63–72; 

Barbour and Johnson 1988, p. 242). 

Shifts in habitat composition caused by 

patterns of dune mobilization that create 

openings suitable for C. p. var. pungens 

are followed by stabilization and 

successional trends in coastal dune 

scrub that result in increased vegetation 

cover over time (Barbour and Johnson 

1988, p. 242). Accordingly, over time 

there are shifts in the distribution and 

size of individual colonies of C. p. var. 

pungens found in the gaps between 

shrub vegetation. 

Human-caused disturbances, such as 

scraping of roads and firebreaks, can 

reduce the competition from other 

herbaceous species and consequently 

provide favorable conditions for 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. This 

has been observed at former Fort Ord 

where C. p. var. pungens occurs along 

the margins of dirt roads (ACOE 1992, 

p. 39; U.S. BLM 2003, pp. 15–22). 

However, such activities can also 

promote the spread and establishment 

of non-native species, can bury the 

seedbank of C. p. var. pungens, and do 

not result in the cycling of nutrients and 

soil microbial changes that are 

associated with large-scale natural 

disturbances, such as fires (Stylinski 

and Allen 1999, pp. 544–554; Keeley 

and Keeley 1989, pp. 67–70). This type 

of management may not sustain 

populations over the long term and 

would likely result in a general 

degradation of habitat for C. p. var. 

pungens if conducted over large areas. 

Conservation of Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens depends on adequate 

space to promote pollinator activity and 

decrease the edge effects associated with 

urban development. Larger areas with a 

high volume-to-edge ratio are less likely 

to be affected by the range of human 

activities that would alter adjacent C. p. 

var. pungens habitat. Potential edge 

effects identified for other Chorizanthe 

species that may also affect C. p. var. 

pungens include the introduction of 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75194 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

non-native plants (e.g., landscaping 

plants), roadside mowing for fuel 

reduction, informal recreation, trash and 

landscape waste dumping, hydrologic 

changes from landscape watering or 

increased paved surfaces, and pesticide 

drift (Conservation Biology Institue 

2000, pp. 6–17). Large occurrences of C. 

p. var. pungens are more likely to attract 

insect pollinators necessary for the 

production of viable seed and promote 

gene flow, to withstand periodic 

extreme environmental stresses (e.g., 

drought, disease), and may act as 

important ‘‘source’’ populations to 

allow recolonization of surrounding 

areas following periodic extreme 

environmental stresses (Schemske et al., 

pp. 584–588). Small patches of plants 

have been documented to suffer 

reproductive failure due to lack of 

effective pollination when critical 

thresholds of isolation were exceeded. 

In contrast, sufficiently large patches 

attracted pollinators regardless of their 

degree of isolation (Groom 1998, p. 487). 

However, small populations of plants 

may serve other functions that support 

the long-term persistence of the species. 

They may serve as corridors for gene 

flow between larger populations, and 

may harbor greater levels of genetic 

diversity than predicted for their size 

(Lesica and Allendorf 1991, pp. 172–

175). 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

appears to function as an opportunistic 

annual plant, most of its seeds 

germinating under variable winter 

conditions, rather than persisting to 

create an extensive, long-lasting soil 

seed bank (Fox et al. 2006, p. 168). This 

highlights the importance of protecting 

above-ground plants from germination 

through seed set each year 

(approximately December through the 

following September), as it appears the 

persistence of C. p. var. pungens relies 

on successful seed set from the previous 

year in addition to adequate climatic 

conditions. This has implications for the 

amount of successive disturbance that 

C. p. var. pungens can endure and still 

persist. Management activities that are 

used for non-native invasive species 

removal, such as mowing prior to seed 

development, are unlikely to be 

compatible with the long-term 

persistence of C. p. var. pungens. 

Areas That Provide the Basic 

Requirements for Growth (Such as 

Water, Light, and Minerals) 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

occurs on sandy soils with a variable 

origin, including active dunes, interior 

fossil dunes, and floodplain alluvium 

(Service 1998, pp 1–13, 20). The most 

prevalent soil series represented are 

coastal beaches, dune sand, Baywood 

sand, Oceano loamy sand, Arnold loamy 

sand, Santa Ynez fine sandy loam, 

Arnold-Santa Ynez complex, Metz 

loamy sand, and Metz complex (Soil 

Conservation Service 1978, pp 13–73, 

1980, pp. 9–81). Sites where C. p. var. 

pungens occurs are generally bare, 

sandy patches free of other vegetation 

(Zoger and Pavlik 1987, unpaginated). 

On the coast, it occurs in coastal dune 

scrub and chaparral communities 

(Service 1998, pp 19–20; CNDDB 2006). 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens does 

not occur under dense stands of 

vegetation, but will occur between more 

widely-spaced shrubs or gaps in the 

shrub vegetation. At more inland sites, 

C. p. var. pungens occurs on sandy, 

well-drained soils in a variety of habitat 

types, most frequently maritime 

chaparral, valley oak woodlands, and 

grasslands (CNDDB 2006). In grassland 

and oak woodland communities, 

abundant annual grasses may 

outcompete C. p. var. pungens, but in 

places where grass species are 

controlled through grazing, mowing, or 

fire activities that are appropriate in 

timing and intensity, C. p. var. pungens 

may persist (e.g. Zander Associates 

2003, pp. B.22–B.24; Morgan 2006). 

Additional specific information about 

the native plant communities associated 

with C. p. var. pungens can be found in 

the listing rule notice (59 FR 5499) and 

the final critical habitat designation (67 

FR 37498). 

Primary Constituent Elements for 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

Pursuant to our regulations, we are 

required to identify the known physical 

and biological features (PCEs) essential 

to the conservation of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens. All areas 

proposed as critical habitat for C. p. var. 

pungens were occupied at the time of 

listing and are presently occupied, 

within the species’ historic geographic 

range, and contain the PCE to support 

at least one life history function. 

Based on our current knowledge of 

the life history, biology, and ecology of 

the species and the requirements of the 

habitat to sustain the essential life 

history functions of the species, we have 

determined that the PCE for 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is: 

1. A vegetation structure arranged in a 

mosaic with openings between the dominant 

elements (e.g., scrub, shrub, oak trees, 

clumps of herbaceous vegetation) providing 

for sunlight on the following sandy soils: 

coastal beaches, dune land, Baywood sand, 

Ben Lomond sandy loam, Elder sandy loam, 

Oceano loamy sand, Arnold loamy sand, 

Santa Ynez fine sandy loam, Arnold-Santa 

Ynez complex, Metz complex, and Metz 

loamy sand. 

This proposed revision to the critical 

habitat designation is designed for those 

areas containing the PCE necessary to 

support the life history functions that 

were the basis for the proposal. Each of 

the areas proposed in this rule have 

been determined to contain the PCE to 

provide for the life history functions of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. 

Units are proposed for designation 

based on the PCE being present to 

support one or more of the species’ life 

history functions. 

Criteria Used To Identify Critical 

Habitat 

As required by section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, we use the best scientific data 

available in determining areas that 

contain the features that are essential to 

the conservation of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens. This includes 

information from the final listing rule; 

data from research and survey 

observations published in peerreviewed articles; reports and survey 

forms prepared for Federal, State, and 

local agencies, and private corporations; 

site visits; regional Geographic 

Information System (GIS) layers, 

including soil and species coverages; 

and data submitted to the California 

Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 

We have also reviewed available 

information that pertains to the ecology, 

life history, and habitat requirements of 

this species. This material included 

information and data in peer-reviewed 

articles, reports of monitoring and 

habitat characterizations, reports 

submitted during section 7 

consultations, scientific information 

cited in our recovery plan, and 

information received from local species 

experts. We are not proposing to 

designate any areas outside of the areas 

occupied by the species at the time of 

listing. 

The long-term conservation of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is 

dependent upon the protection of 

existing population sites and the 

maintenance of ecologic functions, such 

as connectivity between populations 

within close geographic proximity to 

facilitate pollinator activity and seed 

dispersal. 

We are proposing to designate critical 

habitat on lands occupied by the species 

at the time of listing and that, according 

to the best available information, 

continue to be occupied to date. All 

proposed units contain the features 

essential to the conservation of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. We 

are not proposing any units that are 

unoccupied. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75195 

Determining the specific areas that 

this taxon occupies is challenging for 

several reasons: (1) The distribution of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

appears to be more closely tied to the 

presence of sandy soils and openings in 

the surrounding vegetation than to 

specific plant communities because 

plant communities may undergo 

changes over time, which, due to the 

degree of cover that is provided by that 

vegetation type, may either favor the 

presence of C. p. var. pungens or not; (2) 

the way the current distribution of C. p. 

var. pungens is mapped varies 

depending on the scale at which patches 

of individuals were recorded (e.g., many 

small patches versus one large patch); 

and (3) depending on the climate and 

other annual variations in habitat 

conditions, the extent of the 

distributions may either shrink and 

temporarily disappear, or enlarge and 

cover a more extensive area. 

We used a multi-step process to 

identify and delineate proposed critical 

habitat units. First we mapped all 

CNDDB records of Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens known at the time of the 

final listing in a GIS format. These data 

consist of points and polygons depicting 

the results of field surveys. Additional 

records from recent surveys that have 

been reported to the CNDDB but have 

not yet been entered into their database 

were also mapped in GIS format. These 

surveys provided more detailed 

distribution information for C. p. var. 

pungens within and around known 

occurrences, but did not extend the 

known range of the taxon. We then 

selected sites from among this data set 

that contain the necessary features 

essential to the conservation of C. p. var. 

pungens, that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection, and would result in a 

designation that: (a) Represents the 

geographic range of the species, and 

captures peripheral populations; (b) 

encompasses large occurrences in large 

areas of contiguous native habitat, as 

these have the highest likelihood of 

persisting through the environmental 

extremes that characterize California’s 

climate and of retaining the genetic 

variability to withstand future 

introduced stressors (e.g., new diseases, 

pathogens, or climate change); (c) 

includes the range of plant communities 

and soil types in which C. p. pungens 

is found; (d) maintains connectivity of 

occurrences; and (e) maintains the 

disturbance factors that create the 

openings in vegetation cover on which 

this taxon depends. 

Species and plant communities that 

are protected across their ranges are 

expected to have lower likelihoods of 

extinction (Soule and Simberloff 1986; 

Scott et al 2001, p. 1297–1300); 

therefore, proposed critical habitat 

should include multiple locations 

across the entire range of the species to 

prevent range collapse. Protecting 

peripheral or isolated populations is 

highly desirable because they may 

contain genetic variation not found in 

core populations. The genetic variation 

results from the effects of population 

isolation and adaptation to locally 

distinct environments (Lesica and 

Allendorf 1995, pp. 754–757; Fraser 

2000, pp. 49–51; Hamrick and Godt, pp. 

291–295). We also sought to include the 

range of plant communities, soil types, 

and elevational gradients in which 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is 

found to preserve the genetic variation 

that may result from adaptation to local 

environmental conditions, documented 

in other plant species (e.g. see Hamrick 

and Godt pp. 299–301; Millar and Libby 

1991, pp. 150, 152–155). Finally, habitat 

fragmentation can result in loss of 

genetic variation (Young et al. 1996, pp. 

413–417); therefore, we sought to 

maintain connectivity between patches 

or occurrences of plants. 

In determining the extent of lands to 

propose as critical habitat, we identified 

all areas which contain those biological 

and physical features essential to the 

conservation of the species and are 

either already protected, managed, or 

otherwise unencumbered by conflicting 

use (e.g., undeveloped County or City 

parks, proposed preservation areas). 

Populations in these areas are most 

likely to persist into the future and to 

contribute to the species’ survival and 

recovery. We added ownership 

categories to the proposed designation 

in the following manner: First we 

included undeveloped Federal and State 

lands, then local agency and private 

lands with recognized resource 

conservation emphasis (e.g., lands 

owned by a conservation-oriented nonprofit organization, undeveloped 

County or City parks), and finally other 

agency and private lands. 

Mapping 

To map the proposed revised critical 

habitat units, we overlaid Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens records on soil 

series data and, where available, 

vegetation data (e.g., maritime chaparral 

mapped by Van Dyke and Holl (2003)) 

to determine appropriate polygons that 

would contain the necessary habitat 

features essential to the conservation of 

C. p. var. pungens. This taxon is closely 

tied to the presence of sandy soil types, 

and occurrences are generally scattered 

between vegetation gaps within 

appropriate soil types. Units were 

delineated by first mapping the 

occurrences and soil types and 

considering other geographic features 

such as developed areas and road 

boundaries. 

When determining the proposed 

revisions to critical habitat boundaries 

within this proposed rule, we made 

every effort to avoid including 

developed areas, such as buildings, 

paved areas, and other structures, as 

well as tilled fields, row crops, and golf 

courses that lack the PCE for 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. The 

scale of the maps prepared under the 

parameters for publication within the 

Code of Federal Regulations may not 

reflect the non-inclusion of such 

developed areas. Any such structures 

and the land under them inadvertently 

left inside critical habitat boundaries 

shown on the maps of this proposed 

revision to critical habitat have been 

excluded by text in the proposed 

revision and are not proposed for 

designation as critical habitat. 

Therefore, Federal actions limited to 

these areas would not trigger section 7 

consultation, unless they affect the 

species and/or the primary constituent 

element in adjacent critical habitat. 

Using the above criteria we identified 

nine units that contain the necessary 

features essential to the conservation of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. 

Four units are located in southern Santa 

Cruz and northern Monterey County 

along the immediate coast; four are 

located in Monterey County inland from 

the Monterey Bay (including two in the 

Aptos area, one in the Prunedale area, 

and one at former Fort Ord); and one 

unit is located in the Salinas River 

Valley near Soledad. 

Units were designated based on the 

PCE being present to support 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens life 

processes. 

We are proposing to revise the critical 

habitat designation on lands that meet 

the first prong of the definition of 

critical habitat given previously and, 

therefore, were determined to be 

occupied at the time of listing and 

contain the primary constituent element 

to support life history functions 

essential for the conservation of the 

species. The proposed revision to 

critical habitat is designed to provide 

sufficient habitat to maintain selfsustaining populations of C. p. var. 

pungens throughout its range and 

provide those habitat components that 

have the necessary features that are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species. The habitat components 

provide for: (1) individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

germination, pollination, reproduction, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75196 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

pollen and seed dispersal; (2) areas that 

allow gene flow and provide 

connectivity between occupied areas; 

and (3) areas that provide basic 

requirements for growth, such as 

appropriate soil type and openings 

within vegetation cover. All proposed 

revised critical habitat units were 

delineated based on the PCE being 

present to support C. p. var. pungens 

life processes. 

Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act 

authorizes us to issue permits for the 

take of listed animal species incidental 

to otherwise lawful activities. An 

incidental take permit application must 

be supported by a habitat conservation 

plan (HCP) that identifies conservation 

measures that the permittee agrees to 

implement for the species to minimize 

and mitigate the impacts of the 

requested incidental take. We often 

exclude non-Federal public lands and 

private lands that are covered by an 

existing operative HCP and incidental 

take permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of 

the Act from designated critical habitat 

because the benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of inclusion as 

discussed in section 4(b)(2) of the Act. 

We are currently unaware of any areas 

within this critical habitat proposal that 

fall into this category. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protections 

When designating critical habitat, we 

assess whether the areas determined to 

be occupied at the time of listing and 

which contain the PCE may require 

special management considerations or 

protections. We have also considered 

how revising the current designation 

highlights habitat that needs special 

management consideration or 

protection. 

Many of the known occurrences of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens are 

threatened by direct and indirect effects 

from habitat fragmentation and loss, and 

edge effects resulting from urban 

development. Examples of edge effects 

include increases in invasive non-native 

species and increased trampling and 

soil compaction from recreation 

(Conservation Biology Institute 2000, p 

5). Additional threats to C. p. var. 

pungens include road development, 

invasive species control with 

herbicides, industrial and recreational 

development, equestrian and other 

recreational activities, and dune 

stabilization using non-native species 

(59 FR 5499). Threats that could result 

in unfavorable disturbance intensity, 

frequency, or timing and can destroy 

individual plants or deplete any 

associated seed bank include road 

maintenance, invasive species control, 

and fire suppression. These threats may 

require special management to ensure 

the long-term conservation of C. p. var. 

pungens. Threats specific to individual 

units are described in the following 

below titled ‘‘Proposed Revisions to the 

Critical Habitat Designation.’’

Summary of Changes From Previously 

Designated Critical Habitat 

The areas identified in this proposed 

rule constitute a proposed revision from 

the areas we designated as critical 

habitat for Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens on May 29, 2002 (67 FR 

37498). The main differences include 

the following: 

1. The 2002 critical habitat rule (67 

FR 37498) consisted of 10 units 

comprising a total of 18,829 acres (7,620 

ha). This proposed revision includes 9 

units comprising a total of 11,032 acres 

(ac) (4,466 ha). Eight of the units in the 

proposed revision are generally located 

in the same geographic locations as 

those from the previous designation and 

bear the same unit names. The ninth 

unit in this current proposed revision 

(Manresa) was included in the previous 

proposed critical habitat designation in 

2000, but dropped from the previous 

final designation in 2002 due to 

confusion concerning the identity of the 

spineflower populations that occur 

there. Since 2002, we confirmed the 

presence of Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens at Manresa State Beach. 

Additionally, two of the units included 

in the previous designation in 2002 

were not included in this proposed 

revision. One of these units, Del Rey 

Oaks, has substantial areas of 

development within its boundaries, and 

as a consequence the areas within the 

unit that contain the PCEs are very 

fragmented. The second of these units, 

Bel Mar, is in close proximity to the 

Manresa unit included in this proposed 

revision, but not included in the 2002 

critical habitat rule. The Monterey 

spineflower in the Manresa unit was 

recently discovered and contains a more 

robust population than the Bel Mar unit. 

For these reasons, the Del Rey Oaks and 

Bel Mar units are no longer considered 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. 

2. We revised the PCEs. The 2002 

critical habitat rule listed four separate 

elements that we believed to be 

important to maintaining populations of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens 

where they occur (soils, plant 

communities, low cover of non-native 

species, and physical processes that 

support natural dune dynamics). In our 

proposed revision of critical habitat, we 

have combined these four elements 

within one PCE in an effort to 

emphasize the overarching importance 

of the structure of the vegetation 

(mosaic with openings between the 

dominant elements). 

3. Most of the units in this proposed 

revision are smaller in acreage than 

their counterpart units in the 2002 

critical habitat rule. The decrease in size 

is due primarily to the removal of 

numerous parcels in private ownership 

where, due to the availability of updated 

aerial imagery, we removed areas of 

development included in the 2002 

critical habitat rule and areas developed 

since the publication of the prior rule. 

In addition, the changes to Unit 7 are 

due to the removal of areas in the 2002 

rule that are underlain by soil types not 

known to support Monterey 

spineflower, and removal of areas 

containing suitable soils isolated by 

development (and not known to support 

Monterey spineflower). The resulting 

units are more accurately mapped to 

include those areas that contain the 

PCEs. 

Proposed Revisions to the Critical 

Habitat Designation 

We are proposing nine critical habitat 

units for Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens. These units, which generally 

correspond to those units in the 2002 

designation, if finalized, would entirely 

replace the current critical habitat 

designation for Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens in 50 CFR 17.95(a). The 

critical habitat units described below 

constitute our best assessment at this 

time of areas determined to be occupied 

at the time of listing that contain the 

primary constituent element, and that 

may require special management. The 

nine proposed critical habitat units are: 

Sunset Unit 1, Moss Landing Unit 2, 

Marina Unit 3, Asilomar Unit 4, 

Freedom Boulevard Unit 5, Manresa 

Unit 6, Prunedale Unit 7, Fort Ord Unit 

8, and Soledad Unit 9. 

The approximate area encompassed 

within each proposed critical habitat 

unit is shown in Table 1. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75197 

TABLE 1.—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS PROPOSED FOR CHORIZANTHE PUNGENS VAR. PUNGENS

[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries] 1

Unit name 

State lands Private lands County and other 

local jurisdictions 

Federal lands Estimate of total 

acreages 

Acres Hectares Acres Hectares Acres Hectares Acres Hectares Acres Hectares 

1. Sunset .................. 85 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 35 

2. Moss Landing ....... 224 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 91 

3. Marina 2 ................ 884 358 0 0 0 0 0 0 884 358 

4. Asilomar ............... 40 16 0 0 4 2 4 1 48 19 

5. Freedom Blvd. ...... 0 0 24 10 0 0 0 0 24 10 

6. Manresa ............... 94 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 38 

7. Prunedale ............. 155 63 17 7 18 7 0 0 190 77 

8. Fort Ord 2 ............. 606 245 0 0 654 265 8,172 3,307 9,432 3,817 

9. Soledad ................ 0 0 51 21 0 0 0 0 51 21 

Approximate 

Total ............... 2,088 845 92 38 676 274 8,176 3,309 11,032 4,466 

1Approximate acres have been converted to hectares (1 ha = 2.47 ac). Based on the level of imprecision of mapping of each unit, hectares 

and acres greater than 10 have been rounded to the nearest 5; hectares and acres less than or equal to 10 have been rounded to the nearest 

whole number. Totals are sums of units. 2Acreages assigned to various landowner categories for the Fort Ord and Marina units (on former Fort Ord) reflect future land recipient, as indicated by 2006 Army records. 

We present descriptions of all units, 

and reasons why they meet the 

definition of critical habitat for 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens, 

below. 

Unit 1: Sunset (85 ac (35 ha)) 

This unit consists of coastal beaches, 

dunes, and bluffs located west of 

Watsonville in southern Santa Cruz 

County. Unit 1 contains space for 

individual and population growth, 

including sites for seed dispersal and 

germination; provides the basic 

requirements for growth; and includes 

soils primarily in the coastal beach, 

dune land, and Baywood sand series 

(Soil Conservation Service 1978, pp. 13–

25; 1980 (maps)) (PCE 1). This unit was 

occupied at the time of listing and is 

currently occupied (CNDDB 2006, CDPR 

2006a). This unit consists exclusively of 

State land (85 ac (35 ha)) and is entirely 

within the boundaries of Sunset State 

Beach. The unit includes land from 

Sunset Beach Road south to the gate on 

Shell Road, just north of the mouth of 

the Pajaro River, and west of Shell Road, 

which extends the length of the park. 

Unit 1 is important because it supports 

a large population of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens that in some years 

numbers in the tens of thousands 

(CNDDB 2006, CDPR 2006a). Threats 

that may require special management 

considerations or protection in this unit 

include invasive non-native plants, 

particularly European beachgrass which 

forms dense stands on coastal beaches 

and crowds out C. p. var. pungens, and 

recreational activities, including 

camping and foot traffic, which could 

result in the trampling of plants. 

Unit 2: Moss Landing (224 ac (91 ha)) 

This unit consists of coastal beaches, 

dunes, and bluffs to the north and south 

of the community of Moss Landing in 

northern Monterey County. Unit 2 

contains space for individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

seed dispersal and germination, and 

areas that provide for the basic 

requirements for growth, including soils 

in the coastal beach, and dune land 

series (Soil Conservation Service 1978, 

pp. 13–25) (PCE 1). The northern 

portion of this unit includes lands 

owned and managed by the State, 

including portions of Zmudowski State 

Beach and Moss Landing State Beach 

between the mouths of the Pajaro River 

and Elkhorn Slough. The southern 

portion of this unit includes State lands 

within Salinas River State Beach. This 

unit was occupied at the time of listing 

and was included in our previous 

critical habitat designation. Herbarium 

records indicate that this site was 

occupied as early as 1933 and has 

remained occupied through time 

(Consortium of California Herbaria 2006 

cites collections by H.S. Tates, 1936; T. 

Craig, 1933; J. Thomas, 1950). 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens was 

also recently observed in this unit 

(CDPR 2006b, unpaginated). This unit 

contains one of only five populations 

found along the coast, and it may 

provide connectivity between the 

Sunset unit to the north, and the Marina 

unit to the south. Threats that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection in this unit 

consist of invasive non-native plants, 

particularly ice-plant which forms 

dense ground cover on coastal beaches 

and crowds out C. p. var. pungens; and 

recreational activities including foot 

traffic, which could result in the 

trampling of plants. 

Unit 3: Marina (884 ac (358 ha)) 

This unit consists of coastal beaches, 

dunes, and bluffs ranging from just 

south of the mouth of the Salinas River, 

south to the city of Monterey in 

northern Monterey County; these lands 

are entirely west of Highway 1. Unit 3 

contains space for individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

seed dispersal and germination, and 

areas that provide for the basic 

requirements for growth, including soils 

in the coastal beach, dune land, and 

Oceano loamy sand soil series (Soil 

Conservation Service 1978, pp. 13–25, 

54–55) (PCE 1). This unit was occupied 

at the time of listing and it is currently 

occupied (CNDDB 2006, CDPR 2006, 

Service 2002 p. 54). Unit 3 is comprised 

of State lands, including Marina State 

Beach and Monterey State Beach. This 

unit is important because it supports a 

population of C. p. var. pungens that 

numbers in the thousands in some years 

(CNDDB 2006, Service 1998 p. 67); it is 

the southernmost of the Monterey Bay 

area coastal populations; and it may 

provide connectivity between the 

populations along the coast and the 

more interior populations found at 

former Fort Ord. Threats that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection in this unit 

consist of invasive non-native plants, 

particularly ice-plant which forms 

dense ground cover on coastal beaches 

and crowds out C. p. var. pungens; 

recreational activities such as foot traffic 

which could result in the trampling of 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75198 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

plants; and edge effects of urban 

development. 

Unit 4: Asilomar (48 ac (19 ha)) 

This unit consists of coastal dunes 

and bluffs near the communities of 

Pacific Grove and Pebble Beach on the 

Monterey Peninsula in northern 

Monterey County. The unit includes a 

portion of Asilomar State Beach and 

extends just beyond Lighthouse Avenue 

to the north and terminates at the 

boundary of the Asilomar Conference 

Grounds. The unit’s eastern boundary 

extends from Highway 68 north along 

Asilomar Avenue and then turns west 

on Arena Avenue where the boundary 

connects to Sunset Drive. Unit 4 

contains space for individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

seed dispersal and germination; and 

areas that provide for the basic 

requirements for growth, including soils 

in the coastal beach, dune land, and 

Baywood sand soil series (Soil 

Conservation Service 1978, pp. 13–25) 

(PCE 1). The unit is comprised of 4 ac 

(1 ha) of Federal lands, 40 ac (16 ha) of 

State lands at Asilomar State Beach, and 

4 ac (2 ha) of local government 

ownership. This unit was occupied at 

the time of listing and is currently 

occupied. Herbarium records that 

include specimens from this area 

include the following (collector and 

year): Lemmon 1881, L.C. Wheeler, 

1936, R. Hoover, 1941 and 1963, L.S. 

Rose 1963, (Consortium of California 

Herbaria 2006)). This unit currently 

supports a population of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens that numbers in 

the hundreds (Moss 2000, unpaginated). 

This unit is important because it is the 

southernmost of only five populations 

of C. p. var. pungens along the coast and 

it is the only Peninsular population in 

the proposed designation. Preserving 

the genetic characteristics that have 

allowed individuals at this site to 

survive at the southern end of the 

species’ range along the coast is 

important for the long-term survival and 

conservation of C. p. var. pungens. 

Threats that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection in this unit consist of 

invasive non-native plants, particularly 

ice-plant which forms dense ground 

cover on coastal beaches and crowds out 

C. p. var. pungens; recreational 

activities such as foot traffic which 

could result in the trampling of plants; 

and edge effects of urban development. 

An additional threat in this unit is the 

expansion of unregulated vehicle 

parking in the dunes caused by the high 

numbers of visitors this area receives 

each year. 

Unit 5: Freedom Boulevard (24 ac (10 

ha)) 

This unit consists of grassland, 

maritime chaparral, and oak woodland 

habitat near the western terminus of 

Freedom Boulevard and northeast of 

Highway 1 in Santa Cruz County. This 

unit consists entirely of private lands 

(24 ac (10 ha)). Unit 5 contains space for 

individual and population growth, 

including sites for seed dispersal and 

germination; areas that provide for the 

basic requirements for growth; and 

includes soils in the Baywood sand and 

Ben Lomond sandy loam series (Soil 

Conservation Service 1980, pp. 64–65; 

maps) (PCE 1). This unit was occupied 

at the time of listing and is currently 

occupied (CNDDB 2006, EOs 32 and 34; 

Morgan 2006, unpaginated). This unit 

currently supports a population of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens that 

numbers in the thousands in favorable 

years, but many fewer in unfavorable 

years (CNDDB 2006, EOs 32, 34). This 

unit is important because it is the 

northernmost occurrence in the 

designation. Threats that may require 

special management considerations or 

protection in this unit include invasive 

non-native plants, particularly annual 

grasses which crowd out C. p. var. 

pungens, and edge effects from urban 

development. 

Unit 6: Manresa (94 ac (38 ha)) 

This unit consists of coastal bluffs 

along the immediate coast, south of 

Seacliff State Beach and north of Sunset 

State Beach in Santa Cruz County. Unit 

6 contains space for individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

seed dispersal and germination, and 

areas that provide for the basic 

requirements for growth, including soils 

in the coastal beach, Baywood sand, and 

Elder sandy loam series (Soil 

Conservation Service 1980, pp. 11–70, 

maps (PCE 1). This unit is comprised 

entirely of lands owned and managed by 

the State at Manresa State Beach. This 

unit was occupied at the time of listing 

and is currently occupied. This unit is 

important because it is the most 

northerly population that is known from 

the immediate coast and provides 

connectivity to populations in the 

Sunset unit to the south. Threats that 

may require special management 

considerations or protection in this unit 

consist of invasive non-native plants, 

and recreational activities including foot 

traffic, which could result in the 

trampling of plants. 

Unit 7: Prunedale (190 ac (77 ha)) 

This unit consists of grassland, 

maritime chaparral, and oak woodland 

in the area around Prunedale in 

northern Monterey County. On the west 

side of Highway 101, the unit includes 

Manzanita County Park located between 

Castroville Boulevard and San Miguel 

Canyon Road. On the east side of 

Highway 101, the unit consists of four 

subunits. The four subunits support 

similar plant communities and need 

similar types of special management; 

therefore, we discuss them as a unit. 

Unit 7 contains space for individual and 

population growth, including sites for 

seed dispersal and germination, and 

areas that provide for the basic 

requirements for growth, including soils 

in the Arnold loamy sand, Santa Ynez 

fine sandy loam, and Arnold-Santa Ynez 

complex series (Soil Conservation 

Service 1978, pp. 9–11, 72–73) (PCE 1). 

This unit consists of 155 ac (63 ha) of 

State lands, 18 ac (7 ac) of local agency 

lands (Manzanita County Park), and 17 

ac (7 ha) of Pacific Gas and Electric 

easement lands. This unit was occupied 

at the time of listing and was included 

in our rule in reference to the Prunedale 

area (59 FR 5499) and is currently 

occupied (Caltrans 2001, Consortium of 

California Herbaria 2006). This unit is 

important because it is one of only four 

units that are known to support 

populations associated with maritime 

chaparral and oak woodland habitats 

more representative of hotter, interior 

sites and is the easternmost of the 

proposed units in the interior hills. 

Threats that may require special 

management considerations or 

protections in this unit include invasive 

non-native plants which crowd out C. p. 

var. pungens, edge effects from urban 

development, and recreational activities 

such as off road vehicles which can 

crush plants and destroy seeds. 

Unit 8: Fort Ord (9,432 ac (3,817 ha)) 

This unit consists of grassland, 

maritime chaparral, coastal scrub, and 

oak woodland on the former Department 

of Defense (DOD) base at Fort Ord, east 

of the city of Seaside in northern 

Monterey County. This unit is entirely 

within the area formerly known as Fort 

Ord, bounded by Highway 1 on the 

northwest, the Salinas River to the east, 

and Monterey-Salinas Road (Highway 

68) to the south. Approximately 87 

percent of this critical habitat unit is 

Federal land (8,172 ac (3,307 ha)) 

managed by the BLM and the Army, 6 

percent is State land, and 7 percent is 

under local jurisdictions. Portions of 

Fort Ord have been transferred to the 

BLM; University of California, Santa 

Cruz; California State University at 

Monterey Bay; and local city and county 

jurisdictions. All of the lands included 

in this unit are designated as current or 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75199 

future habitat reserves under the Army’s 

habitat management plan (ACOE 1997, 

Attachment A map; Zander Associates 

2002, Figures 4–6). Unit 8 contains 

space for individual and population 

growth, including sites for seed 

dispersal and germination, and areas 

that provide for the basic requirements 

for growth, and includes soils in the 

Arnold-Santa Ynez complex, Baywood 

sand, and Oceano loamy sand series 

(Soil Conservation Service 1978, pp. 9–

73). Lands in this unit are intended to 

be managed at a landscape scale, using 

prescribed fire, as needed, to maintain 

a range of different aged maritime 

chaparral stands (ACOE 1997, p. 4.24–

4.25) and by doing so preserve 

substantial populations of rare maritime 

chaparral species in the Monterey Bay 

area. This unit was occupied at the time 

of listing (59 FR 5499) and is currently 

occupied. This unit is important 

because it currently supports multiple 

large populations of Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens that number in 

the tens of thousands in some years 

(CNDDB 2006, EO 2; Jones and Stokes 

1992, Figure F–3; BLM 2006), and it is 

one of only five units which include 

maritime chaparral and oak woodland 

habitats more representative of hotter, 

interior sites. Threats that may require 

special management considerations or 

protection in this unit include invasive 

species that crowd out C. p. var. 

pungens, munitions clean-up methods 

on former ranges that remove and chip 

all standing vegetation, and recreational 

activities and road and trail 

maintenance, which could result in the 

trampling of plants. 

Unit 9: Soledad (51 ac (21 ha)) 

This unit consists of an interior dune 

in the floodplain of the Salinas River 

channel just south of the town of 

Soledad in central Monterey County on 

privately owned lands. Unit 9 contains 

space for individual and population 

growth, including sites for seed 

dispersal and germination, and areas 

that provide for the basic requirements 

for growth, including soils in the dune 

land and Metz complex soil series (Soil 

Conservation Service 1978, pp. 24, 48–

49) (PCE 1). This unit was occupied at 

the time of listing and is currently 

occupied. Approximately 5,000 plants 

were observed in this unit in 1994 

(CNDDB 2006 EO 28, Wesco 1994, pp. 

5–8). This unit is important because it 

is the southernmost interior location 

that supports a population and the only 

unit where Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens grows in interior floodplain 

dune habitat. This population is 

geographically remote from all others in 

this designation. Protecting peripheral 

or isolated populations of rare species is 

highly desirable because they may 

contain genetic variation not found in 

core populations (Lesica and Allendorf 

1995, p. 755–757) Threats that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection in this unit 

include invasive non-native plants 

which crowd out C. p. var. pungens; 

overspray of herbicides and pesticides 

from agricultural operations; and 

vegetation clearing activities associated 

with road maintenance. 

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation 

Section 7 Consultation 

Section 7 of the Act requires Federal 

agencies, including the Service, to 

ensure that actions they fund, authorize, 

or carry out are not likely to destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat. In our 

regulations at 50 CFR 402.02, we define 

destruction or adverse modification as 

‘‘a direct or indirect alteration that 

appreciably diminishes the value of 

critical habitat for both the survival and 

recovery of a listed species. Such 

alterations include, but are not limited 

to, alterations adversely modifying any 

of those physical or biological features 

that were the basis for determining the 

habitat to be critical.’’ However, recent 

decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit 

Court of Appeals have invalidated this 

definition (see Gifford Pinchot Task 

Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

378 F. 3d 1059 (9th Cir 2004) and Sierra 

Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et 

al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5th Cir 2001)). 

Pursuant to current national policy and 

the statutory provisions of the Act, 

destruction or adverse modification is 

determined on the basis of whether, 

with implementation of the proposed 

Federal action, the affected critical 

habitat would remain functional (or 

retain the current ability for the primary 

constituent elements to be functionally 

established) to serve the intended 

conservation role for the species. 

Section 7(a) of the Act requires 

Federal agencies, including the Service, 

to evaluate their actions with respect to 

any species that is proposed or listed as 

endangered or threatened and with 

respect to its critical habitat, if any is 

proposed or designated. Regulations 

implementing this interagency 

cooperation provision of the Act are 

codified at 50 CFR part 402. 

Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires 

Federal agencies to confer with us on 

any action that is likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of a proposed 

species or result in destruction or 

adverse modification of proposed 

critical habitat. This is a procedural 

requirement only. However, once 

proposed species becomes listed, or 

proposed critical habitat is designated 

as final, the full prohibitions of section 

7(a)(2) apply to any Federal action. The 

primary utility of the conference 

procedures is to maximize the 

opportunity for a Federal agency to 

adequately consider proposed species 

and critical habitat and avoid potential 

delays in implementing their proposed 

action as a result of the section 7(a)(2) 

compliance process, should those 

species be listed or the critical habitat 

designated. 

Under conference procedures, the 

Service may provide advisory 

conservation recommendations to assist 

the agency in eliminating conflicts that 

may be caused by the proposed action. 

The Service may conduct either 

informal or formal conferences. Informal 

conferences are typically used if the 

proposed action is not likely to have any 

adverse effects to the proposed species 

or proposed critical habitat. Formal 

conferences are typically used when the 

Federal agency or the Service believes 

the proposed action is likely to cause 

adverse effects to proposed species or 

critical habitat, inclusive of those that 

may cause jeopardy or adverse 

modification. 

The results of an informal conference 

are typically transmitted in a conference 

report; while the results of a formal 

conference are typically transmitted in a 

conference opinion. Conference 

opinions on proposed critical habitat are 

typically prepared according to 50 CFR 

402.14, as if the proposed critical 

habitat were designated. We may adopt 

the conference opinion as the biological 

opinion when the critical habitat is 

designated, if no substantial new 

information or changes in the action 

alter the content of the opinion (see 50 

CFR 402.10(d)). As noted above, any 

conservation recommendations in a 

conference report or opinion are strictly 

advisory. 

If a species is listed or critical habitat 

is designated, section 7(a)(2) of the Act 

requires Federal agencies to ensure that 

activities they authorize, fund, or carry 

out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of such a species or 

to destroy or adversely modify its 

critical habitat. If a Federal action may 

affect a listed species or its critical 

habitat, the responsible Federal agency 

(action agency) must enter into 

consultation with us. As a result of this 

consultation, compliance with the 

requirements of section 7(a)(2) will be 

documented through the Service’s 

issuance of: (1) a concurrence letter for 

Federal actions that may affect, but are 

not likely to adversely affect, listed 

species or critical habitat; or (2) a 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75200 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

biological opinion for Federal actions 

that may affect, but are likely to 

adversely affect, listed species or critical 

habitat. 

When we issue a biological opinion 

concluding that a project is likely to 

result in jeopardy to a listed species or 

the destruction or adverse modification 

of critical habitat, we also provide 

reasonable and prudent alternatives to 

the project, if any are identifiable. 

‘‘Reasonable and prudent alternatives’’

are defined at 50 CFR 402.02 as 

alternative actions identified during 

consultation that can be implemented in 

a manner consistent with the intended 

purpose of the action, that are consistent 

with the scope of the Federal agency’s 

legal authority and jurisdiction, that are 

economically and technologically 

feasible, and that the Director believes 

would avoid jeopardy to the listed 

species or destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat. 

Reasonable and prudent alternatives can 

vary from slight project modifications to 

extensive redesign or relocation of the 

project. Costs associated with 

implementing a reasonable and prudent 

alternative are similarly variable. 

Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require 

Federal agencies to reinitiate 

consultation on previously reviewed 

actions in instances where a new 

species is listed or critical habitat is 

subsequently designated that may be 

affected and the Federal agency has 

retained discretionary involvement or 

control over the action or such 

discretionary involvement or control is 

authorized by law. Consequently, some 

Federal agencies may request 

reinitiation of consultation with us on 

actions for which formal consultation 

has been completed, if those actions 

may affect subsequently listed species 

or designated critical habitat or 

adversely modify or destroy proposed 

critical habitat. 

Federal activities that may affect 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens or its 

designated critical habitat will require 

section 7 consultation under the Act. 

Activities on State, tribal, local or 

private lands requiring a Federal permit 

(such as a permit from the Corps under 

section 404 of the Clean Water Act or a 

permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 

Act from the Service) or involving some 

other Federal action (such as funding 

from the Federal Highway 

Administration, Federal Aviation 

Administration, or the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency) will 

also be subject to the section 7 

consultation process. Federal actions 

not affecting listed species or critical 

habitat, and actions on State, tribal, 

local or private lands that are not 

federally-funded, authorized, or 

permitted, do not require section 7 

consultations. 

Application of the Jeopardy and 

Adverse Modification Standards for 

Actions Involving Effects to Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens and Its Critical 

Habitat 

Jeopardy Standard 

Prior to and following designation of 

critical habitat, the Service has applied 

an analytical framework for Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens jeopardy analyses 

that relies heavily on the importance of 

core area populations to the survival 

and recovery of the C. p. var. pungens. 

The section 7(a)(2) analysis is focused 

not only on these populations but also 

on the habitat conditions necessary to 

support them. 

The jeopardy analysis usually 

expresses the survival and recovery 

needs of the Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens in a qualitative fashion without 

making distinctions between what is 

necessary for survival and what is 

necessary for recovery. Generally, if a 

proposed Federal action is incompatible 

with the viability of the affected core 

area population(s), inclusive of 

associated habitat conditions, a jeopardy 

finding is considered to be warranted, 

because of the relationship of each core 

area population to the survival and 

recovery of the species as a whole. 

Adverse Modification Standard 

The analytical framework described 

in the Director’s December 9, 2004, 

memorandum will be used to complete 

section 7(a)(2) analyses for Federal 

actions affecting Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens critical habitat. The key 

factor related to the adverse 

modification determination is whether, 

with implementation of the proposed 

Federal action, the affected critical 

habitat would remain functional (or 

retain the current ability for the primary 

constituent elements to be functionally 

established) to serve the intended 

conservation role for the species. 

Generally, the conservation role of C. p. 

var. pungens critical habitat units is to 

support viable core area populations. 

Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us 

to briefly evaluate and describe in any 

proposed or final regulation that 

designates critical habitat those 

activities involving a Federal action that 

may destroy or adversely modify such 

habitat, or that may be affected by such 

designation. Activities that may destroy 

or adversely modify critical habitat may 

also jeopardize the continued existence 

of the species. 

Activities that may destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat are 

those that alter the PCEs to an extent 

that the conservation value of critical 

habitat for the Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens is appreciably reduced. 

Activities that, when carried out, 

funded, or authorized by a Federal 

agency, may affect critical habitat and 

therefore result in consultation for the 

C. p. var. pungens include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) Actions that would degrade or 

destroy native maritime chaparral, 

dune, and oak woodland communities, 

including but not limited to, livestock 

grazing, clearing, discing, introducing or 

encouraging the spread of non-native 

plants, and heavy recreational use; 

(2) Actions that would appreciably 

diminish habitat value or quality 

through indirect effects (e.g., edge 

effects, invasion of non-native plants or 

animals, or fragmentation). 

All of the units in the proposed 

revision to critical habitat to contain 

features essential to the conservation of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. All 

units are within the geographic range of 

the species, and all were occupied by 

the species at the time of listing. All 

units are currently occupied by C. p. 

var. pungens. Federal agencies already 

consult with us on activities in areas 

currently occupied by the C. p. var. 

pungens, or if the species may be 

affected by the action, to ensure that 

their actions do not jeopardize the 

continued existence of the C. p. var. 

pungens. 

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act 

The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 

1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) 

required each military installation that 

includes land and water suitable for the 

conservation and management of 

natural resources to complete, by 

November 17, 2001, an Integrated 

Natural Resource Management Plan 

(INRMP). An INRMP integrates 

implementation of the military mission 

of the installation with stewardship of 

the natural resources found on the base. 

Each INRMP includes an assessment of 

the ecological needs on the installation, 

including the need to provide for the 

conservation of listed species; a 

statement of goals and priorities; a 

detailed description of management 

actions to be implemented to provide 

for these ecological needs; and a 

monitoring and adaptive management 

plan. Among other things, each INRMP 

must, to the extent appropriate and 

applicable, provide for fish and wildlife 

management, fish and wildlife habitat 

enhancement or modification, wetland 

protection, enhancement, and 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75201 

restoration where necessary to support 

fish and wildlife and enforcement of 

applicable natural resource laws. 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 

108–136) amended the Act to limit areas 

eligible for designation as critical 

habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) 

of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) 

now provides: The Secretary shall not 

designate as critical habitat any lands or 

other geographical areas owned or 

controlled by the Department of 

Defense, or designated for its use, that 

are subject to an integrated natural 

resources management plan prepared 

under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 

U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines 

in writing that such plan provides a 

benefit to the species for which critical 

habitat is proposed for designation. 

Lands at former Fort Ord are not 

discussed in this section because Fort 

Ord is no longer an active military 

installation. All but a few hundred acres 

at former Fort Ord are to be eventually 

transferred to non-military entities. The 

few hundred acres that the Army may 

retain do not occur within this proposed 

critical habitat designation. 

Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act 

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

critical habitat shall be designated, and 

revised, on the basis of the best 

available scientific data after taking into 

consideration the economic impact, 

national security impact, and any other 

relevant impact, of specifying any 

particular area as critical habitat. The 

Secretary may exclude an area from 

critical habitat if he determines that the 

benefits of such exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of specifying such area as part 

of the critical habitat, unless he 

determines, based on the best scientific 

data available, that the failure to 

designate such area as critical habitat 

will result in the extinction of the 

species. In making that determination, 

the Congressional record is clear that 

the Secretary is afforded broad 

discretion regarding which factor(s) to 

use and how much weight to give to any 

factor. 

Pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act, 

we must consider relevant impacts in 

addition to economic ones. We 

anticipate no impact to national 

security, Tribal lands, or habitat 

conservation plans from this proposed 

revision to the current critical habitat 

designation. Based on the best available 

information, we believe that all of the 

proposed revised units contain the 

features essential to Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens or are otherwise 

essential for the conservation of this 

species. As such, we have considered 

but are not proposing to exclude any 

lands from this designation based on the 

potential impacts to these or other 

factors. 

Economic Analysis 

An analysis of the economic impacts 

of this proposed critical habitat revision 

for Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is 

being prepared. We will announce the 

availability of the draft economic 

analysis as soon as it is completed, at 

which time we will seek public review 

and comment. At that time, copies of 

the draft economic analysis will be 

available for downloading from the 

Internet at http://www.fws.gov/ventura/ 

or by contacting the VFWO directly (see 

ADDRESSES section). 

Peer Review 

In accordance with our joint policy 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek 

the expert opinions of at least three 

appropriate and independent specialists 

regarding this proposed revised rule. 

The purpose of such review is to ensure 

that our critical habitat designation is 

based on scientifically sound data, 

assumptions, and analyses. We will 

send these peer reviewers copies of this 

proposed revised rule immediately 

following publication in the Federal 

Register. We will invite these peer 

reviewers to comment, during the 

public comment period, on the specific 

assumptions and conclusions regarding 

the proposed revisions to the current 

critical habitat designation. 

We will consider all comments and 

information received during the 

comment period on this proposed 

revised rule during preparation of a 

final rulemaking. Accordingly, the final 

decision may differ from this proposed 

revision. 

Public Hearings 

The Act provides for one or more 

public hearings on this proposal, if 

requested. Requests for public hearings 

must be made in writing at least 15 days 

prior to the close of the public comment 

period. We will schedule public 

hearings on this proposal, if any are 

requested, and announce the dates, 

times, and places of those hearings in 

the Federal Register and local 

newspapers at least 15 days prior to the 

first hearing. 

Clarity of the Rule 

Executive Order 12866 requires each 

agency to write regulations and notices 

that are easy to understand. We invite 

your comments on how to make this 

proposed revised rule easier to 

understand, including answers to 

questions such as the following: (1) Are 

the requirements in the proposed 

revised rule clearly stated? (2) Does the 

proposed revised rule contain technical 

jargon that interferes with the clarity? 

(3) Does the format of the proposed 

revised rule (grouping and order of the 

sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 

and so forth) aid or reduce its clarity? 

(4) Is the description of the notice in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

the preamble helpful in understanding 

the proposed revised rule? (5) What else 

could we do to make this proposed 

revised rule easier to understand? 

Send a copy of any comments on how 

we could make these proposed revisions 

to the critical habitat designation easier 

to understand to: Office of Regulatory 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20240. You may e-mail 

your comments to this address: 

Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12866, this document is a significant 

rule in that it may raise novel legal and 

policy issues, but it is not anticipated to 

have an annual effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more or affect the 

economy in a material way. Due to the 

tight timeline for publication in the 

Federal Register, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has not 

formally reviewed this rule. We are 

preparing a draft economic analysis of 

this proposed action, which will be 

available for public comment, to 

determine the economic consequences 

of designating the specific areas as 

critical habitat. This economic analysis 

also will be used to determine 

compliance with Executive Order 

12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act, and Executive Order 

12630. 

Further, Executive Order 12866 

directs Federal Agencies promulgating 

regulations to evaluate regulatory 

alternatives (Office of Management and 

Budget, Circular A–4, September 17, 

2003). Pursuant to Circular A–4, once it 

has been determined that the Federal 

regulatory action is appropriate, then 

the agency will need to consider 

alternative regulatory approaches. Since 

the determination of critical habitat is a 

statutory requirement under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

we must then evaluate alternative 

regulatory approaches, where feasible, 

when promulgating a designation of 

critical habitat. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75202 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

In developing our designations of 

critical habitat, we consider economic 

impacts, impacts to national security, 

and other relevant impacts under 

section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Based on the 

discretion allowable under this 

provision, we may exclude any 

particular area from the designation of 

critical habitat providing that the 

benefits of such exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of specifying the area as critical 

habitat and that such exclusion would 

not result in the extinction of the 

subspecies. As such, we believe that the 

evaluation of the inclusion or exclusion 

of particular areas, or combination 

thereof, in a designation constitutes our 

regulatory alternative analysis. 

Within these areas, the types of 

Federal actions or authorized activities 

that we have identified as potential 

concerns are listed above in the section 

on Section 7 Consultation. The 

availability of the draft economic 

analysis will be announced in the 

Federal Register and in local 

newspapers so that it is available for 

public review and comments. The draft 

economic analysis can be obtained from 

the internet website at http:// 

www.fws.gov/ventura/ or by contacting 

the VFWO directly (see ADDRESSES

section). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), 

whenever an agency is required to 

publish a notice of rulemaking for any 

proposed or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effects of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of the agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The SBREFA amended the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to 

require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of the factual basis for 

certifying that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

At this time, the Service lacks the 

available economic information 

necessary to provide an adequate factual 

basis for the required RFA finding. 

Therefore, the RFA finding is deferred 

until completion of the draft economic 

analysis prepared under section 4(b)(2) 

of the Act and E.O. 12866. This draft 

economic analysis will provide the 

required factual basis for the RFA 

finding. Upon completion of the draft 

economic analysis, the Service will 

publish a notice of availability of the 

draft economic analysis of the proposed 

designation and reopen the public 

comment period for the proposed 

designation for an additional 60 days. 

The Service will include with the notice 

of availability, as appropriate, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis or a 

certification that the rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

accompanied by the factual basis for 

that determination. The Service has 

concluded that deferring the RFA 

finding until completion of the draft 

economic analysis is necessary to meet 

the purposes and requirements of the 

RFA. Deferring the RFA finding in this 

manner will ensure that the Service 

makes a sufficiently informed 

determination based on adequate 

economic information and provides the 

necessary opportunity for public 

comment. 

Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

an Executive Order (E.O. 13211; Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. Although 

this proposed rule to designate critical 

habitat for the Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens is a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866, it 

is not expected to significantly affect 

energy supplies, distribution, or use. 

Therefore, this action is not a significant 

energy action, and no Statement of 

Energy Effects is required. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501), 

the Service makes the following 

findings: 

(a) This rule will not produce a 

Federal mandate. In general, a Federal 

mandate is a provision in legislation, 

statute or regulation that would impose 

an enforceable duty upon State, local, 

tribal governments, or the private sector 

and includes both ‘‘Federal 

intergovernmental mandates’’ and 

‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’

These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 

658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental 

mandate’’ includes a regulation that 

‘‘would impose an enforceable duty 

upon State, local, or tribal governments’’

with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a 

condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also 

excludes ‘‘a duty arising from 

participation in a voluntary Federal 

program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates 

to a then-existing Federal program 

under which $500,000,000 or more is 

provided annually to State, local, and 

tribal governments under entitlement 

authority,’’ if the provision would 

‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of 

assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or 

otherwise decrease, the Federal 

Government’s responsibility to provide 

funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal 

governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust 

accordingly. At the time of enactment, 

these entitlement programs were: 

Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child 

Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services 

Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation 

State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption 

Assistance, and Independent Living; 

Family Support Welfare Services; and 

Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal 

private sector mandate’’ includes a 

regulation that ‘‘would impose an 

enforceable duty upon the private 

sector, except (i) a condition of Federal 

assistance or (ii) a duty arising from 

participation in a voluntary Federal 

program.’’

The designation of critical habitat 

does not impose a legally binding duty 

on non-Federal government entities or 

private parties. Under the Act, the only 

regulatory effect is that Federal agencies 

must ensure that their actions do not 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal 

funding, assistance, or permits, or that 

otherwise require approval or 

authorization from a Federal agency for 

an action, may be indirectly impacted 

by the designation of critical habitat, the 

legally binding duty to avoid 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat rests squarely on the 

Federal agency. Furthermore, to the 

extent that non-Federal entities are 

indirectly impacted because they 

receive Federal assistance or participate 

in a voluntary Federal aid program, the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would 

not apply; nor would critical habitat 

shift the costs of the large entitlement 

programs listed above on to State 

governments. 

(b) We do not believe that this rule 

will significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments because much (93 

percent) of the proposed critical habitat 

is owned and managed by the Federal 

government and the State and only 

about 6 percent of the total proposed 

critical habitat designation is owned 

and managed by local jurisdictions. Of 

the lands under local jurisdiction, 97 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75203 

percent are associated with land 

transfers through Fort Ord and are 

therefore already taking into 

consideration the management of 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens and 

other sensitive species. In addition, less 

than 1 percent of the total proposed 

designation is private lands. Therefore, 

a Small Government Agency Plan is not 

required. We will, however, further 

evaluate this issue as we conduct our 

economic analysis and revise this 

assessment if appropriate. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630 (‘‘Government Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Private Property Rights’’), we 

have analyzed the potential takings 

implications of designating critical 

habitat for the Chorizanthe pungens var. 

pungens in a takings implications 

assessment. The takings implications 

assessment concludes that this 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens does 

not pose significant takings 

implications. However, we will further 

evaluate this issue as we conduct our 

economic analysis and review and 

revise this assessment as warranted. 

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630 (‘‘Government Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Private Property Rights’’), we 

have analyzed the potential takings 

implications of designating critical 

habitat for the Monterey spine flower in 

a takings implications assessment. The 

takings implications assessment 

concludes that this designation of 

critical habitat for the Monterey spine 

flower does not pose significant takings 

implications. However, we will further 

evaluate this issue as we conduct our 

economic analysis and review and 

revise this assessment as warranted. 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

determined that the rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 

and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We have 

proposed designating critical habitat in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

Act. This proposed revised rule uses 

standard property descriptions and 

identifies the primary constituent 

elements within the designated areas to 

assist the public in understanding the 

habitat needs of Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This rule does not contain any new 

collections of information that require 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. This rule will not 

impose recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements on State or local 

governments, individuals, businesses, or 

organizations. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

It is our position that, outside the 

Tenth Circuit, we do not need to 

prepare environmental analyses as 

defined by the NEPA in connection with 

designating critical habitat under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended. We published a notice 

outlining our reasons for this 

determination in the Federal Register 

on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This 

assertion was upheld in the courts of the 

Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. 

Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. Ore. 

1995), cert. denied 116 S. Ct. 698 

(1996)). 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive 

Order 13175, and the Department of 

Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we 

readily acknowledge our responsibility 

to communicate meaningfully with 

recognized Federal Tribes on a 

government-to-government basis. We 

have determined that there are no tribal 

lands occupied at the time of listing or 

currently occupied that contain the 

features essential for the conservation 

and no tribal lands that are unoccupied 

areas that are essential for the 

conservation of Chorizanthe pungens 

var. pungens. Therefore, in this 

proposed revised rule, critical habitat 

for the C. p. var. pungens has not been 

proposed for designation on tribal lands. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this rulemaking is available upon 

request from the Field Supervisor, 

VFWO (see ADDRESSES section). 

Author(s) 

The primary author of this package is 

the VFWO. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 17—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. 

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–

625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. 

2. In § 17.96(a), revise the entry for 

‘‘Family Polygonaceae: Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens (Monterey 

spineflower)’’ to read as follows: 

§ 17.96 Critical habitat—plants. 

(a) Flowering plants. 

* * * * * 

Family Polygonaceae: Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens (Monterey 

spineflower) 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties, 

California, on the maps below. 

(2) The primary constituent element 

of critical habitat for Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens is vegetation 

structure arranged in a mosaic with 

openings between the dominant 

elements (e.g., scrub, shrub, oak trees, 

clumps of herbaceous vegetation) 

providing for sunlight on the following 

sandy soils: coastal beaches, dune land, 

Baywood sand, Ben Lomond sandy 

loam, Elder sandy loam, Oceano loamy 

sand, Arnold loamy sand, Santa Ynez 

fine sandy loam, Arnold—Santa Ynez 

complex, Metz complex, and Metz 

loamy sand. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures, such as buildings, 

aqueducts, airports, and roads, and the 

land on which such structures are 

located, existing on the effective date of 

this rule and not containing the primary 

constituent element. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

on base maps using aerial imagery from 

the National Agricultural Imagery 

Program (aerial imagery captured June 

2005). Data were projected to Universal 

Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 11, 

North American Datum (NAD) 1983. 

(5) Note: Index map (Map 1) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75204 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALEP14DE06.026</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75205 

(6) Unit 1: Sunset Unit, Santa Cruz 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Watsonville West. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 603929, 

4083699; 604051, 4083487; 604059, 

4083449; 604045, 4083383; 604045, 

4083351; 604091, 4083265; 604106, 

4083164; 604122, 4083147; 604176, 

4083117; 604222, 4083063; 604255, 

4083022; 604279, 4083005; 604325, 

4082960; 604349, 4082925; 604373, 

4082842; 604412, 4082708; 604424, 

4082671; 604426, 4082579; 604449, 

4082515; 604460, 4082474; 604491, 

4082428; 604504, 4082397; 604510, 

4082350; 604527, 4082300; 604546, 

4082248; 604535, 4082205; 604688, 

4081900; 604847, 4081649; 604743, 

4081648; 604613, 4081903; 604338, 

4082450; 604205, 4082695; 604132, 

4082828; 603987, 4083070; 603703, 

4083577; returning to 603929, 4083699. 

(ii) Note: Map of Units 1, 5, and 6 

(Map 2) follows: 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75206 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALEP14DE06.027</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75207 

(7) Unit 2: Moss Landing Unit, 

Monterey County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Moss Landing. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 607507, 

4075612; 607621, 4075684; 607654, 

4075633; 607631, 4075619; 607636, 

4075576; 607597, 4075556; 607690, 

4075440; 607823, 4075301; 607910, 

4075107; 607947, 4074934; 607954, 

4074719; 608021, 4074544; 608058, 

4074335; 607999, 4074277; 607936, 

4074603; 607872, 4074869; 607801, 

4075108; 607725, 4075268; 607599, 

4075459; returning to 607507, 4075612. 

(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Moss Landing. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 607903, 

4073162; 608016, 4073442; 608084, 

4073399; 607962, 4073136; returning to 

607903, 4073162. 

(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Moss Landing. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 607228, 

4070373; 607310, 4070736; 607328, 

4070904; 607348, 4071016; 607384, 

4071156; 607514, 4071712; 607717, 

4072508; 607772, 4072783; 607853, 

4073038; 607914, 4073020; 607895, 

4072915; 607865, 4072861; 607783, 

4072474; 607787, 4072361; 607718, 

4072182; 607621, 4071731; 607609, 

4071579; 607619, 4071527; 607625, 

4071342; 607616, 4071320; 607621, 

4071220; 607596, 4071153; 607592, 

4071096; 607570, 4071047; 607576, 

4071014; 607648, 4070995; 607689, 

4070941; 607666, 4070915; 607668, 

4070868; 607631, 4070839; 607679, 

4070781; 607677, 4070715; 607710, 

4070665; 607739, 4070545; 607696, 

4070507; 607689, 4070486; 607670, 

4070465; 607654, 4070436; 607649, 

4070398; 607502, 4070309; 607230, 

4070348; returning to 607228, 4070373. 

(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Moss Landing. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 606454, 

4078187; 606601, 4078347; 606679, 

4078021; 606792, 4077578; 606824, 

4077463; 606863, 4077367; 606841, 

4077344; 606846, 4077325; 606856, 

4077319; 606883, 4077322; 606936, 

4077244; 607001, 4076989; 607221, 

4076534; 607207, 4076523; 607206, 

4076512; 607216, 4076487; 607238, 

4076472; 607272, 4076417; 607272, 

4076386; 607298, 4076371; 607309, 

4076358; 607302, 4076347; 607281, 

4076295; 607281, 4076279; 607170, 

4076277; 607008, 4076687; 606805, 

4077227; 606661, 4077584; 606561, 

4077910; returning to 606454, 4078187. 

(v) Note: Map of Units 2 and 7 (Map 

3) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75208 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALEP14DE06.028</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75209 

(8) Unit 3: Marina Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 603550, 4054338; 

603691, 4054583; 603944, 4055018; 

604173, 4055496; 604429, 4056021; 

604819, 4056877; 605042, 4057450; 

605354, 4058252; 605565, 4058848; 

605837, 4059750; 605918, 4060031; 

606155, 4061060; 606282, 4061745; 

606320, 4062114; 606653, 4061944; 

606642, 4061777; 606595, 4061605; 

606497, 4061365; 606456, 4061248; 

606413, 4061089; 606388, 4060903; 

606384, 4060755; 606390, 4060633; 

606431, 4060406; 606349, 4060385; 

606398, 4060148; 606370, 4060069; 

606443, 4060021; 606446, 4059958; 

606490, 4059933; 606225, 4059382; 

606099, 4059154; 605974, 4058942; 

605942, 4058878; 605861, 4058673; 

605779, 4058394; 605739, 4058410; 

605709, 4058346; 605679, 4058361; 

605597, 4058304; 605587, 4058210; 

605728, 4058160; 605683, 4058028; 

605674, 4057900; 605681, 4057671; 

605667, 4057538; 605662, 4057406; 

605671, 4057317; 605690, 4057220; 

605712, 4057147; 605763, 4057024; 

605756, 4056939; 605731, 4056910; 

605457, 4056766; 605429, 4056741; 

605335, 4056560; 605360, 4056447; 

605356, 4056395; 605232, 4056155; 

605212, 4056093; 604940, 4055894; 

604498, 4055349; 604397, 4055203; 

604345, 4055087; 604323, 4055018; 

604254, 4054897; 604077, 4054661; 

604008, 4054566; 603934, 4054465; 

603914, 4054402; 603758, 4054196; 

603755, 4054189; 603737, 4054200; 

603550, 4054338; 604416, 4055878; 

604427, 4055852; 604451, 4055848; 

604497, 4055868; 604526, 4055905; 

604560, 4055938; 604613, 4055965; 

604651, 4056003; 604699, 4056069; 

604731, 4056138; 604736, 4056182; 

604732, 4056242; 604726, 4056273; 

604709, 4056296; 604675, 4056304; 

604634, 4056288; 604613, 4056256; 

604609, 4056220; 604632, 4056186; 

604631, 4056167; 604605, 4056141; 

604599, 4056122; 604602, 4056098; 

604599, 4056084; 604568, 4056084; 

604524, 4056092; 604513, 4056083; 

604512, 4056070; 604528, 4056015; 

604522, 4056001; 604501, 4055983; 

604475, 4055969; 604459, 4055945; 

604456, 4055931; 604438, 4055912; 

604416, 4055878. 

(ii) Note: Map of Units 3, 4, and 8 

(Map 4) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75210 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALEP14DE06.029</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75211 

(9) Unit 4: Asilomar Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Monterey. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 594619, 4053296; 

594619, 4053330; 594626, 4053369; 

594643, 4053405; 594653, 4053431; 

594654, 4053454; 594660, 4053514; 

594648, 4053561; 594648, 4053583; 

594655, 4053600; 594727, 4053636; 

594734, 4053644; 594740, 4053671; 

594751, 4053688; 594765, 4053700; 

594763, 4053748; 594755, 4053773; 

594750, 4053787; 594766, 4053795; 

594788, 4053798; 594800, 4053805; 

594811, 4053823; 594817, 4053849; 

594813, 4053884; 594795, 4053906; 

594779, 4053929; 594776, 4053948; 

594778, 4053962; 594784, 4053976; 

594798, 4054002; 594808, 4054006; 

594824, 4054004; 594853, 4053992; 

594880, 4053986; 594908, 4053991; 

594929, 4054006; 594949, 4054037; 

594950, 4054065; 594944, 4054114; 

594952, 4054174; 594968, 4054190; 

594979, 4054237; 594977, 4054292; 

594972, 4054311; 595001, 4054351; 

594980, 4054393; 594962, 4054440; 

594960, 4054479; 594946, 4054509; 

594969, 4054511; 594985, 4054509; 

595008, 4054518; 595011, 4054528; 

595025, 4054538; 595059, 4054529; 

595052, 4054467; 595026, 4054447; 

595013, 4054407; 595028, 4054355; 

595028, 4054328; 595021, 4054284; 

594958, 4054012; 594959, 4054012; 

594943, 4053970; 594883, 4053919; 

594857, 4053880; 594796, 4053673; 

594782, 4053639; 594769, 4053626; 

594713, 4053598; 594719, 4053582; 

594888, 4053489; 594869, 4053373; 

594896, 4053299; 594890, 4053268; 

594927, 4053223; 594919, 4053193; 

594957, 4053160; 594950, 4053123; 

594886, 4053082; 594885, 4053056; 

594923, 4053026; 594924, 4052940; 

594906, 4052966; 594871, 4053005; 

594832, 4053036; 594804, 4053053; 

594726, 4053053; 594680, 4053081; 

594680, 4053142; 594667, 4053173; 

594651, 4053254; returning to 594619, 

4053296. 

(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Monterey. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 594873, 4054693; 

594913, 4054742; 595038, 4054606; 

595057, 4054580; 595062, 4054561; 

594921, 4054598; 594905, 4054625; 

returning to 594873, 4054693 

(iii) Note: Map of Unit 4 is provided 

at paragraph (8)(ii) of this entry. 

(10) Unit 5: Freedom Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Watsonville West. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 601321.000 

4093848; 601363, 4093878; 601484, 

4093904; 601600, 4093907; 601710, 

4093877; 601828, 4093833; 601921, 

4093791; 601965, 4093746; 601983, 

4093719; 601989, 4093682; 601905, 

4093585; 601870, 4093613; 601487, 

4093784; 601333, 4093837; returning to 

601321, 4093848. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5 is provided 

at paragraph (6)(ii) of this entry. 

(11) Unit 6: Manresa Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Watsonville West. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 602044, 

4086559; 602112, 4086716; 602197, 

4086682; 602210, 4086694; 602221, 

4086722; 602232, 4086754; 602285, 

4086738; 602326, 4086722; 602374, 

4086749; 602431, 4086877; 602376, 

4086900; 602383, 4086914; 602296, 

4086951; 602289, 4086937; 602236, 

4086959; 602268, 4086998; 602524, 

4086894; 602501, 4086838; 602557, 

4086814; 602494, 4086665; 602763, 

4086296; 602864, 4086162; 602562, 

4086054; 602541, 4086096; 602394, 

4086067; 602378, 4086099; 602302, 

4086085; 602318, 4086053; 602275, 

4086044; 602210, 4086186; 602139, 

4086348; 602115, 4086409; returning to 

602044, 4086559. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6 is provided 

at paragraph (6)(ii) of this entry. 

(12) Unit 7: Prunedale Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Prunedale. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 618887, 4071619; 

618896, 4071742; 619145, 4071725; 

619431, 4071664; 619441, 4071576; 

619439, 4071574; 619169, 4071562; 

619166, 4071601; returning to 618887, 

4071619. 

(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Prunedale. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 621025, 4070792; 

621080, 4071114; 621051, 4071111; 

621085, 4071163; 621121, 4071173; 

621136, 4071182; 621157, 4071219; 

621160, 4071234; 621207, 4071274; 

621233, 4071259; 621258, 4071205; 

621283, 4071171; 621295, 4071168; 

621290, 4071132; 621295, 4071048; 

621284, 4070900; 621321, 4070847; 

621314, 4070833; 621093, 4070705; 

621046, 4070723; returning to 621025, 

4070792. 

(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Prunedale. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 620707, 4073069; 

620896, 4073161; 620837, 4073252; 

620899, 4073326; 620937, 4073319; 

621026, 4073386; 621107, 4073506; 

621199, 4073608; 621206, 4073579; 

621166, 4073526; 621173, 4073436; 

621083, 4073322; 621197, 4073259; 

621151, 4072949; 621158, 4072940; 

621187, 4072867; 621278, 4072572; 

621300, 4072385; 621364, 4072301; 

621342, 4072258; 621328, 4072169; 

621331, 4072151; 621353, 4072139; 

621389, 4072155; 621377, 4072009; 

621414, 4071899; 621422, 4071791; 

621411, 4071786; 621361, 4071747; 

621364, 4071718; 621377, 4071704; 

621421, 4071702; 621385, 4071615; 

621370, 4071533; 621379, 4071479; 

621265, 4071449; 621256, 4071455; 

621283, 4071501; 621288, 4071541; 

621282, 4071565; 621230, 4071628; 

621278, 4071792; 621255, 4071940; 

621265, 4072089; 621192, 4072091; 

621191, 4072183; 621130, 4072185; 

621130, 4072300; 621085, 4072462; 

621060, 4072649; 621031, 4072686; 

621017, 4072730; 621009, 4072808; 

620987, 4072831; 620927, 4072859; 

620775, 4072954; 620739, 4072948; 

620709, 4072962; returning to 620707, 

4073069. 

(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Prunedale. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 620983, 4073724; 

621027, 4073754; 620988, 4073922; 

620997, 4073968; 620986, 4074025; 

621101, 4074125; 621133, 4074174; 

621144, 4074209; 621084, 4074270; 

621123, 4074335; 621127, 4074380; 

621146, 4074396; 621174, 4074395; 

621273, 4074228; 621256, 4074215; 

621206, 4074150; 621149, 4074028; 

621163, 4073968; 621180, 4073920; 

621159, 4073901; 621160, 4073898; 

621124, 4073845; 621154, 4073750; 

621074, 4073707; 621036, 4073609; 

returning to 620983, 4073724. 

(v) Note: Map of Unit 7 is provided at 

paragraph (7)(v) of this entry. 

(13) Unit 8: Fort Ord Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 609697, 4059326; 

609722, 4059410; 610034, 4059231; 

610010, 4059188; 610075, 4059114; 

610137, 4059066; 610125, 4059051; 

610114, 4059037; 610103, 4059024; 

610091, 4059012; 610078, 4058998; 

610065, 4058986; 609965, 4058895; 

609958, 4058903; 609998, 4059020; 

609962, 4059186; 609940, 4059175; 

609906, 4059214; 609932, 4059260; 

609797, 4059338; 609773, 4059296; 

609709, 4059308; returning to 609697, 

4059326. 

(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 610192, 4059594; 

610236, 4059663; 610258, 4059655; 

610274, 4059651; 610309, 4059651; 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75212 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

610379, 4059665; 610390, 4059664; 

610433, 4059733; 610443, 4059751; 

610466, 4059785; 610502, 4059762; 

610434, 4059652; 610504, 4059609; 

610493, 4059592; 610463, 4059611; 

610444, 4059619; 610420, 4059623; 

610397, 4059620; 610355, 4059601; 

610331, 4059591; 610295, 4059584; 

610267, 4059581; 610240, 4059582; 

610211, 4059588; returning to 610192, 

4059594. 

(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 608008, 4060536; 

609030, 4060994; 609030, 4060995; 

609971, 4060407; 609846, 4060206; 

610033, 4060089; 609999, 4060034; 

610264, 4059868; 610164, 4059707; 

610220, 4059673; 610168, 4059589; 

610111, 4059623; 609932, 4059336; 

609230, 4059739; 609322, 4059793; 

returning to 608008, 4060536. 

(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina and Salinas. Land 

bounded by the following UTM zone 10 

NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 609751, 

4058616; 610060, 4058898; 610647, 

4058564; 610667, 4058598; 610879, 

4058745; 612436, 4057852; 612399, 

4057799; 612384, 4057756; 612381, 

4057739; 612387, 4057693; 612378, 

4057650; 612361, 4057603; 612352, 

4057589; 612317, 4057541; 612304, 

4057508; 612294, 4057462; 612274, 

4057395; 611971, 4057411; 611159, 

4057399; 611101, 4057397; 611145, 

4057519; 611450, 4057629; 611480, 

4057720; 611321, 4058012; 610816, 

4058291; returning to 609751, 4058616. 

(v) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Marina, Salinas, Seaside, 

and Spreckles. Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10 NAD83 

coordinates (E, N): 605408, 4050946; 

605410, 4051017; 605417, 4051087; 

605436, 4051191; 605522, 4051488; 

605602, 4051720; 605630, 4051830; 

605627, 4052006; 605600, 4052419; 

605601, 4052501; 605607, 4052559; 

605617, 4052617; 605630, 4052674; 

605647, 4052729; 605669, 4052784; 

605755, 4052925; 605799, 4052980; 

605821, 4053004; 605890, 4053067; 

605951, 4053108; 606007, 4053137; 

606408, 4053300; 606490, 4053347; 

606545, 4053384; 606598, 4053428; 

606636, 4053464; 606689, 4053526; 

606767, 4053639; 606817, 4053698; 

606874, 4053750; 606918, 4053782; 

606950, 4053802; 607005, 4053831; 

607729, 4054151; 607873, 4054074; 

607886, 4053775; 607904, 4053747; 

607933, 4053729; 607986, 4053722; 

608063, 4053728; 608098, 4053744; 

608110, 4053762; 608102, 4053961; 

608113, 4054001; 608182, 4053964; 

608546, 4054184; 608601, 4054203; 

609141, 4054548; 609160, 4054556; 

609231, 4054598; 609258, 4054621; 

609310, 4054704; 609315, 4054723; 

609316, 4054750; 609309, 4054768; 

609291, 4054789; 609315, 4054806; 

609366, 4054824; 609440, 4054835; 

609459, 4054850; 609477, 4054868; 

609493, 4054873; 609569, 4054861; 

609611, 4054845; 609698, 4054839; 

609757, 4054849; 609772, 4054857; 

609817, 4054936; 609820, 4054959; 

609841, 4054989; 609907, 4055031; 

609927, 4055053; 609944, 4055100; 

609947, 4055132; 609927, 4055254; 

609934, 4055294; 609967, 4055327; 

610020, 4055349; 610057, 4055378; 

610164, 4055520; 610209, 4055546; 

610237, 4055571; 610306, 4055681; 

610387, 4055754; 610520, 4055833; 

610554, 4055869; 610574, 4055904; 

610643, 4056127; 610658, 4056143; 

610901, 4056274; 611153, 4056431; 

611104, 4056509; 611091, 4056560; 

611069, 4056592; 611046, 4056645; 

611025, 4056671; 611033, 4056696; 

611031, 4056719; 611006, 4056762; 

611005, 4056778; 610992, 4056821; 

610993, 4056878; 611001, 4056895; 

611011, 4057000; 610986, 4057080; 

610970, 4057224; 611012, 4057361; 

611950, 4057379; 611958, 4057200; 

611948, 4057203; 611937, 4057200; 

611926, 4057191; 611923, 4057178; 

611938, 4057146; 611938, 4057138; 

611942, 4057138; 611962, 4057097; 

611970, 4056892; 611990, 4056882; 

612022, 4056833; 612154, 4056656; 

612173, 4056586; 612270, 4056432; 

612342, 4056434; 612478, 4056464; 

612526, 4056458; 612566, 4056441; 

612640, 4056444; 612759, 4056485; 

612970, 4056560; 613013, 4056113; 

613193, 4055994; 613060, 4055849; 

613038, 4055818; 613033, 4055786; 

613060, 4055413; 613060, 4055373; 

613052, 4055334; 612998, 4055174; 

612988, 4055121; 612992, 4055065; 

613011, 4054974; 613013, 4054937; 

613005, 4054877; 612986, 4054850; 

612887, 4054762; 612866, 4054738; 

612847, 4054706; 612833, 4054662; 

612818, 4054637; 612799, 4054618; 

612755, 4054589; 612743, 4054577; 

612721, 4054544; 612693, 4054453; 

612476, 4053952; 612446, 4053881; 

612426, 4053845; 612349, 4053748; 

612332, 4053721; 612319, 4053691; 

612303, 4053631; 612267, 4053559; 

612265, 4053541; 612273, 4053470; 

612274, 4053433; 612270, 4053404; 

612250, 4053323; 612251, 4053272; 

612255, 4053218; 612238, 4053128; 

612226, 4053030; 612228, 4052996; 

612255, 4052840; 612255, 4052818; 

612248, 4052779; 612235, 4052738; 

612193, 4052664; 612188, 4052579; 

612167, 4052495; 612147, 4052453; 

612110, 4052400; 612097, 4052366; 

612092, 4052334; 612092, 4052274; 

612096, 4052244; 612113, 4052172; 

612125, 4052134; 612203, 4051986; 

612236, 4051914; 612248, 4051881; 

612275, 4051794; 612283, 4051759; 

612291, 4051699; 612281, 4051639; 

612261, 4051561; 612247, 4051534; 

612118, 4051387; 612023, 4051304; 

612002, 4051275; 611994, 4051260; 

611987, 4051235; 611979, 4051157; 

611957, 4051054; 611948, 4051022; 

611934, 4050984; 611908, 4050937; 

611867, 4050885; 611722, 4050757; 

611702, 4050737; 611694, 4050705; 

611676, 4050543; 611484, 4050568; 

611399, 4050574; 611259, 4050574; 

611146, 4050565; 611042, 4050551; 

610945, 4050516; 610871, 4050482; 

610784, 4050434; 610732, 4050403; 

610678, 4050363; 610617, 4050313; 

610545, 4050241; 610074, 4049765; 

610039, 4049758; 609981, 4049733; 

609937, 4049701; 609889, 4049652; 

609877, 4049618; 609814, 4049590; 

609730, 4049564; 607897, 4049093; 

607832, 4049096; 607676, 4049111; 

607570, 4049128; 607487, 4049145; 

607378, 4049173; 607306, 4049194; 

607130, 4049259; 606738, 4049427; 

606676, 4049452; 606613, 4049473; 

606531, 4049492; 606449, 4049505; 

606382, 4049509; 606308, 4049509; 

606215, 4049712; 606173, 4049789; 

606127, 4049854; 606067, 4049919; 

606019, 4049966; 605756, 4050195; 

605696, 4050251; 605658, 4050292; 

605623, 4050334; 605590, 4050379; 

605560, 4050424; 605532, 4050472; 

605496, 4050546; 605465, 4050623; 

605448, 4050675; 605428, 4050755; 

605417, 4050824; 605412, 4050864; 

returning to 605408, 4050946. 

Excluding: 609791, 4053559; 609792, 

4053420; 609833, 4053395; 609908, 

4053357; 610068, 4053380; 610032, 

4053598; returning to 609791, 4053559. 

Excluding: 611172, 4052992; 611242, 

4052923; 611314, 4052987; 611402, 

4052913; 611442, 4052907; 611524, 

4052850; 611543, 4052844; 611587, 

4052866; 611607, 4052919; 611628, 

4053042; 611618, 4053074; 611670, 

4053189; 611761, 4053277; 612029, 

4053402; 612049, 4053521; 611863, 

4053644; 611727, 4053518; 611656, 

4053497; 611611, 4053451; 611535, 

4053431; 611438, 4053400; 611394, 

4053341; 611346, 4053238; 611278, 

4053122; 611230, 4053068; returning to 

611172, 4052992. Excluding: 611476, 

4056579; 611418, 4056559; 611437, 

4056500; 611496, 4056520; returning to 

611476, 4056579. 

(vi) Note: Map of Unit 8 is provided 

at paragraph (8)(ii) of this entry. 

(14) Unit 9: Soledad Unit, Monterey 

County, California. 

(i) From USGS 1:24,000 scale 

quadrangle Soledad. Land bounded by 

the following UTM zone 10 NAD83 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75213 

coordinates (E, N): 653941, 4029661; 

654080, 4029718; 654098, 4029754; 

654158, 4029789; 654279, 4029808; 

654372, 4029801; 654425, 4029812; 

654458, 4029845; 654505, 4029873; 

654619, 4029910; 654705, 4029898; 

654777, 4029915; 654821, 4029942; 

654865, 4029970; 654930, 4029989; 

655223, 4030005; 655305, 4030020; 

655374, 4029973; 655318, 4029807; 

655195, 4029858; 655025, 4029760; 

654944, 4029812; 654829, 4029774; 

654735, 4029691; 654629, 4029678; 

654495, 4029721; 654381, 4029731; 

654318, 4029721; 654199, 4029687; 

654123, 4029655; 653987, 4029654; 

returning to 653941, 4029661. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 9 (Map 5) 

follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
75214 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALEP14DE06.030</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules 75215 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 6, 2006. 

David M. Verhey, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 06–9656 Filed 12–13–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Remove the Uinta Basin 

Hookless Cactus From the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants; 

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List 

the Pariette Cactus as Threatened or 

Endangered 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of two 90-day petition 

findings and initiation of 5-year review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce 

two 90-day findings made under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). One finding concerns a 

petition to remove Uinta Basin hookless 

cactus (Sclerocactus glaucus) from the 

List of Endangered and Threatened 

Plants, and the other a petition to list 

Pariette cactus (Sclerocactus 

brevispinus) as a threatened or 

endangered plant. Until recently, these 

species were considered one taxonomic 

entity, so the petitions are being 

considered concurrently in this notice. 

We find the petition to remove 

Sclerocactus glaucus from the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants does 

not present substantial information 

indicating that the petitioned action 

may be warranted, and we are not 

initiating a further status review in 

response to this petition. However, in 

order to determine the appropriate 

status of S. glaucus given recent 

taxonomic revisions to this species, we 

are initiating a 5-year review under 

section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act. Through 

this action, we encourage all interested 

parties to provide us information 

regarding the status of, and any 

potential threats to, this species as it 

was originally listed (i.e., information 

pertaining to S. glaucus, S. brevispinus, 

and S. wetlandicus). 

We find the petition to list 

Sclerocactus brevispinus presents 

substantial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted, 

and we are initiating a further status 

review in response to this petition. 

Through this action, we encourage all 

interested parties to provide us 

information regarding the status of, and 

any potential threats to, this species. 

DATES: The findings announced in this 

document were made on December 14, 

2006. Comments and information must 

be submitted on or before February 12, 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, 

you may submit your comments and 

materials by any one of the following 

methods: 

(1) You may mail or hand-deliver 

written comments and information to 

Field Supervisor, Utah Ecological 

Services Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 2369 West Orton Circle, Suite 

50, West Valley City, Utah 84119. 

(2) You may submit your comments 

by electronic mail (e-mail) to 

fw6_sclerocactus@fws.gov. For 

directions on how to submit comments 

by e-mail, see the ‘‘Public Comments 

Solicited’’ section of this notice. In the 

event that our Internet connection is not 

functional, please submit your 

comments by mail, hand-delivery, or 

fax. 

(3) You may fax your comments to 

(801) 975–3331. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Larry England, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 2369 West Orton Circle, Suite 

50, West Valley City, Utah 84119 

(telephone 801–975–3330; fax 801–975–

3331; e-mail larry_england@fws.gov). 

Additional information is available at 

http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/ 

plants/threecacti/index.htm. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that we 

make a finding on whether a petition to 

list, delist, or reclassify a species 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information to indicate that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition, 

supporting information submitted with 

the petition, and information otherwise 

available in our files at the time we 

make the determination. To the 

maximum extent practicable, we are to 

make this finding within 90 days of our 

receipt of the petition, and publish our 

notice of this finding promptly in the 

Federal Register. 

Our standard for substantial 

information with regard to a 90-day 

petition finding is ‘‘that amount of 

information that would lead a 

reasonable person to believe that the 

measure proposed in the petition may 

be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we 

find that substantial information was 

presented, we are required to promptly 

commence a status review of the 

species. 

In making these findings, we relied on 

information provided by the petitioners 

and evaluated that information in 

accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our 

90-day finding process under section 

4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and section 

424.14(b) of the regulations is limited to 

a determination of whether the 

information in the petition meets the 

‘‘substantial information’’ threshold. 

On October 11, 1979, we listed 

Sclerocactus glaucus as a threatened 

species (44 FR 58868) based on threats 

from overcollection for horticultural 

purposes, energy development 

(including oil, gas, and potential oilshale development), grazing, off-road 

vehicle (ORV) use, and water 

development (44 FR 58869). A recovery 

plan for the species was finalized on 

September 27, 1990. Revisions in the 

taxonomy of S. glaucus began in 1989 

(Hochstatter 1989, 1993; Heil and Porter 

1994; Porter et al. 2000; Welsh et al. 

2003), and by 2004, the Flora of North 

America recognized the plant S. glaucus 

that we listed in 1979 as three distinct 

species: S. glaucus, S. wetlandicus, and 

S. brevispinus. 

In our February 28, 1996, Candidate 

Notice of Review (CNOR) (61 FR 7596), 

we included Sclerocactus brevispinus as 

a candidate species. Retraction of S. 

brevispinus as a candidate species 

occurred in our September 19, 1997, 

CNOR (62 FR 49401) with the following 

justification: ‘‘Because S. brevispinus 

was a part of S. glaucus when the latter 

species was listed as threatened, those 

plants now referred to as S. brevispinus 

are still considered to be listed as 

threatened. Therefore, including S. 

brevispinus as a candidate in the 1996 

notice of review was inappropriate and 

unnecessary. To address the recent 

change in taxonomy, a proposed rule to 

add S. brevispinus to the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants will 

be published in the Federal Register at 

a later time.’’

On February 3, 1997, we received a 

petition from the National Wilderness 

Institute to remove Sclerocactus glaucus 

from the List of Endangered and 

Threatened Plants on the basis of 

‘‘original data error,’’ but higher priority 

actions have precluded addressing this 

petition to date. On April 18, 2005, the 

Center for Native Ecosystems and the 

Utah Native Plant Society petitioned us 

to designate S. brevispinus as threatened 

or endangered and to designate critical 

habitat. On October 10, 2005, the same 

parties filed a complaint in the U.S. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL