39248 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AU75 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Peck’s Cave Amphipod, 

Comal Springs Dryopid Beetle, and 

Comal Springs Riffle Beetle 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are 

designating critical habitat for the Peck’s 

cave amphipod (Stygobromus pecki), 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle 

(Stygoparnus comalensis), and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis 

comalensis) in areas of occupied, 

spring-related aquatic habitat in Texas 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (Act). The three listed 

species are known only from four spring 

systems in central Texas: Comal Springs 

and Hueco Springs in Comal County, 

and Fern Bank Springs and San Marcos 

Springs in Hays County. The total area 

designated as critical habitat for the 

amphipod is about 38.5 acres (ac) (15.6 

hectares (ha)), for the dryopid beetle it 

is about 39.5 ac (16.0 ha), and for the 

riffle beetle it is about 30.3 ac (12.3 ha). 

DATES: This rule becomes effective on 

August 16, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, 

Austin Ecological Services Office, 10711 

Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 

78758 (telephone 512–490–0057; 

facsimile 512–490–0974). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

It is our intent to discuss only those 

topics directly relevant to the 

designation of critical habitat in this 

rule. For more information on these 

species, refer to the final rule listing the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle that was published in the Federal 

Register on December 18, 1997 (62 FR 

66295). 

All three of the listed species 

included in this final rule for critical 

habitat designation are freshwater 

invertebrates. The Peck’s cave 

amphipod is an eyeless, subterranean 

(below ground) arthropod that has been 

found in Comal Springs and Hueco 

Springs (also spelled Waco Springs). 

Both spring systems are located in 

Comal County, Texas. The Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle is a subterranean 

insect with vestigial (poorly developed, 

non-functional) eyes. The species has 

been found in two spring systems, 

Comal Springs and Fern Bank Springs, 

that are located in Comal and Hays 

Counties, respectively. The Comal 

Springs riffle beetle is an aquatic insect 

that is found in and primarily restricted 

to surface water associated with Comal 

Springs in Comal County and with San 

Marcos Springs in Hays County. 

The four spring systems (Comal, Fern 

Bank, Hueco, and San Marcos) 

designated as critical habitat units are 

produced by discharge of aquifer spring 

water along the Balcones fault zone at 

the edge of the Edwards Plateau in 

central Texas. The source of water flows 

for Comal Springs and San Marcos 

Springs is the San Antonio segment of 

the Edwards Aquifer. This aquifer is 

characterized by highly varied, below 

ground spaces that have been hollowed 

out within limestone bedrock through 

dissolution by rainwater. Groundwater 

is held and conveyed within these 

hollowed-out spaces, which range in 

size from honeycomb-like pores to large 

caverns. The San Antonio segment of 

the aquifer occurs in a crescent-shaped 

section over a distance of 176 miles (mi) 

(283 kilometers (km)), from the town of 

Brackettville in Kinney County on the 

segment’s west side over to the town of 

Kyle in Hays County at the segment’s 

northeast side. Groundwater generally 

moves from recharge areas in the 

southwest part of the San Antonio 

segment and travels toward discharge 

areas in the northeast part of the 

segment, which includes Comal Springs 

and San Marcos Springs. The area that 

recharges groundwater coming to Comal 

Springs may occur as much as 62 mi 

(100 km) away from the springs (Brune 

1981, p. 130). Hueco Springs is 

recharged locally from the local 

watershed basin and possibly by the San 

Antonio segment of the Edwards 

Aquifer (Guyton and Associates 1979, p. 

2). The source of water for Fern Bank 

Springs has not been determined. Fern 

Bank Springs discharges water from the 

upper member of the Glen Rose 

Formation, and its flow could originate 

primarily from that unit; however, water 

discharged from the springs could also 

be (1) Drainage from the nearby 

Edwards Aquifer recharge zone, (2) 

water lost from the Blanco River, or (3) 

a combination of all three sources (Veni 

2006, p.1). 

Comal Springs and San Marcos 

Springs are the two largest spring 

systems in Texas with respective mean 

annual flows of 284 and 170 cubic feet 

per second (8 and 5 cubic meters per 

second) (Fahlquist and Slattery 1997, p. 

1; Slattery and Fahlquist 1997, p. 1). 

Both spring systems emerge as a series 

of spring outlets along the Balcones 

fault that follows the edge of the 

Edwards Plateau in Texas. Fern Bank 

Springs and Hueco Springs have 

considerably smaller flows and consist 

of one main spring with several satellite 

springs or seep areas. 

The four spring systems designated 

for critical habitat are characterized by 

high water quality and relatively 

constant water flows, with temperatures 

that range from 68 to 75 °F (Fahrenheit) 

(20 to 24 °C (Celsius)). Due to the 

underlying limestone aquifer, 

discharged water from these springs has 

a carbonate chemistry (Ogden et al. 

1986, p. 103). Although flows from San 

Marcos Springs can vary according to 

fluctuations in the source aquifer, 

records indicate that this spring system 

has never ceased flowing. San Marcos 

Springs has been monitored since 1894, 

and has exhibited the greatest flow 

dependability of any major spring 

system in central Texas (Puente 1976, p. 

27). Comal Springs has a flow record 

nearly comparable to that of San Marcos 

Springs; however, Comal Springs ceased 

flowing from June 13 to November 3, 

1956, during a severe drought (U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers 1965, p. 59). 

Water pumping from the aquifer 

contributed to cessation of flow at 

Comal Springs during the drought 

period (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

1965, p. 59). Hueco Springs has gone 

dry a number of times in the past during 

drought periods (Puente 1976, p. 27; 

Guyton and Associates 1979, p. 46). 

Although flow records are unavailable 

for Fern Bank Springs, the spring system 

is considered to be perennial (Barr 1993, 

p. 39). 

Each of the four spring systems and 

related subterranean aquifers typically 

provide adequate resources to sustain 

life cycle functions for resident 

populations of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

However, a primary threat to the three 

invertebrate species is the potential 

failure of spring flow due to drought or 

excessive groundwater pumping, which 

could result in loss of aquatic habitat for 

the species. Although these invertebrate 

species persisted at Comal Springs in 

the 1950s despite drought conditions 

(Bowles et al. 2003, p. 379), all three 

species are aquatic and require water to 

complete their individual life cycles. 

Bowles et al. (2003, p. 379) pointed 

out that the mechanism by which the 

Comal Springs riffle beetle survived the 

drought and the extent to which its 

population was negatively impacted are 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39249 

uncertain. Bowles et al. (2003, p. 379) 

speculated that the riffle beetle may be 

able to retreat back into spring openings 

or burrow down to wet areas below the 

surface of the streambed. 

Barr (1993, p. 55) found Comal 

Springs dryopid beetles in spring flows 

with low volume discharge as well as 

high volume discharge and suggested 

that presence of the species did not 

necessarily depend on a high spring 

flow. However, Barr (1993, p. 61) noted 

that effects on both subterranean species 

(dryopid beetle and amphipod) from 

extended loss of spring flow and low 

aquifer levels could not be predicted 

due to limited knowledge about their 

life cycles. 

Previous Federal Actions 

Information about previous Federal 

actions for Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle can be found 

in our proposal to designate critical 

habitat for these species published in 

the Federal Register on July 17, 2006 

(71 FR 40588). On March 16, 2007, we 

announced the availability of our draft 

economic analysis, and we reopened the 

public comment period on the proposed 

rule (72 FR 12585). The reopened public 

comment period ended on April 16, 

2007. 

Summary of Comments and 

Recommendations 

We requested written comments from 

the public on the proposed designation 

of critical habitat for Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

in the proposed rule published on July 

17, 2006 (71 FR 40588) and in our 

March 16, 2007, Federal Register notice 

(72 FR 12585). We also contacted 

appropriate Federal, State, and local 

agencies; scientific organizations; and 

other interested parties and invited 

them to comment on the proposed rule. 

During the comment period that 

opened on July 17, 2006, and closed on 

September 15, 2006, we received eight 

responses directly addressing the 

proposed critical habitat designation: 

four from peer reviewers, one from a 

State agency, and three from 

organizations or individuals. The 

response we received from the State 

agency, the Texas Department of 

Transportation, indicated that the 

proposed critical habitat designations 

for these species were ‘‘prudently 

identified’’ by the Service. However, 

that agency did not offer any other 

comments. After completing the draft 

economic analysis, we reopened the 

comment period between March 16, 

2007, and April 16, 2007 (72 FR 12585). 

During the second comment period, we 

received one comment from a peer 

reviewer and four from organizations; 

two of which included comments on the 

economic analysis. Responses to all 

comments were grouped by those from 

peer reviewers, followed by public 

comments. These comments are 

addressed in the following summary 

and incorporated into the final rule as 

appropriate. We did not receive any 

requests for a public hearing and thus 

no public hearing was held. 

Peer Review 

In accordance with our policy 

published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 

34270), we solicited expert opinions 

from nine knowledgeable individuals 

with scientific expertise that included 

familiarity with the species, the 

geographic region in which the species 

occur, and conservation biology 

principles. We received responses from 

four of the peer reviewers. Although 

none of the peer reviewers disagreed 

with our methods in designating critical 

habitat for the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle, three of the 

responses indicated that the critical 

habitat designation failed to address the 

broader issue of maintaining spring 

flows, ecosystem functioning, and 

groundwater levels within the Edwards 

Aquifer. Also, two of the peer reviewers 

disagreed with the reasoning we 

presented in our determination of 

Primary Constituent Element (PCE) 4. 

Three of the peer reviewers’ responses 

provided additional information, 

clarifications, and suggestions to 

improve the final critical habitat rule. 

We address peer reviewer comments in 

the following summary and have 

incorporated them into the final rule as 

appropriate. 

We reviewed all comments received 

from the peer reviewers and the public 

for substantive issues and new 

information regarding critical habitat for 

the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle, and address them 

in the following summary. 

Peer Reviewer Comments 

1. Comment: One of the critical 

factors affecting the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle is 

continued natural spring flows. 

Adequate or minimum spring flows 

should be included as a PCE. 

Our Response: We agree that adequate 

water quantity is necessary for the 

survival of the three invertebrate 

species. We indicated that availability 

and access to water at the spring sites 

are important factors in maintaining the 

life history functions of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, the Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and the Comal Springs riffle 

beetle by highlighting the role of water 

in the descriptions of PCEs 1, 2, and 3 

of this final rule. We clarified the 

language for PCE 3 to highlight the 

importance of spring flows in 

maintaining adequate dissolved oxygen 

levels. We also state in the Special 

Management Considerations section of 

this rule that prolonged cessation of 

spring flows as a result of the loss of 

hydrological connectivity within the 

aquifer may require special management 

considerations, such as maintenance of 

sustainable groundwater use and 

subsurface flows. 

2. Comment: PCE 5 should be 

corrected to indicate that the substrate 

habitat of the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle should also 

be free of sand and silt. 

Our Response: We incorporated this 

suggestion into PCE 5. 

3. Comment: Riparian vegetation in 

the immediate vicinity of the spring 

openings are likely not the food source 

for any of the three invertebrate species, 

as described in PCE 4. Aquatic 

invertebrates typically feed on plant 

material well after it has been 

mechanically broken down. Flow in the 

vicinity of spring openings would 

quickly carry away leaf litter and other 

plant material before it could become 

mechanically broken down. The detritus 

that comprises the food source for the 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle is most 

likely introduced into the aquifer at 

recharge points far upstream of the 

spring openings (i.e., within the 

recharge area of the aquifer). Similarly, 

the food source for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod is likely found within the 

Edwards Aquifer. Specifically, the food 

source may be composed of material 

that enters through the recharge area of 

the aquifer and the many other 

organisms that co-occur within the 

aquifer. Aquatic macrophyte (i.e., large 

plant) roots may be a source of detritus 

for invertebrates in a spring-run 

downstream of a spring opening. 

However, the roots are likely not the 

food sources for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, because the amphipod is 

found only near the spring openings and 

within the aquifer. Because the riparian 

habitats around the springs are likely 

not influencing these three species, the 

critical habitat designations only 

represent the smallest part of their 

habitats or range. 

Our Response: The Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle has only been observed 

near spring outlets. Adults have been 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39250 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

found on rocks and cotton cloth lures in 

spring openings. They have also been 

observed on rotting wood above spring 

upwellings near tree roots growing just 

under the gravel substrate more than 16 

feet (ft) (5 meters (m)) from the shore of 

Landa Lake (Gibson et al. 2006, p. 3). 

Larvae of this species do not have gills 

and are considered terrestrial, as they 

typically inhabit moist soil along stream 

banks (Brown 1987, p. 253; Ulrich 1986, 

p. 325). Because of these characteristics, 

we believe Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle larvae feed on roots and decaying 

vegetation in areas just above the aquifer 

(i.e., subsurface area) water line. We 

believe the Peck’s cave amphipod likely 

consumes both animals and plants, and 

feeds both within the aquifer and on 

detritus in areas near spring outlets 

where plant roots interface with spring 

water (Gibson 2006, p. 1). Therefore, we 

believe critical habitat should include 

the riparian vegetation as a food source 

for the Peck’s cave amphipod and 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle. 

4. Comment: The designation of 50–

ft distances around spring openings 

seems reasonable to protect and 

maintain the subsurface vegetation 

profile in the immediate area of the 

springs; however, the detrital food base 

could come from sources at greater 

distances. 

Our Response: Although there may be 

some contribution of detrital food 

sources from greater distances within 

the aquifer, we are unaware of any data 

that indicate this. As explained in our 

response to Comment 3 above, there is 

available information that suggests that 

riparian vegetation near the spring 

openings is an important habitat 

component for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle, 

and may provide a source of food for 

these species. 

5. Comment: Under PCE 1, the 

pesticides mentioned only refer to 

classes such as organochlorines, 

organophosphates, and chlorinated 

hydrocarbons. The Service should 

consider pesticide classes such as insect 

growth regulators as well as 

pharmaceuticals that could enter 

groundwater sources. The Service 

should clarify the differences between 

these compounds and their potential 

effects on the listed species. 

Our Response: We have added 

pharmaceuticals to the list of potential 

pollutants discussed under PCE 1 in 

response to this comment. There are no 

scientific studies available on the 

potential effects that each of these 

pollutants have on the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle, 

so we are unable to address the 

potential effects of these pollutants in 

the final rule. We acknowledge the 

importance of maintaining high water 

quality within the Edwards Aquifer, and 

we will work to evaluate and address 

the effects of pollutants during the 

recovery planning and implementation 

processes for these species. 

6. Comment: With regard to PCE 1, 

Hueco Springs and Fern Bank Springs 

may be influenced by storm water. Can 

the claim be made that the spring 

systems are characterized by high water 

quality? 

Our Response: Spring systems in 

general may have some short-term 

changes in water quality after storm 

events. Hueco Springs and Fern Bank 

Springs are smaller in size and may 

have more local recharge features than 

Comal Springs and San Marcos Springs. 

Although these characteristics may 

make them more susceptible to shortterm changes in water quality after 

storm events, the Service has no data to 

indicate that these temporary changes 

negatively affect the species that occur 

near the spring openings. Comal and 

San Marcos Springs may also be affected 

by local runoff from storm events based 

on tracer tests by the Edwards Aquifer 

Authority. We consider all of the spring 

systems occupied by the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle to 

have high water quality. 

7. Comment: There is a strong 

likelihood that additional populations 

of the Comal Springs riffle beetle occur 

in or around the various spring outlets 

in the bottoms of Spring Lake and Landa 

Lake, where substrate is sufficiently 

coarse to serve as habitat. 

Our Response: We believe this is 

addressed through the designation of all 

aquatic habitat within Landa Lake 

where springs are present and PCEs are 

known to exist for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod and Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle. However, this point was clarified 

in the Critical Habitat Designation 

section of this final rule describing the 

designated critical habitat areas within 

Landa Lake for the Comal Springs Unit 

in Comal County, Texas. 

8. Comment: Paragraph 8 under 

‘‘Adverse Modification Standard’’ states 

that ‘‘ongoing human activities that 

occur outside the proposed critical 

habitat are unlikely to threaten the 

physical and biological features of the 

proposed critical habitat.’’ However, if 

there is an increase in pumping water 

from the aquifer prior to the ruling on 

critical habitat, then that new pumping 

may impact PCEs 2, 3, and 5. 

Our Response: We agree with the 

commenter and have clarified the 

language in the Effects of Critical 

Habitat Designation section that 

groundwater pumping from the 

Edwards Aquifer may affect critical 

habitat and require section 7 

consultation. 

9. Comment: The critical habitat 

designations may provide benefits to the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle on a local scale (i.e., in the 

immediate area of the spring openings), 

but they do not offer protections to the 

Edwards Aquifer ecosystem. Critical 

habitat for these species should be 

extended to include the entire Edwards 

Aquifer, including subsurface areas. 

Until parts of the Edwards Aquifer can 

be shown to not have populations of 

these two species, the most sensible 

solution is to assume that the entire 

aquifer is critical habitat. Also, there are 

ecosystem processes (e.g., organic 

matter inputs, interactions with other 

species, nutrient availability) that are 

not addressed by the PCEs and may be 

addressed by designating the entire 

Edwards Aquifer. 

Our Response: Organic matter and 

nutrient availability are addressed in 

PCE 4. We recognize the importance of 

maintaining ecosystem integrity and 

functionality and implementing 

strategies to protect the entire Edwards 

Aquifer. However, we reviewed all 

available information that pertains to 

the occurrence of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

Although the Peck’s cave amphipod and 

the Comal Springs dryopid beetle are 

believed to be subterranean, we have no 

information available to show that the 

entire Edwards Aquifer ecosystem is 

occupied by the species. Nor do we 

believe the PCEs are found throughout 

the aquifer. We cannot demonstrate that 

the entire aquifer is essential to the 

conservation of the species. Although 

the entire aquifer has not been 

designated as critical habitat, Federal 

activities outside of designated critical 

habitat areas are subject to review under 

section 7 of the Act if these activities 

may adversely affect the PCEs within 

the critical habitat designation. 

10. Comment: The PCEs do nothing to 

safeguard the source of the water—the 

Edwards Aquifer, upon which the 

invertebrates depend. A comprehensive 

plan for the Edwards Aquifer with 

constraints on groundwater pumping 

and pollution of recharge should be 

developed. 

Our Response: Designating critical 

habitat is only one means to aid in the 

habitat conservation of listed species. 

Efforts to address threats to the Edwards 

Aquifer can be undertaken through the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39251 

recovery implementation process for 

these and the other federally-listed 

species that depend on the aquifer for 

their survival. For example, we are 

working with a large number of partner 

agencies and organizations, including 

the Edwards Aquifer Authority, to 

develop an Edwards Aquifer Recovery 

Implementation Program (RIP) to 

address threats to the Edwards Aquifer. 

The Edwards Aquifer Authority (EAA) 

is the agency with the responsibility to 

manage, enhance, and protect the 

Edwards Aquifer system through a 

variety of mechanisms including the 

issuing of pumping permits for use of 

water from the aquifer. We intend to 

continue our close work with the EAA 

and others for conservation of the 

springs that flow from the Edwards 

Aquifer. 

Public Comments 

11. Comment: It seems imprudent to 

designate critical habitat for the Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle, 

when this would provide no benefit to 

the species beyond that provided by 

listing of the species and any 

subsequent evaluation of activities in 

light of section 7 consultation 

requirements. 

Our Response: The Role of Critical 

Habitat in Actual Practice of 

Administering and Implementing the 

Act section in the proposed rule has 

been removed from this final rule. We 

recognize some benefits to critical 

habitat designations. Federal activities 

outside of designated critical habitat 

areas are subject to review under section 

7 of the Act if these activities may 

adversely affect the PCEs within the 

critical habitat designation. The Ninth 

Circuit Court’s decision in Gifford 

Pinchot Task Force v. United States Fish 

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

Cir 2004) (hereinafter Gifford Pinchot) 

requires consideration of the recovery of 

species. Thus, under this court ruling, 

and our implementation of Section 7 of 

the Act, critical habitat designations 

may provide greater benefits to the 

recovery of a species. Also, we have 

found that critical habitat designations 

serve to educate landowners, State and 

local governments, and the public 

regarding the potential conservation 

value of the areas designated. 

12. Comment: This critical habitat 

designation is not beneficial, especially 

in light of a recent initiation of a RIP for 

the endangered species of the Edwards 

Aquifer under the encouragement of the 

Service. 

Our Response: In designating critical 

habitat areas, we have reviewed the 

overall approach to the conservation of 

the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle undertaken by local, 

Federal, and State agencies; and by 

private organizations operating within 

the species’ range since their listing. As 

noted above, we are very supportive of 

the RIP process; however, this process is 

in its initial stages of development, and 

therefore we were not able to consider 

the potential conservation benefits of 

the RIP to these species in our critical 

habitat determination. Also, as stated in 

our response to Comment 11 above, we 

recognize several benefits to designating 

critical habitat. 

13. Comment: In the Critical Habitat 

section of the proposed rule, the Service 

understates the extent to which critical 

habitat designations provide additional 

protection for species above and beyond 

the prohibition of take that comes with 

federally listing species as endangered 

or threatened. This approach is legally 

and scientifically unsubstantiated, and 

it shortchanges the goals of the Act to 

provide for the conservation and 

recovery of listed species. 

Our Response: As discussed above, 

we agree that the designation of critical 

habitat can serve positive purposes, but 

we also believe it is only one tool for 

managing listed species’ habitat. In 

addition to the designation of critical 

habitat, we have determined that other 

conservation mechanisms, including the 

recovery planning process, section 6 

funding to States, section 7 

consultations, management plans, Safe 

Harbor agreements, and other on-theground strategies, contribute to species’

conservation. We will continue to work 

with local partner organizations (such as 

the Edwards Aquifer Authority, San 

Antonio Water System, local 

municipalities, Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department, and others) 

through the RIP, to develop means for 

voluntary conservation of habitats for 

these listed species. We believe these 

other conservation measures often 

provide incentives for project planners 

and greater conservation benefits than 

critical habitat designation. 

14. Comment: There does not appear 

to be a clear correlation between the 

needs of the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle and 

particular spring flow conditions to 

require such special management 

considerations. 

Our Response: There is information to 

indicate that availability and access to 

water at the spring sites are important 

factors in maintaining the life history 

functions (i.e., those functions that are 

dependent on high water quality, 

adequate water temperature, and 

adequate dissolved oxygen levels) of the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle, as described under PCEs 1, 2, 

and 3. We believe that prolonged 

cessation of spring flows as a result of 

the loss of hydrological connectivity 

within the aquifer may require special 

management considerations, such as 

maintenance of sustainable groundwater 

use and subsurface flows. 

15. Comment: The proposed rule only 

designates as critical habitat the aquatic 

areas where the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle are found, 

plus a 50-ft distance from the spring 

outlets. The proposed rule does nothing 

to control water quality impacts from 

activities occurring in the contributing 

and recharge zones of the aquifer, 

limiting the critical habitat to only a 50- 

ft buffer beyond the spring outlets to 

protect the species’ food sources. Such 

a buffer would fail to protect the water 

quality in the aquatic habitat. Typical 

buffers to protect water quality tend to 

be at least 100 ft on each side of 

sensitive waters. The critical habitat 

should likewise at least accommodate 

such extended buffers to help protect 

water quality in the aquatic habitat. 

Our Response: We proposed 

designating critical habitat in areas that 

we have determined are occupied by the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle; contain sufficient PCEs to 

support life-history functions essential 

for the conservation of the species; and 

require special management or 

protection. The 50-ft (15.2-m) distances 

define the lateral extent of critical 

habitat that contains PCEs with respect 

to food sources in root/water interfaces. 

Use of a 100-ft (30.4-m) buffer for this 

critical habitat designation would 

extend the boundary to include areas 

not known to contain the PCEs; 

therefore, use of this larger buffer is not 

consistent with the criteria used to 

identify critical habitat. 

The designation of critical habitat 

requires Federal agencies to consult 

with us when activities they fund, 

authorize, or carry out may affect the 

critical habitat of a listed species. 

Consultation is required where projects 

may (indirectly or directly) adversely 

affect critical habitat, even if those 

projects occur outside designated 

critical habitat (e.g., the contributing 

and recharge zones of the aquifer). 

16. Comment: The final rule should 

include the minimal spring flow rates 

provided in the EAA’s 2005 Draft 

Habitat Conservation Plan. 

Our Response: The EAA’s 2005 Draft 

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) has not 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39252 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

been finalized, nor have we issued a 

permit for the EAA. We have not 

analyzed spring flow rates from the 

2005 Draft HCP for effects to the Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

In addition, flow from Fern Bank 

Springs is from the Trinity Aquifer, not 

the Edwards Aquifer. Thus, the draft 

EAA HCP does not address the 

maintenance of Fern Bank Springs 

habitat and that population of the Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle. 

17. Comment: The economic analysis 

should include the benefits of 

designating critical habitat for the 

invertebrate species. Without estimating 

the benefits to designation, the costs 

seem unreasonably high, and therefore 

paint the conservation effort in a 

negative light. A full benefits analysis 

should include direct, indirect, and 

non-use benefits. 

Our Response: As stated in Chapter 1 

of the final economic analysis, a 

potential direct benefit of the 

rulemaking is the potential to enhance 

conservation of the species. The 

published economics literature has 

documented that social welfare benefits 

can result from the conservation and 

recovery of endangered and threatened 

species. However, in its guidance for 

implementing Executive Order 12866, 

OMB acknowledges that it may not be 

feasible to monetize, or even quantify, 

the benefits of environmental 

regulations due to either an absence of 

defensible, relevant studies or a lack of 

resources on the implementing agency’s 

part to conduct new research. Rather 

than rely on economic measures, we 

believe that the direct benefits of the 

proposed rule are best expressed in 

biological terms that can be weighed 

against the expected cost impacts of the 

rulemaking. 

Where data are available, the 

economic analysis does discuss and 

attempt to measure the net economic 

impacts of this rulemaking. For 

example, Chapter 2 discusses the 

reduction in net economic benefit to 

municipal and industrial water users 

that may occur with pumping 

restrictions. The analysis also discusses 

the fact that higher springflow levels are 

anticipated to contribute to river flows 

downstream of the aquifer, which will 

make more water available to 

municipalities, industries, and farmers 

who use river water. Whether the users 

will use the water to an economic 

benefit depends on a myriad of factors 

that are beyond the scope of the 

economic analysis; however, the 

analysis notes that increased 

springflows are likely to generate 

potentially significant ecological and/or 

recreational benefits. 

18. Comment: Section 1.34(c) of the 

EAA Act of 1993, as amended, notes 

that a ‘‘holder of a permit for irrigation 

use may not lease more than 50 percent 

of the irrigation rights initially 

permitted. The user’s remaining 

irrigation water rights must be used in 

accordance with the original permit and 

must pass with transfer of the irrigated 

land.’’ Paragraph 83 of the economic 

analysis makes it unclear whether this 

restriction on irrigation transfers was 

considered in the analysis. 

Our Response: The analysis predicts 

that water users, when faced with 

lowered water permit availability, will 

sell or lease their water rights to highervalued uses. The value of water in the 

planning area is assumed to rise faster 

than the profitability of irrigated crops, 

and thus agricultural water will be 

traded from agriculture to municipal 

and industrial use, as has been common 

in the western United States. Despite 

the current restriction on the sale and 

lease of irrigation rights in the Edwards 

Aquifer, the analysis assumes that the 

Edwards Aquifer Authority will be able 

to purchase and retire sufficient 

agricultural water rights for the 

purposes of maintaining aquifer levels 

in the future. While this assumption 

was implicit in the draft economic 

analysis, it is now stated explicitly in 

the final economic analysis. 

19. Comment: PCE 5 concludes that a 

gravel substrate is necessary for the 

Comal Springs riffle beetle because 

specimens were not found in Spring 

Run 4 where the substrate was primarily 

sand and not gravel. The Service has 

drawn this conclusion from a 

preliminary correlation reported in a 

study done by Bowles et al. (2003), and 

therefore, a definitive conclusion may 

inaccurately represent the findings. A 

number of abiotic and biotic factors, 

including flow rates, competition with 

other species, and other life-history 

traits may all have been contributing 

factors to the absence of the beetle in 

Spring Run 4. 

Our Response: In reviewing the best 

available information, we found that 

additional searches for the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle in Spring Run 3 and 

the western shoreline habitat of Landa 

Lake yielded results similar to those 

found by Bowles et al. (2003) with 

regard to the occurrence of this species 

on gravel, cobble, and rock substrates 

outside of areas with sedimentation or 

silt buildup (BIO–WEST 2002a, p. 11). 

We included this additional reference 

within the discussion of PCE 5. By 

referencing the survey results of Bowles 

et al. (2003), it was not our intention to 

imply that the Comal Springs riffle 

beetle could never be found in smaller 

sized substrates. Although we cannot 

determine the full scope of substrate 

habitat restrictions for the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle from the 

information provided in the above 

referenced reports, it does indicate that 

gravel, cobble, and rock substrates that 

are free of silt and sedimentation are 

essential features of the habitat for this 

species. 

20. Comment: ‘‘Global warming’’ is 

another impact to consider in protecting 

water quantity in the habitat of the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. At least one science team has 

predicted higher temperatures, and 

thus, higher evaporation rates, and 

reduced rainfall for central Texas as a 

result of global warming. 

Our Response: We recognize that 

global climate change may affect global 

temperatures, and that this in turn can 

cause other climatic changes, such as 

changes in the amount and pattern of 

precipitation. However, the 

consequences of such changes to the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle are unknown. We therefore 

believe this issue to be outside the scope 

of the critical habitat designation for 

these species. 

Summary of Changes From Proposed 

Rule 

Based upon our review of the peer 

review and public comments, economic 

analysis, and any new relevant 

information that may have become 

available since the publication of the 

proposal, we reevaluated our proposed 

critical habitat designation for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. We made no changes to the 

critical habitat designation as described 

in the proposed rule. Other than minor 

clarifications and incorporation of 

additional information on the species’

biology, status, and threats, this final 

rule differs from the proposal by the 

following: 

(1) We modified the primary 

constituent elements for clarity and to 

reflect additional information received 

during the public comment period. 

Specifically we added, ‘‘other 

compounds containing surfactants’’ and 

‘‘pharmaceuticals and veterinary 

medicines,’’ under the list of potential 

pollutants under PCE 1. Under PCE 3, 

we added the phrase, ‘‘that allows for 

adequate spring flows’’ to clarify the 

intent of the hydrologic regime. For PCE 

4, we added, ‘‘living plant material, 

algae, fungi, bacteria and other 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39253 

microorganisms,’’ to the list of potential 

food items. 

(2) We made technical corrections to 

some of the information found in the 

Primary Constituent Elements, 

Background, and Criteria Used to 

Identify Critical Habitat sections of this 

rule. 

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 

that 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 of the Act 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 of the Act 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 (PCEs), as 

defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)). 

Occupied habitat may be included in 

critical habitat only if the essential 

features thereon may require special 

management or protection. Furthermore, 

when the best available scientific data 

do not demonstrate that the 

conservation needs of the species 

require additional areas, we cannot 

designate critical habitat in areas 

outside the geographical area occupied 

by the species at the time of listing. 

However, an area currently occupied by 

the species but not occupied at the time 

of listing, will likely be essential to the 

conservation of the species and, 

therefore, may be 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 (Pub. 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 may 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 on the basis of 

the best scientific and commercial 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. 

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 

designate as critical habitat, we consider 

those physical and biological features 

(known as primary constituent 

elements) 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: (1) Space for individual and 

population growth, and for normal 

behavior; (2) food, water, air, light, 

minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; (3) cover or 

shelter; (4) sites for breeding, 

reproduction, and rearing (or 

development) of offspring; and (5) 

habitats that are protected from 

disturbance or are representative of the 

historic geographical and ecological 

distributions of a species. 

The specific primary constituent 

elements required for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

are derived from the biological needs of 

these species as described in the 

Background section of this final rule 

and in the December 18, 1997, final rule 

listing these species (62 FR 66295). 

Pursuant to the Act and its 

implementing regulations, we are 

required to identify the known physical 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39254 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

and biological features (PCEs) within 

the geographical area occupied at the 

time of listing that are essential to the 

conservation of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle, 

which may require special management 

considerations or protections. All areas 

designated as critical habitat for Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

are occupied, within the species’

historic geographic ranges, and contain 

sufficient PCEs to support at least one 

life history function. 

Based on our current knowledge of 

the life history, biology, and ecology of 

these species, and the habitat 

requirements for sustaining the essential 

life history functions of these species, 

we have determined that the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

require the PCEs described below. The 

PCEs apply to all three species unless 

otherwise noted. 

PCE 1. High-quality water with no or 

minimal levels of pollutants, such as 

soaps and detergents (Brown 1987, p. 

261) and other compounds containing 

surfactants, heavy metals, pesticides, 

fertilizer nutrients, petroleum 

hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and 

veterinary medicines, and semi-volatile 

compounds, such as industrial cleaning 

agents, and including: 

(a) Low salinity with total dissolved 

solids that generally range from about 

307 to 368 milligrams per liter (mg/L); 

and 

(b) Low turbidity that generally is less 

than 5 nephelometric (measurement of 

turbidity in a water sample by passing 

light through the sample and measuring 

the amount of the light that is deflected) 

turbidity units (NTUs). 

These spring-adapted aquatic species 

live in high-quality unpolluted 

groundwater and spring outflows that 

have low levels of salinity and turbidity. 

High-quality discharge water from 

springs and adjacent subterranean areas 

also help sustain habitat components, 

such as riparian vegetation, that are 

essential to the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle. The two 

beetle species are thought to require 

water with adequate levels of dissolved 

oxygen for respiration (Brown 1987, p. 

260; Arsuffi 1993, p. 18). Amphipods 

generally require relatively high 

concentrations of oxygen and may serve 

as an indicator of good water quality 

(Arsuffi 1993, p. 15). While definitive 

studies on the limits of tolerance and 

preference for these aquatic 

invertebrates have not been completed, 

the aquatic invertebrates are exclusively 

found in aquatic habitats with constant 

temperature, low salinity, low turbidity, 

and extremely low levels of pollutants. 

In particular, respiration in the riffle 

beetle may be inhibited by pollutants 

such as soaps and detergents that can 

affect its respiratory mechanism (Brown 

1987, p. 261). The dryopid beetle may 

also be affected by these particular 

pollutants, since this species shares a 

similar respiratory structure (Arsuffi 

1993, p. 18). However, biological 

tolerances for this species are not 

understood due to its existence within 

a subterranean habitat. 

Based on available literature, we 

believe that the PCE for high water 

quality in the critical habitat for these 

species should have an approximate 

range of salinity of about 307 to 368 mg/ 

L and a turbidity of less than 5 NTUs. 

Fahlquist and Slattery (1997, p. 3) 

reported a low salinity (as measured by 

total dissolved solids) as low as 307 mg/ 

L at Comal Springs, and Slattery and 

Fahlquist (1997, p. 4) found that San 

Marcos Springs had a low salinity of 

328 mg/L. The two springs also have a 

low turbidity of less than 5 NTUs 

(Fahlquist and Slattery 1997, p. 3; 

Slattery and Fahlquist 1997, p. 4). Brune 

(1975, p. 94) reported a salinity for 

Hueco Springs of 322 mg/L. The highest 

salinity (as determined by analysis of 

total dissolved solids) that we have 

found associated with any of these 

invertebrates was 368 mg/L, which was 

reported from Fern Bank Springs on 

April 28, 2005 (Texas Water 

Development Board 2006, p. 1). 

PCE 2. Aquifer water temperatures 

that range from approximately 68 to 75 

°F (20 to 24 °C). 

The three listed invertebrate species 

complete their life cycle functions 

within a relatively narrow temperature 

range; water temperatures outside of 

this range could be harmful to these 

invertebrates. The temperature of spring 

water emerging from the Edwards 

Aquifer at Comal Springs and San 

Marcos Springs ordinarily occurs within 

a narrow range of approximately 72 to 

75 °F (22 to 24 °C) (Fahlquist and 

Slattery 1997, pp. 3–4; Groeger et al. 

1997, pp. 282–283). Hueco Springs and 

Fern Bank Springs have temperature 

records of 68 to 71 °F (20 to 22 °C) 

(George 1952, p. 52; Brune 1975, p. 94; 

Texas Water Development Board 2006, 

p. 1). 

PCE 3. A hydrologic regime that 

allows for adequate spring flows that 

provide levels of dissolved oxygen in 

the approximate range of 4.0 to 10.0 mg/ 

L for respiration of the Comal Springs 

riffle beetle and Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle. 

Respiration in most beetle species 

belonging to the family Elmidae (which 

includes the Comal Springs riffle beetle) 

typically requires flowing waters highly 

saturated with dissolved oxygen (Brown 

1987, p. 260). As a consequence, riffle 

beetles are most commonly associated 

with flowing water that has shallow 

riffles (small waves) or rapids (Brown 

1987, p. 253). Although there are not 

available data to support a correlation 

between minimum spring flows and 

survival or other sublethal, adverse 

effects of low or no spring flows on 

these species, there is information to 

indicate that availability and access to 

water at the spring sites are important 

factors in their respiration. For example, 

riffle beetles are known to be restricted 

to waters with high dissolved oxygen 

due to their reliance on a plastron (a 

thin sheet of air) that is held next to the 

underside of the body surface by a mass 

of minute, hydrophobic (tending to 

repel and not absorb water) hairs. The 

plastron functions as a gill by allowing 

oxygen to diffuse passively from water 

into the plastron and replace oxygen 

absorbed during respiration (Brown 

1987, p. 260). Beetle species in the 

Elmidae family are generally limited to 

well-aerated water environments since 

gaseous exchange with a plastron can 

actually be reversed in oxygen-depleted 

waters (Brown 1987, p. 260; Ward 1992, 

p. 130). The Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle also relies on a plastron for 

respiration, and this beetle species may 

also be affected by changes in oxygen 

levels caused by habitat modification 

(Arsuffi 1993, pp. 17–18). 

PCE 4. Food supply that includes 

detritus (decomposed materials), leaf 

litter, living plant material, algae, fungi, 

bacteria and other microorganisms, and 

decaying roots. 

Feeding ecology in the Elmidae family 

varies among species, but most riffle 

beetles, as larvae and adults, feed on 

algae and detritus scraped from the 

substrates within their habitat (Brown 

1987, p. 262). Specific food 

requirements for each of the three 

invertebrate species are unknown. 

However, the Peck’s cave amphipod and 

dryopid beetle are most commonly 

found in areas where plant roots are 

inundated or otherwise influenced by 

aquifer water. Potential food sources for 

all three species in these areas include 

detritus (decomposed materials), leaf 

litter, and decaying roots; however, it is 

possible that these species feed on 

bacteria and fungi associated with 

decaying plant material. Both beetle 

species may be detritivores (detritusfeeding animals) that consume detrital 

materials in spring-influenced riparian 

zones (Brown 1987, p. 262; Randy 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39255 

Gibson 2006, pp. 1–2). The best 

information available indicates the 

Peck’s cave amphipod is an omnivore (a 

species capable of consuming both 

animals and plants), which would 

enable the amphipod to exist as a 

scavenger or predator inside the aquifer 

in addition to using detritus in areas 

near spring outlets where plant roots 

interface with spring water (Gibson 

2006, p. 1). 

Trees and shrubs in riparian areas 

adjacent to the spring system may 

provide plant growth necessary to 

maintain food sources such as decaying 

material for these invertebrates. Roots 

from trees and shrubs in proximity to 

spring outlets are most likely to 

penetrate underground down to the 

water pools, where these roots can serve 

as habitat for the amphipod and dryopid 

beetle. We believe relatively intact 

riparian areas with trees and shrubs may 

provide an important function within 

areas designated for critical habitat of 

the two subterranean species. According 

to patterns of plant canopies as 

determined from aerial photographs, 

trees and shrubs (and their root systems) 

are generally within 50 ft (15.2 m) of the 

edge of water in these spring systems. 

PCE 5. Bottom substrate in surface 

water habitat of the Comal Springs riffle 

beetle that is free of sand and silt, and 

is composed of gravel and cobble 

ranging in size between 0.3 to 5.0 inches 

(in) (8–128 millimeters (mm)). 

Although Comal Springs riffle beetles 

occur in conjunction with a variety of 

bottom substrates in surface water 

habitat, Bowles et al. (2003, p. 372) 

found that these beetles mainly 

occurred in areas with gravel and cobble 

ranging between 0.3 to 5.0 in (8–128 

mm). Collection efforts in areas of high 

sedimentation generally do not yield 

riffle beetles (Bowles et al. 2003, p. 376). 

Similarly, BIO-WEST (2002, p. 11) 

conducted surveys for the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle in the Comal system 

and found that individuals of this 

species were restricted to habitat areas 

that consisted of rocks and gravel. They 

also observed that riffle beetles were 

only found in areas that were largely 

silt-free (BIO-WEST 2002, p.11). 

This designation is designed for the 

conservation of PCEs necessary to 

support the life history functions that 

were the basis for the proposal and the 

areas containing those PCEs. Because 

not all life history functions require all 

of the PCEs, not all of the designated 

critical habitat may contain all the PCEs. 

Units are designated based on 

sufficient PCEs being present to support 

at least one of each of the species’ life 

history functions. Some units contain 

all PCEs and support multiple life 

processes, while some units contain 

only a portion of the PCEs necessary to 

support the species’ particular use of 

that habitat. Where a subset of the PCEs 

is present at the time of designation, this 

rule protects those PCEs and thus the 

conservation function of the habitat. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protections 

When designating critical habitat, we 

assess whether the areas determined to 

be occupied at the time of listing 

contain the features essential to the 

conservation that may require special 

management considerations or 

protections. Primary threats to the 

spring systems designated as critical 

habitat for the three invertebrate species 

that may require special management 

are summarized in Table 2. The threats 

for individual springs vary according to 

the degree of urbanization and 

availability of aquifer source water, but 

possible threats generally include 

prolonged cessation of spring flows (in 

1956, Comal Springs at New Braunfels 

did not flow from mid-June to 

November (U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers 1965)) as a result of the loss 

of hydrological connectivity within the 

aquifer (e.g., groundwater pumping, 

excavation, concrete filling), pollutants 

(e.g., stormwater drainage, pesticide 

use), and non-native species (e.g., 

biological control, sport fish stocking). 

To address the threats affecting these 

three invertebrate species, certain 

special management actions may be 

required—for example, maintenance of 

sustainable groundwater use and 

subsurface flows, use of adequate 

buffers for water quality protection, 

selection of appropriate pesticides, and 

implementation of integrated pest 

management plans. 

Criteria Used To Identify Critical 

Habitat 

As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of 

the Act, we use the best scientific and 

commercial data available in 

determining areas that contain the 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

We reviewed available information 

that pertains to the presence and habitat 

requirements of these three invertebrate 

species, such as research published in 

peer-reviewed articles, data in reports 

submitted during section 7 

consultations, contracted surveys, 

agency reports and databases, and aerial 

photographs. Information that has been 

reviewed includes, but is not limited to: 

Holsinger (1967), Bosse et al. (1988), 

Barr and Spangler (1992), Arsuffi (1993), 

Barr (1993), BIO-WEST (2001, 2002a, 

2002b, 2003, 2004), Bowles et al. (2003), 

Fries et al. (2004), and Krejca (2005). As 

part of the process, we also reviewed the 

overall approach to conservation of 

these species undertaken by local, State, 

and Federal agencies, and private and 

non-governmental organizations 

operating within the species’ range 

since their listing in 1997. 

Peck’s cave amphipod—The Peck’s 

cave amphipod has been found in 

Comal Springs and Hueco Springs, 

which are both located in Comal 

County. While limited data have been 

collected on the extent to which this 

subterranean species exists below 

ground away from outlets of spring 

systems, other species within the genus 

Stygobromus are known to be widely 

distributed in groundwaters and cave 

systems (Holsinger 1972, p. 65). 

Although this species could possibly 

range throughout the 4-mile (mi) (8- 

kilometer (km)) distance between the 

two habitat spring systems through the 

‘‘honeycomb’’ pores and conduits of the 

Edwards Aquifer, it is not known to 

what extent below-ground connections 

between Comal Springs and Hueco 

Springs are inhabited by the amphipod. 

The only specific location information 

we have for this species regarding its 

distribution in the aquifer, aside from 

where they exit the aquifer via spring 

openings, is an observation of Peck’s 

cave amphipods at the bottom of a well 

(Panther Canyon well) that is located 

approximately 360 ft (110 m) away from 

the head outlet of Spring Run No. 1 (as 

designated in Barr and Spangler 1992, 

Fig. 1 on p. 42) in the Comal Springs 

complex (Krejca 2005, p. 83). 

We are designating critical habitat for 

the Peck’s cave amphipod in aquatic 

habitat associated with both Comal 

Springs and Hueco Springs. To include 

amphipod food sources in root/water 

interfaces around spring outlets, we also 

are designating an area consisting of a 

50-ft (15.2-m) distance from spring 

outlets of both Comal Springs and 

Hueco Springs (including several 

satellite springs that are located between 

the main outlet of Hueco Springs and 

the Guadalupe River). We believe that 

this 50-ft distance defines the lateral 

extent of critical habitat that contains 

PCEs necessary to provide for life 

functions of the Peck’s cave amphipod 

with respect to roots that can penetrate 

into the aquifer. Based on the 50-ft 

distance, the areas designated for the 

amphipod critical habitat are about 38.1 

ac (15.4 ha) at Comal Springs and 0.4 ac 

(0.2 ha) at Hueco Springs. The acreages 

were calculated with a computer-based 

Geographical Information System (GIS). 

Designated critical habitat does not 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39256 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

include areas where PCEs do not occur 

for this species, such as buildings, 

roads, sidewalks, campgrounds, and 

lawns. Where lakes are designated, 

critical habitat is only designated in a 

radius of 50 ft (15.2 m) around springs 

and does not include other areas of the 

lake bottom where springs do not occur. 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle—The 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle has been 

found in only two spring systems, 

Comal Springs and Fern Bank Springs, 

located in Comal and Hays Counties, 

respectively. The subterranean species 

is primarily collected near spring outlets 

(Barr and Spangler 1992, p. 41). While 

the extent to which the dryopid beetle 

inhabits subterranean areas away from 

spring outlets is unknown, this species 

does not swim and may be limited to 

relatively short ranges within the 

aquifer. In addition, immature stages of 

the species are thought to be terrestrial 

(Barr 1993, p. 56); however, they may 

also exist in spring outlets and in 

subterranean, air-filled chambers, such 

as caves (Barr and Spangler 1992, pp. 

51–52). Barr and Spangler (1992, p. 41) 

collected larvae of the dryopid beetle 

near spring outlets of Comal Springs 

and believed that the larvae were 

associated with ceilings of spring 

orifices. Extension of the dryopid beetle 

into the aquifer may also be limited by 

the lack of food materials associated 

with decaying plant roots that occur 

near spring orifices. 

For critical habitat of the Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, we are 

designating aquatic habitat and a 50-ft 

(15.2-m) distance from spring outlets of 

Comal Springs and Fern Bank Springs. 

The 50-ft (15.2-m) distance is based on 

evaluations of aerial photographs 

showing tree and shrub canopies 

occurring in proximity to spring outlets 

at both spring systems. These plant 

canopies reflect approximate distances 

where plant root systems interface with 

water flows of the two spring systems. 

Based on the 50-ft (15.2-m) distance, the 

area designated for dryopid beetle 

critical habitat at Comal Springs is about 

38.1 ac (15.4 ha), and 1.4 ac (0.6 ha) at 

Fern Bank Springs. These acreages 

include occupied areas that contain 

PCEs necessary for life history functions 

of the Comal Springs dryopid beetle. 

The acreages were calculated with GIS. 

Designated critical habitat does not 

include areas where PCEs do not occur 

for this species, such as lawns, 

buildings, roads, parking lots, and 

sidewalks. Where lakes are designated, 

critical habitat is only designated in a 

radius of 50 ft (15.2 m) around springs 

and does not include other areas of the 

lake bottom where springs do not occur. 

Comal Springs riffle beetle—For the 

Comal Springs riffle beetle, habitat is 

primarily restricted to surface water in 

two impounded spring systems that are 

located within Comal and Hays 

Counties in central Texas. In Comal 

County, the aquatic beetle species is 

found in various spring outlets and 

seeps of Comal Springs that occur 

within the spring runs of Landa Lake 

and within Landa Lake itself, over a 

linear distance of about 0.9 mi (1.4 km). 

The species has also been found in 

outlets of San Marcos Springs in the 

upstream portion of Spring Lake in Hays 

County. However, populations of Comal 

Springs riffle beetles may exist 

elsewhere in Spring Lake since spring 

systems within the lake are 

interconnected, and sampling to date for 

the species within the lake has been 

limited. 

For critical habitat of the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle, we are designating 

an area that encompasses all of the 

spring outlets that are found within the 

same lake (excluding a slough (slack 

water) portion that lacks spring outlets). 

Apart from the slough portion, the 

approximate linear distance of Spring 

Lake at its greatest length is 0.2 mi (0.3 

km). We are designating about 19.8 ac 

(8.0 ha) of aquatic habitat in Landa Lake 

and about 10.5 ac (4.3 ha) of aquatic 

habitat in Spring Lake as critical habitat. 

These areas contain PCEs necessary for 

life-history functions of the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle. We did not include 

the 50-ft (15.2-m) lateral extent around 

springs because, unlike the other two 

species, the riffle beetle is believed to 

occur on the surface and not 

subterranean. The acreages were 

estimated by calculating the crosshatched polygon area in two map 

figures of these lakes using GIS. 

Designated critical habitat does not 

include areas where PCEs do not occur 

for this species, such as lawns, 

buildings, roads, parking lots, and 

sidewalks. 

When determining critical habitat 

boundaries, we made every effort to 

avoid including within those 

boundaries of the maps contained 

within this final rule developed areas 

such as buildings, paved areas, and 

other structures that lack PCEs for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, or Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. These efforts included overlaying 

critical habitat boundaries onto aerial 

photos to determine the percentage of 

buildings, lawns, and paved areas that 

were located within the critical habitat 

designations. In the few instances that 

this occurred, these areas were excluded 

in the text of the critical habitat unit 

descriptions in the Critical Habitat 

Designation section of this final rule. 

The estimated acreages for these areas 

were so small (i.e., approximately 2 

percent or less of the critical habitat 

units involved), it was not practical to 

exclude them from the GIS coordinates 

provided for the designated critical 

habitat units in this final rule. We 

believe that eliminating buildings, 

lawns, and paved areas in the text of the 

critical habitat descriptions was the 

most feasible means of excluding these 

areas from the designations and 

provided a clearer indication of the 

exclusions for the public. The scale of 

the maps prepared under the parameters 

for publication within the Code of 

Federal Regulations may not reflect the 

exclusion of such developed areas. Any 

such structures and the surface under 

them inadvertently left inside critical 

habitat boundaries shown on the maps 

of this final rule have been excluded by 

text in the final rule and are not 

designated as critical habitat. Therefore, 

Federal actions limited to these areas 

would not trigger section 7 consultation, 

unless they may affect the species or 

PCEs in adjacent critical habitat. 

We are designating critical habitat in 

areas that we have determined were 

occupied at the time of listing and 

contain sufficient PCEs to support lifehistory functions essential for the 

conservation of the species. Units of 

Comal Springs, Fern Bank Springs, 

Hueco Springs, and San Marcos Springs 

were designated based on sufficient 

PCEs being present to support at least 

one life process for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and/or Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. A brief discussion of each area 

designated as critical habitat is provided 

in the unit descriptions below. 

Critical Habitat Designation 

We are designating four units as 

critical habitat for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

The critical habitat areas described 

below constitute our best assessment of 

areas determined to be occupied at the 

time of listing, that contain the PCEs 

essential for the conservation of these 

species and may require special 

management, and those additional areas 

that were not known to be occupied at 

the time of listing but were found to be 

essential to the conservation of the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. The four spring systems 

designated as critical habitat are: (1) The 

Comal Springs Unit, (2) the Fern Bank 

Springs Unit, (3) the Hueco Springs 

Unit, and (4) the San Marcos Springs 

Unit. Table 1 shows the occupied units, 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39257 

as well as provides approximate areas 

(ac/ha) of these spring units that have 

been determined to meet the definition 

of critical habitat for the three listed 

invertebrates. 

TABLE 1.—SPRING SYSTEM UNITS, OCCUPANCY, DISTANCES FROM SPRING OUTLETS, AND ACREAGES OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATED FOR THE PECK’S CAVE AMPHIPOD, COMAL SPRINGS DRYOPID BEETLE, AND COMAL SPRINGS RIFFLE

BEETLE IN COMAL AND HAYS COUNTIES, TEXAS

Species Spring systems designated as critical 

habitat areas 

Occupied 

at time of 

listing 

Currently 

occupied 

Distance from 

spring outlets 

for designated 

critical habitat 

ft (m) 

Designated 

critical habitat 

acreage 

ac (ha) 

Peck’s cave amphipod ............................ Comal Springs Unit ................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... 50 (15.2) 38.1 (15.4) 

Hueco Springs Unit ................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... 50 (15.2) 0.4 (0.2) 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle ................ Comal Springs Unit ................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... 50 (15.2) 38.1 (15.4) 

Fern Bank Springs Unit .......................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 50 (15.2) 1.4 (0.6) 

Comal Springs riffle beetle ..................... Comal Springs Unit ................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... (1) 19.8 (8.0) 

San Marcos Springs Unit ....................... Yes .......... Yes .......... (1) 10.5 (4.3) 

1 Not applicable. 

Table 2 summarizes land ownership 

and threats for the four spring systems 

designated for critical habitat. Land 

ownership for these spring systems 

involves only the State of Texas, 

municipalities, and private landowners, 

and does not involve Federal or Tribal 

holdings. Comal Springs and San 

Marcos Springs are surrounded, 

respectively, by the cities of New 

Braunfels and San Marcos. Both Comal 

Springs and San Marcos Springs have 

been impounded with dams to form 

Landa Lake and Spring Lake, 

respectively. Possible threats to these 

urban spring systems include, but are 

not limited to, water withdrawals, 

pesticide use, and stormwater runoff of 

pollutants that have accumulated on 

impervious cover (paved driveways, 

parking lots, sidewalks, etc.) in urban 

areas. A thorough threats discussion is 

found in the December 18, 1997, final 

rule listing these species (62 FR 66295). 

TABLE 2.—OWNERSHIP AND THREATS TO SPRINGS OR LISTED SPECIES FOR CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS

Designated critical habitat 

units 

Ownership of critical habitat by listed species 

ac (ha) Threats to spring system or listed species 

Comal Springs Unit, Comal 

County.

Peck’s cave amphipod ....................................................

State—19.8 (8.0) 

Municipal—7.3 (3.0) 

Private—11.0 (4.5) 

Water withdrawals, hazardous materials spills, pesticide 

use, excavation/construction, stormwater pollutants, 

invasive species, and well entrainment. 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle 

State—19.8 (8.0) 

Municipal—7.3 (3.0) 

Private—11.0 (4.5) 

Comal Springs riffle beetle 

State—19.8 (8.0) 

Fern Bank Springs Unit, 

Hays County.

Comal Springs dryopid beetle .........................................

Private—1.4 (0.6) 

Water withdrawals, excavation/construction, and pesticide use. 

Hueco Springs Unit, Comal 

County.

Peck’s cave amphipod ....................................................

Private—0.4 (0.2) 

Water withdrawals, hazardous materials spills, pesticide 

use, excavation/construction, stormwater pollutants, 

and well entrainment. 

San Marcos Springs Unit, 

Hays County.

Comal Springs riffle beetle ..............................................

State—10.5 (4.3) 

Water withdrawals, hazardous materials spills, pesticide 

use, excavation/construction, stormwater pollutants, 

and invasive species. 

We present brief descriptions of all 

units and reasons why they meet the 

definition of critical habitat for Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

below. Maps of the designated critical 

habitat units are provided in the 

Regulation Promulgation section of this 

rule. 

Comal Springs Unit—Comal County, 

Texas 

The Comal Springs system provides 

habitat for all three listed invertebrate 

species, along with a federally listed 

fish, the endangered fountain darter 

(Etheostoma fonticola). No other critical 

habitat has been designated at this 

spring system. Comal Springs provides 

all of the PCEs necessary for 

conservation of the three invertebrate 

species. The spring system primarily 

occurs as a series of spring outlets that 

lie along the west shoreline of Landa 

Lake and within the lake itself. This 

nearly L-shaped lake is surrounded by 

the City of New Braunfels. Practically 

all of the spring outlets and spring runs 

associated with Comal Springs occur 

within the upper part of the lake above 

the confluence of Spring Run No. 1 with 

the lake. The land ownership of Comal 

Springs consists of private, municipal, 

and State holdings. The surface water 

and bottom of Landa Lake are Stateowned. The City of New Braunfels owns 

approximately 40 percent of the land 

surface adjacent to the lake, and private 

landowners own approximately 60 

percent. Approximate acreages of 

surface land ownership within the 

designated critical habitat unit and 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39258 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

threats to the unit are shown in Table 

2. 

Critical habitat for the three listed 

invertebrate species in the Comal 

Springs Unit is as follows: 

(1) Landa Lake (Comal Springs riffle 

beetle only)—aquatic habitat within the 

lake and outlying spring runs that occur 

from the confluence of Blieders Creek at 

the upstream end of Landa Lake down 

to the lake’s lowermost point of 

confluence with Spring Run No. 1. The 

part of Landa Lake that lies below the 

confluence with Spring Run No. 1 down 

to the impounding dams at the 

downstream end of the lake is not 

included. 

(2) Aquatic habitat and shoreline 

areas of Landa Lake (Peck’s cave 

amphipod and Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle only)—aquatic habitat within the 

lake and outlying spring runs that occur 

from the confluence of Blieders Creek at 

the upstream end of Landa Lake down 

to the lake’s lowermost point of 

confluence with Spring Run No. 1. The 

part of Landa Lake that lies below the 

confluence with Spring Run No. 1 down 

to the impounding dams at the 

downstream end of the lake is not 

included. Land areas along the shoreline 

of Landa Lake and on small islands 

inside the lake that are within a 50-ft 

(15.2-m) distance from habitat spring 

outlets are included in the critical 

habitat. These shoreline areas in 

proximity to spring outlets provide trees 

and shrubs with roots that penetrate 

underground to serve as habitat for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod and Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle. The critical 

habitat designated for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod and Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle includes only aquatic and 

shoreline areas where PCEs exist for 

these two species and does not include 

areas where these features do not occur, 

such as lawns, buildings, roads, parking 

lots, and sidewalks. Where lakes are 

included, critical habitat is only 

designated for areas within a radius of 

50 ft (15.2 m) around springs and does 

not include other areas of the lake 

bottom in areas where springs are 

absent. 

Fern Bank Springs Unit—Hays County, 

Texas 

The Fern Bank Springs system 

provides habitat for only the Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle. No other critical 

habitat has been designated at this 

spring system. Fern Bank Springs 

provides all of the PCEs necessary for 

conservation of this species. The spring 

system is located approximately 0.2 mi 

(0.4 km) east of the junction of 

Sycamore Creek with the Blanco River 

in Hays County. This spring system 

occurs in a rural area and is relatively 

unaffected by current urban activities in 

the vicinity of the springs. It consists of 

a main outlet and a number of seep 

springs that occur at the base of a high 

bluff overlooking the Blanco River. This 

spring system is located entirely on land 

that is privately owned. Approximate 

acreages of land ownership 

encompassed within the designated 

critical habitat unit and threats to the 

unit are shown in Table 2. 

Critical habitat for the Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle in the Fern Bank Springs 

Unit as follows: Fern Bank Springs—

aquatic habitat and land areas that are 

within a 50-ft (15.2-m) distance from 

spring outlets, including the main outlet 

of Fern Bank Springs and its associated 

seep springs. These land areas in 

proximity to spring outlets provide trees 

and shrubs with roots that penetrate 

underground to serve as habitat for the 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle. The 

critical habitat designated for the Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle includes only 

areas where PCEs exist for this species 

and does not include areas where these 

features do not occur, such as buildings, 

lawns, or paved areas. 

Hueco Springs Unit—Comal County, 

Texas 

The Hueco Springs system provides 

habitat for only the Peck’s cave 

amphipod. No other critical habitat has 

been designated at this spring system. 

Hueco Springs provides all of the PCEs 

necessary for conservation of this 

species. This spring system occurs in a 

rural area and is relatively unaffected by 

current urban activities in the vicinity of 

the springs. It has a main outlet that is 

located approximately 0.1 mi (0.2 km) 

south of the junction of Elm Creek with 

the Guadalupe River in Comal County. 

The main outlet itself lies 

approximately 500 ft (152 m) from the 

west bank of the Guadalupe River. 

Several satellite springs lie further south 

between the main outlet and the river. 

This spring system is located entirely on 

private land. The main outlet of Hueco 

Springs is located on undeveloped land, 

but the satellite springs occur within 

undeveloped areas of a privately owned 

campground. Approximate acreages of 

land ownership encompassed within 

the designated critical habitat unit and 

threats to the unit are indicated in Table 

2. 

We designate critical habitat for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod within the Hueco 

Springs Unit as follows: 

(1) Hueco Springs—aquatic habitat 

and land areas that are within 50 ft (15.2 

m) from habitat spring outlets, including 

the main outlet of Hueco Springs and its 

associated satellite springs. These land 

areas in proximity to spring outlets 

provide trees and shrubs with roots that 

penetrate underground to serve as 

habitat for the Peck’s cave amphipod. 

The critical habitat designated for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod includes only 

aquatic habitat and land areas where 

PCEs exist for this species. Areas 

consisting of buildings, roads, 

sidewalks, campgrounds, and lawns are 

excluded from this designation. 

San Marcos Springs Unit—Hays 

County, Texas 

The San Marcos Springs system 

provides habitat only for the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle. However, the San 

Marcos Springs system provides habitat 

for five other federally listed species: (1) 

The endangered fountain darter, (2) the 

endangered San Marcos gambusia 

(Gambusia georgei), (3) the threatened 

San Marcos salamander (Eurycea nana), 

(4) the endangered Texas blind 

salamander (Eurycea (formerly 

Typhlomolge) rathbuni), and (5) 

endangered Texas wild-rice (Zizania 

texana) (Service 1996, p. 6). However, 

the San Marcos gambusia has not been 

found in surveys during recent years 

and is presumed to be extinct (Edwards 

1999, p. 3). Critical habitat has been 

designated for the fountain darter, San 

Marcos gambusia, San Marcos 

salamander, and Texas wild-rice within 

Spring Lake and portions of the San 

Marcos River that lie downstream from 

Spring Lake (45 FR 47355, July 14, 

1980). The San Marcos Springs unit 

provides all of the PCEs necessary for 

conservation of the Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. The spring system primarily 

occurs as a series of spring outlets that 

lie at the bottom of Spring Lake and 

along its shoreline. The lake is 

surrounded by the City of San Marcos 

in Hays County. The spring outlets 

associated with San Marcos Springs 

occur within the main part of the lake, 

excluding the slough portion that exists 

as an arm of the lake. The land 

ownership involving San Marcos 

Springs consists entirely of State 

holdings. The surface water and bottom 

of Spring Lake are State-owned; the 

State-affiliated Texas State University 

owns the adjacent land surface. 

Approximate acreages of surface land 

ownership in the designated critical 

habitat unit and threats to the unit are 

shown in Table 2. 

We designate critical habitat for the 

Comal Springs riffle beetle in the San 

Marcos Springs unit as: Spring Lake—

aquatic habitat areas within the lake 

upstream of Spring Lake dam, with the 

exception of the slough portion of the 

lake upstream of its confluence with the 

main body. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39259 

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 

Courts of Appeal have invalidated this 

definition. 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 PCEs 

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. 

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 

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 the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, or Comal Springs riffle 

beetle or their 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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 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 Federal Emergency 

Management Agency) will also be 

subject to the section 7 consultation 

process. Federal actions requiring 

section 7 consultation also include 

pumping of Edwards Aquifer water by 

Federal agencies, such as the 

Department of Defense or Service. 

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 the Peck’s 

Cave Amphipod, Comal Springs 

Dryopid Beetle, and Comal Springs 

Riffle Beetle and Their Critical Habitat 

Jeopardy Standard 

The Service has applied an analytical 

framework for jeopardy analyses of 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle that relies heavily on the 

importance of habitat conditions to the 

survival and recovery of these species. 

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

on the habitat conditions necessary to 

support them. 

The jeopardy analysis usually 

expresses the survival and recovery 

needs of the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle 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 species, 

inclusive of associated habitat 

conditions, a jeopardy finding is 

warranted because of the relationship of 

each core area population to the 

survival and recovery of the species as 

a whole. 

Adverse Modification Standard 

For the reasons described in the 

Director’s December 9, 2004, 

memorandum, 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 PCEs 

to be functionally established) to serve 

the intended conservation role for the 

species. Generally, the conservation role 

of critical habitat units for the Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle is 

to have each unit support viable 

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 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39260 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

those that alter the PCEs to an extent 

that the conservation value of critical 

habitat for Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle is 

appreciably reduced. Activities that, 

when carried out, funded, or authorized 

by a Federal agency, may affect critical 

habitat and, therefore, should result in 

consultation for these listed species 

include, but are not limited to: 

(1) Actions that can negatively affect 

the PCEs of the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, or Comal 

Springs riffle beetle; 

(2) Activities that would significantly 

and detrimentally alter the water quality 

in any of the spring systems listed above 

and would thereby destroy or adversely 

modify the critical habitat for any of 

theses species. These activities include, 

but are not limited to, sedimentation 

from construction or release of chemical 

or biological pollutants into the surface 

water or connected groundwater at a 

point source or by dispersed release 

(non-point source); such activities could 

also alter water conditions to a point 

that negatively affects these invertebrate 

species; 

(3) Actions that change the existing 

and historic flow regimes and would 

thereby significantly and detrimentally 

alter the PCEs necessary for 

conservation of these species. Such 

activities could include, but are not 

limited to, water withdrawal, 

impoundment, and water diversions. 

These activities could eliminate or 

reduce the habitat necessary for the 

growth, reproduction, or survival of 

these invertebrate species; and 

(4) Actions that remove hydraulic 

connectivity of the aquifer and the 

spring areas where it exists and would 

thereby negatively affect the PCEs of the 

designated critical habitat of these 

species and the population dynamics of 

the species. Alteration of subsurface 

water flows through destruction of 

geologic features (for example, 

excavation) or creation of impediments 

to flow (for example, concrete filling), 

especially in proximity to spring outlets, 

could negatively alter the hydraulic 

connectivity necessary to sustain these 

species. It is necessary for subsurface 

habitat to remain intact with sufficient 

hydraulic connectivity of flow paths 

and conduits to ensure that PCEs (water 

quality, water quantity, and food 

supply) for the designated critical 

habitat remain adequate for all three 

listed invertebrates. 

Due in large part to the nature of the 

aquifer and spring systems, ongoing 

human activities that occur outside the 

designated critical habitat may threaten 

the physical and biological features of 

the designated critical habitat. While we 

are only designating critical habitat in 

occupied areas where PCEs exist and are 

in need of special management (i.e., 

areas meeting the Service’s criteria for 

defining critical habitat), consultation 

may also be needed outside of 

designated areas in order to avoid 

adverse modification of the PCEs within 

the designation. Federal activities 

outside of critical habitat (such as 

groundwater pumping, pollution, 

issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, 

highway construction, etc.) are subject 

to review under section 7 of the Act if 

they may affect these species or 

adversely affect their critical habitat. 

We consider all of the units 

designated as critical habitat to contain 

features essential to the conservation of 

the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, or Comal 

Springs riffle beetle. All units are within 

the geographic range of the species, all 

were occupied by the species at the time 

of listing (based on observations made 

within the last 9 years), and are likely 

to be used by these listed invertebrates. 

Federal agencies already consult with us 

on activities in areas currently occupied 

by these listed invertebrates, or if the 

species may be affected by the action, to 

ensure that their actions do not 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, or Comal 

Springs riffle beetle. 

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

Act—Approved Integrated Natural 

Resource Management Plans 

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. 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 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. 

There are no Department of Defense 

lands within the designated critical 

habitat that have completed an INRMP. 

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 Secretary is afforded broad 

discretion, and the Congressional record 

is clear that, in making a determination 

under the section, the Secretary has 

discretion as to which factors and how 

much weight will be given to any factor. 

Under section 4(b)(2), in considering 

whether to exclude a particular area 

from the designation, we must identify 

the benefits of including the area in the 

designation, identify the benefits of 

excluding the area from the designation, 

determine whether the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

inclusion. If an exclusion is 

contemplated, then we must determine 

whether excluding the area would result 

in the extinction of the species. In the 

following sections, we address a number 

of general issues that are relevant to the 

exclusions we considered. 

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

we must consider relevant impacts in 

addition to economic ones. We 

determined that the lands within the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle are not owned or managed by the 

Department of Defense; there are 

currently no habitat conservation plans 

for the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle; and the designation 

does not include any Tribal lands or 

trust resources. 

We have considered a number of 

programs that exist at the State and local 

levels (e.g., EAA and Texas Commission 

for Environmental Quality) to protect 

the Edwards Aquifer and manage spring 

flows. As a result of a ruling in a 1991 

court case (Sierra Club v. Secretary of 

the Interior, No. MO–91–CA–069), we 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39261 

identified minimum spring flows from 

Comal and San Marcos springs likely to 

cause take, jeopardy, and adverse 

modification of critical habitat for other 

listed aquatic species. As a result of the 

Sierra Club lawsuit, the State legislature 

created the EAA through Senate Bill 

1477 to regulate groundwater 

withdrawals. The EAA has issued 

withdrawal permits and created drought 

response plans that help protect the 

PCEs related to water quantity and 

temperature. The EAA has prepared a 

draft Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) to 

provide for water quantity in the aquifer 

and protect spring dependent species. If 

finalized and permitted, the HCP is 

expected to help protect the aquifer. 

However, at this time the HCP has not 

been completed and the EAA is 

continuing to develop aquifer 

management strategies to permit 

appropriate pumping levels and 

conserve downstream spring flows. The 

full effects of future pumping strategies 

on spring flows remain uncertain and 

do not allow us to exclude any areas 

from critical habitat based on the 

benefits of the Edwards Aquifer 

management. 

Other programs that provide some 

aquifer protection are Edwards Aquifer 

Rules and Phase I optional water quality 

measures of the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The 

Edwards Aquifer Rules provide 

protection for drinking water, and the 

Phase I measures provide protection for 

fountain darter, Texas wild-rice, San 

Marcos salamander, and San Marcos 

gambusia. The Edwards Aquifer Rules 

protect water quality by reducing 

pollutant loading through the 

implementation of best management 

practices that can help prevent 

degradation of groundwater. The Phase 

I optional water quality measures 

include enhanced best management 

practices that protect sensitive karst 

features. These measures also contain 

other protective actions that can be 

applied to many types of new projects. 

The Edwards Aquifer Rules and Phase 

I optional measures provide some 

benefits for the three Comal Springs 

invertebrates. However, the Phase I 

optional measures are not mandated for 

every project. Therefore we have 

considered excluding but have not 

excluded any lands from this 

designation based on the potential 

benefits from these planned or existing 

aquifer and water quality management 

initiatives. 

We anticipate no impact to national 

security, Tribal lands, partnerships, or 

habitat conservation plans from this 

critical habitat designation. Based on 

the best available information, including 

the prepared economic analysis, we 

believe that all of these units contain the 

features that are essential for the 

conservation of the species. Our 

economic analysis does not indicate any 

areas within the critical habitat 

designation will bear a disproportionate 

cost of the designation. Therefore, we 

have found no areas for which the 

benefits of exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion, and so have not 

excluded any areas from this 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle based on economic impacts. As 

such, we have considered but not 

excluded any lands from this 

designation based on the potential 

impacts to economic factors. 

Economics 

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

to designate critical habitat on the basis 

of the best scientific information 

available and to consider the economic 

and other relevant impacts of 

designating a particular area as critical 

habitat. We may exclude areas from 

critical habitat upon a determination 

that the benefits of such exclusions 

outweigh the benefits of specifying such 

areas as critical habitat. We cannot 

exclude such areas from critical habitat 

when such exclusion will result in the 

extinction of the species concerned. 

Following the publication of the 

proposed critical habitat designation, 

we conducted an economic analysis to 

estimate the potential economic effect of 

the designation. The draft analysis was 

made available for public review on 

March 16, 2007 (72 FR 12585). We 

accepted comments on the draft analysis 

until April 16, 2007. 

The primary purpose of the economic 

analysis is to estimate the potential 

economic impacts associated with the 

conservation of the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

This economic analysis considers the 

economic efficiency effects that may 

result from the designation, including 

habitat protections that may be coextensive with the listing of the species. 

It also addresses distribution of impacts, 

including an assessment of the potential 

effects on small entities and the energy 

industry. This information can be used 

by the Secretary to assess whether the 

effects of the designation might unduly 

burden a particular group or economic 

sector. 

This analysis focuses on the direct 

and indirect costs of the rule. However, 

economic impacts to land use activities 

can exist in the absence of critical 

habitat. These impacts may result from, 

for example, section 7 consultations 

under the jeopardy standard, local 

zoning laws, State and natural resource 

laws, and enforceable management 

plans and best management practices 

applied by other State and Federal 

agencies. 

Under scenarios 1 and 2 in the draft 

economic analysis, impacts associated 

with water use changes comprised the 

vast majority, or between 91 and 99 

percent, of the total quantified impacts 

in the areas we proposed for 

designation. Economic impacts were 

based on the total permitted 

withdrawals from the Edwards Aquifer 

that are planned to be reduced in part 

to provide spring flows that were 

identified in a 1993 lawsuit concerning 

five endangered species in the Edwards 

Aquifer that share habitat with the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. The analysis considered that as 

soon as 2008, total permitted water 

withdrawals in the Edwards Aquifer 

may be further limited from the present 

549,000 acre-feet per year to 400,000 

acre-feet per year (scenario 1). It is also 

possible that, in dry years, additional 

restrictions may be imposed that will 

further limit aquifer withdrawals to 

340,000 acre-feet (scenario 2). The draft 

economic analysis examined social 

welfare and regional economic impacts 

that could result from these limits to 

water withdrawals in the aquifer. It 

should be noted that the majority of 

economic impacts quantified in the 

draft economic analysis are jointly 

caused by eight endangered species, 

including the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle. Because all 

of these species reside in the same 

habitat, separating future impacts of the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle from those of the other listed 

species in the aquifer was not 

attempted. 

We estimated costs related to 

conservation activities for the area 

proposed for designation of critical 

habitat for the Peck’s cave amphipod, 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and 

Comal Springs riffle beetle under 

sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act to be 

approximately $24.5 million over the 

next 20 years under scenario 1, or 

$154.3 million under scenario 2 in 

undiscounted dollars (annualized 

dollars are estimated to be $1.2 million 

under scenario 1 and $7.7 million under 

scenario 2). Future economic impacts 

associated with conservation activities 

in areas designated as critical habitat at 

a 3 percent discount rate are estimated 

to be $18 million over the next 20 years 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39262 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

under scenario 1, or $113 million under 

scenario 2 (annualized dollars are 

estimated to be $1.2 million under 

scenario 1 and $7.6 million under 

scenario 2). Future economic impacts 

associated with conservation efforts in 

areas proposed as critical habitat at a 7 

percent discount rate were estimated to 

be $12.5 million over the next 20 years 

under scenario 1, or $78.5 million under 

scenario 2 (annualized dollars are 

estimated to be $1.3 million under 

scenario 1 and $7.4 million under 

scenario 2). No areas were excluded 

from this designation as a result of the 

economic analysis. The economic 

analysis did not consider recent changes 

to the Edwards Aquifer Authority 

passed by the Texas Legislature in May 

2007 (Senate Bill 3). 

A copy of the final economic analysis 

with supporting documents may be 

obtained by contacting U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Branch of Endangered 

Species (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT) or by download from the 

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

southwest/es/Library/. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

In accordance with Executive Order 

(E.O.) 12866, this document is a 

significant rule in that it may raise novel 

legal and policy issues, but will not 

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. As 

explained above, we prepared an 

economic analysis of this action. We 

used this analysis to meet the 

requirement of section 4(b)(2) of the Act 

to determine the economic 

consequences of designating the specific 

areas as critical habitat. We also used it 

to help determine whether to exclude 

any area from critical habitat, as 

provided for under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, if we determine that the benefits of 

such exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

specifying an area as part of the critical 

habitat, unless we determine, based on 

the best scientific data available, that 

the failure to designate such an area as 

critical habitat will result in the 

extinction of the species. 

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

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA) (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 effect of the rule on small 

entities (small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA 

to require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of factual basis for certifying 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The SBREFA 

also amended the RFA to require a 

certification statement. 

Small entities include small 

organizations, such as independent 

nonprofit organizations; small 

governmental jurisdictions, including 

school boards and city and town 

governments that serve fewer than 

50,000 residents; as well as small 

businesses. Small businesses include 

manufacturing and mining concerns 

with fewer than 500 employees, 

wholesale trade entities with fewer than 

100 employees, retail and service 

businesses with less than $5 million in 

annual sales, general and heavy 

construction businesses with less than 

$27.5 million in annual business, 

special trade contractors doing less than 

$11.5 million in annual business, and 

agricultural businesses with annual 

sales less than $750,000. To determine 

if potential economic impacts to these 

small entities are significant, we 

consider the types of activities that 

might trigger regulatory impacts under 

this rule, as well as the types of project 

modifications that may result. In 

general, the term ‘‘significant economic 

impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical 

small business firm’s business 

operations. 

To determine if the rule could 

significantly affect a substantial number 

of small entities, we consider the 

number of small entities affected within 

particular types of economic activities 

(such as housing development, grazing, 

oil and gas production, timber 

harvesting). We apply the ‘‘substantial 

number’’ test individually to each 

industry to determine if certification is 

appropriate. However, the SBREFA does 

not explicitly define ‘‘substantial 

number’’ or ‘‘significant economic 

impact.’’ Consequently, to assess 

whether a ‘‘substantial number’’ of 

small entities is affected by this 

designation, this analysis considers the 

relative number of small entities likely 

to be impacted in an area. In some 

circumstances, especially with critical 

habitat designations of limited extent, 

we may aggregate across all industries 

and consider whether the total number 

of small entities affected is substantial. 

In estimating the number of small 

entities potentially affected, we also 

consider whether their activities have 

any Federal involvement. 

Designation of critical habitat only 

affects activities conducted, funded, or 

permitted by Federal agencies. Some 

kinds of activities are unlikely to have 

any Federal involvement and so will not 

be affected by critical habitat 

designation. In areas where the species 

is present, Federal agencies already are 

required to consult with us under 

section 7 of the Act on activities they 

fund, permit, or implement that may 

affect the Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle. Federal agencies 

also must consult with us if their 

activities may affect critical habitat. 

Designation of critical habitat, therefore, 

could result in an additional economic 

impact on small entities due to the 

requirement to reinitiate consultation 

for ongoing Federal activities. 

The draft economic analysis 

examined the potential for Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

conservation efforts to affect small 

entities. This analysis was based on the 

estimated impacts associated with the 

proposed critical habitat designation 

and evaluated the potential for 

economic impacts related to water use 

for agricultural activities, construction 

or development, and aquatic restoration. 

Aquatic restoration activities were not 

anticipated to affect small entities, as 

these activities will be carried out by a 

Federal agency (U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers). Accordingly, the small 

business analysis focused on economic 

impacts resulting from potential water 

use changes for agricultural activities 

and construction or development 

activities. Future restrictions on 

groundwater pumping are expected to 

cause irrigated crop acreage to shift to 

dryland production. Under Scenario 1, 

where future groundwater pumping is 

restricted to 400,000 acre-feet per year, 

approximately 33,000 acres of irrigated 

cropland are expected to shift to 

dryland production, and 507 farms are 

likely to experience a reduction in 

output valued between $8,000 and 

$44,000. Under Scenario 2, where future 

groundwater pumping is restricted to 

340,000 acre-feet per year, 

approximately 35,000 acres of irrigated 

cropland are expected to shift to 

dryland production, and 532 farms are 

likely to experience a reduction in 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39263 

output valued between $9,000 and 

$45,000. However, these costs are 

associated with the conservation of the 

species, and may result from desirable 

management, but not necessarily 

management that can be required under 

the Act. For those development projects 

likely to be undertaken by a small 

entity, Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal 

Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal 

Springs riffle beetle conservation costs 

are estimated to be between $1,340 and 

$1,710. Assuming the annual revenues 

of an average small developer are $18.0 

million, the average annualized cost per 

project is about 0.1 percent of typical 

annual sales. 

In general, two different mechanisms 

in section 7 consultations could lead to 

additional regulatory requirements for 

the approximately four small 

businesses, on average, that may be 

required to consult with us each year 

regarding their project’s impact on the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle and its habitat. First, if we 

conclude, in a biological opinion, that a 

proposed action is likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of a species or 

adversely modify its critical habitat, we 

can offer ‘‘reasonable and prudent 

alternatives.’’ Reasonable and prudent 

alternatives are alternative actions that 

can be implemented in a manner 

consistent with the scope of the Federal 

agency’s legal authority and 

jurisdiction, that are economically and 

technologically feasible, and that would 

avoid jeopardizing the continued 

existence of listed species or result in 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 

A Federal agency and an applicant may 

elect to implement a reasonable and 

prudent alternative associated with a 

biological opinion that has found 

jeopardy or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. An agency or applicant 

could alternatively choose to seek an 

exemption from the requirements of the 

Act or proceed without implementing 

the reasonable and prudent alternative. 

However, unless an exemption were 

obtained, the Federal agency or 

applicant would be at risk of violating 

section 7(a)(2) of the Act if it chose to 

proceed without implementing the 

reasonable and prudent alternatives. 

Second, if we find that a proposed 

action is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of a listed animal or 

plant species, we may identify 

reasonable and prudent measures 

designed to minimize the amount or 

extent of take and require the Federal 

agency or applicant to implement such 

measures through non-discretionary 

terms and conditions. We may also 

identify discretionary conservation 

recommendations designed to minimize 

or avoid the adverse effects of a 

proposed action on listed species or 

critical habitat, help implement 

recovery plans, or to develop 

information that could contribute to the 

recovery of the species. 

Based on our experience with 

consultations pursuant to section 7 of 

the Act for all listed species, virtually 

all projects—including those that, in 

their initial proposed form, would result 

in jeopardy or adverse modification 

determinations in section 7 

consultations—can be implemented 

successfully with, at most, the adoption 

of reasonable and prudent alternatives. 

These measures, by definition, must be 

economically feasible and within the 

scope of authority of the Federal agency 

involved in the consultation. We can 

only describe the general kinds of 

actions that may be identified in future 

reasonable and prudent alternatives. 

These are based on our understanding of 

the needs of the species and the threats 

it faces, as described in the final listing 

rule and this critical habitat designation. 

Within the final critical habitat units, 

the types of Federal actions or 

authorized activities that we have 

identified as potential concerns are: 

(1) Regulation of activities affecting 

waters of the United States by the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers under section 

404 of the Clean Water Act; 

(2) Regulation of water flows, 

damming, diversion, and channelization 

implemented or licensed by Federal 

agencies; 

(3) Activities that may lead to storm 

water runoff that are regulated under the 

National Pollution Discharge 

Elimination System of the Clean Water 

Act by the Environmental Protection 

Agency; 

(4) Activities authorized, carried out, 

or funded by any Federal agency that 

may result in point source storm water 

pollutant discharges, including 

excavation, site development, 

construction, and other surface 

disturbing activities; 

(5) Activities authorized, carried out, 

or funded by the Federal Highway 

Administration that could lead to the 

introduction of pollutants into receiving 

waters from highway runoff; and 

(6) Activities authorized, carried out, 

or funded by any Federal agency that 

could result in a reduction of 

groundwater supplies that support the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. 

It is likely that a developer or other 

project proponent could modify a 

project or take measures to protect the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. The kinds of actions that may be 

included if future reasonable and 

prudent alternatives become necessary 

include conservation set-asides, 

management of competing nonnative 

species, restoration of degraded habitat, 

and regular monitoring. These are based 

on our understanding of the needs of the 

species and the threats it faces, as 

described in the final listing rule and 

proposed critical habitat designation. 

These measures are not likely to result 

in a significant economic impact to 

project proponents. 

In summary, we have considered 

whether this would result in a 

significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities. We 

have determined, for the above reasons 

and based on currently available 

information, that it is not likely to affect 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Federal involvement, and thus section 7 

consultations, would be limited to a 

subset of the area designated. The most 

likely Federal involvement could 

include actions needing a section 404 

permit under the Clean Water Act, 

actions receiving Federal Highway 

Administration funding, and actions 

needing a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended. A regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) 

Under SBREFA, this rule is not a 

major rule. Our detailed assessment of 

the economic effects of this designation 

is described in the economic analysis. 

Based on the effects identified in the 

economic analysis, we believe that this 

rule will not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more, 

will not cause a major increase in costs 

or prices for consumers, and will not 

have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. Refer to 

the final economic analysis for a 

discussion of the effects of this 

determination. 

Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 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. This final 

rule to designated critical habitat for the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39264 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle 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 et 

seq.), we make 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, or 

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 who receive Federal 

funding, assistance, permits or 

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 it will not 

produce a Federal mandate of $100 

million or greater in any year; that is, it 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act. The designation of critical habitat 

imposes no obligations on State or local 

governments. As such, a Small 

Government Agency Plan is not 

required. 

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 38.5 ac (15.6 

ha) of lands in Comal County, Texas, as 

critical habitat for the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, 39.5 ac (16.0 ha) of lands in 

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas, as 

critical habitat for the Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and 30.3 ac (12.3 ha) of 

lands in Comal and Hays counties, 

Texas, as critical habitat for the Comal 

Springs riffle beetle in a takings 

implication assessment. The takings 

implications assessment concludes that 

this final designation of critical habitat 

does not pose significant takings 

implications for lands within or affected 

by the designation. 

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132 (Federalism), the rule does not 

have significant Federalism effects. A 

Federalism assessment is not required. 

In keeping with the Department of the 

Interior and Department of Commerce 

policy, we requested information from, 

and coordinated development of, this 

final critical habitat designation with 

appropriate State resource agencies in 

Texas. The designation may have some 

benefit to these governments in that the 

areas that contain the features essential 

to the conservation of the species are 

more clearly defined, and the primary 

constituent elements of the habitat 

necessary to the conservation of the 

species are specifically identified. While 

making this definition and 

identification does not alter where and 

what federally sponsored activities may 

occur, it may assist these local 

governments in long-range planning 

(rather than waiting for case-by-case 

section 7 consultations to occur). 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988 (Civil Justice Reform), 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 are designating critical habitat in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

Endangered Species Act. This final 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 the Peck’s cave 

amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. 

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 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

It is our position that, outside the 

jurisdiction of the Tenth Federal Circuit, 

we do not need to prepare 

environmental analyses as defined by 

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 516 U.S. 1042 

(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 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39265 

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. In 

accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 

of June 5, 1997, ‘‘American Indian 

Tribal Rights, Federal—Tribal Trust 

Responsibilities, and the Endangered 

Species Act,’’ we readily acknowledge 

our responsibilities to work directly 

with tribes in developing programs for 

healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that 

tribal lands are not subject to the same 

controls as Federal public lands, to 

remain sensitive to Indian culture, and 

to make information available to tribes. 

We have determined that there are no 

Tribal lands occupied at the time of 

listing that contain the features essential 

for the conservation and no Tribal lands 

that are unoccupied areas that are 

essential for the conservation of the 

Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle 

beetle. Therefore, we have not 

designated critical habitat for the Peck’s 

cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle 

on Tribal lands. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this rulemaking is available upon 

request from the Field Supervisor, 

Austin Ecological Services Office (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Author(s) 

The primary authors of this final rule 

are staff of the Ecological Services Office 

in Austin, Texas (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Regulation Promulgation 

■ Accordingly, we 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. Amend § 17.11(h), the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, as 

follows: 

■ a. Under ‘‘INSECTS,’’ revise the 

entries for ‘‘Beetle, Comal Springs 

dryopid’’ and ‘‘Beetle, Comal Springs 

riffle’’ to read as set forth below; and 

■ b. Under ‘‘CRUSTACEANS,’’ revise 

the entry for ‘‘Amphipod, Peck’s cave’’

to read as set forth below. 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

Species 

Historic range 

Vertebrate 

population 

where endangered 

or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

* * * * * * * 

INSECTS 

* * * * * * * 

Beetle, Comal Springs 

dryopid.

Stygoparnus comalensis ... U.S.A. (TX) ....................... NA E 629 17.95(i) NA 

Beetle, Comal Springs riffle Heterelmis comalensis ...... U.S.A. (TX) ....................... NA E 629 17.95(i) NA 

* * * * * * * 

CRUSTACEANS 

* * * * * * * 

Amphipod, Peck’s cave ...... Stygobromus 

(=Stygonectes) Pecki.

U.S.A. (TX) ....................... NA E 629 17.95(h) NA 

* * * * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 17.95 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (h), add an entry for 

‘‘Peck’s cave amphipod (Stygobromus 

pecki)’’, in the same alphabetical order 

in which the species appears in the 

table at 50 CFR 17.11(h), to read as set 

forth below; and 

■ b. In paragraph (i), add entries for 

‘‘Comal Springs dryopid beetle 

(Stygoparnus comalensis)’’ and ‘‘Comal 

Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis 

comalensis)’’, in the same alphabetical 

order in which these species appear in 

the table at 50 CFR 17.11(h), to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) Crustaceans. 

* * * * * 

Peck’s cave amphipod (Stygobromus 

pecki). 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Comal County, Texas, on the maps 

below. 

(2) The primary constituent elements 

of critical habitat for Peck’s cave 

amphipod are: 

(i) High-quality water with no or 

minimal levels of pollutants, such as 

soaps and detergents (Brown 1987, p. 

261) and other compounds containing 

surfactants, heavy metals, pesticides, 

fertilizer nutrients, petroleum 

hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and 

veterinary medicines, and semi-volatile 

compounds, such as industrial cleaning 

agents, and including: 

(A) Low salinity with total dissolved 

solids that generally range from 307 to 

368 mg/L; and 

(B) Low turbidity that generally is less 

than 5 nephelometric turbity units; 

(ii) Aquifer water temperatures that 

range from approximately 68 to 75 °F 

(20 to 24 °C); and 

(iii) Food supply that includes 

detritus (decomposed materials), leaf 

litter, living plant material, algae, fungi, 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39266 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

bacteria and other microorganisms, and 

decaying roots. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures (such as buildings, 

aqueducts, roads, and other paved areas) 

and the land on which they are located 

existing within the legal boundaries on 

the effective date of this rule. Where 

lakes are designated, critical habitat is 

only designated for areas where springs 

occur and does not include areas of the 

lake bottom beyond a radius of 50 ft 

(15.2 m) from the spring outlet. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

by using ArcGIS. All coordinates are 

UTM zone 14 coordinate pairs, 

referenced to North American 

Horizontal Datum 1983. Coordinates 

were derived from 2004 digital 

orthophotographs. All acreage and 

mileage calculations were performed 

using GIS. 

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

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39267 

(6) Comal Springs Unit, Comal 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 583387, 3287251; 

583392, 3287264; 583405, 3287280; 

583404, 3287290; 583407, 3287301; 

583414, 3287307; 583425, 3287308; 

583425, 3287320; 583433, 3287328; 

583444, 3287330; 583454, 3287325; 

583463, 3287301; 583482, 3287272; 

583486, 3287286; 583501, 3287296; 

583520, 3287314; 583547, 3287326; 

583557, 3287333; 583572, 3287335; 

583586, 3287342; 583567, 3287387; 

583560, 3287408; 583559, 3287423; 

583534, 3287403; 583499, 3287359; 

583491, 3287347; 583484, 3287340; 

583471, 3287334; 583461, 3287334; 

583452, 3287340; 583450, 3287350; 

583454, 3287364; 583465, 3287374; 

583494, 3287415; 583521, 3287443; 

583526, 3287453; 583563, 3287477; 

583589, 3287503; 583613, 3287519; 

583643, 3287547; 583662, 3287561; 

583719, 3287617; 583759, 3287669; 

583780, 3287701; 583811, 3287743; 

583833, 3287764; 583848, 3287784; 

583892, 3287826; 583911, 3287850; 

583970, 3287907; 584008, 3287938; 

584047, 3287963; 584055, 3287964; 

584065, 3287960; 584073, 3287948; 

584074, 3287941; 584081, 3287952; 

584131, 3288011; 584164, 3288044; 

584183, 3288062; 584197, 3288071; 

584216, 3288093; 584236, 3288110; 

584258, 3288138; 584284, 3288161; 

584325, 3288209; 584343, 3288223; 

584364, 3288233; 584375, 3288243; 

584386, 3288244; 584401, 3288234; 

584403, 3288218; 584433, 3288201; 

584437, 3288193; 584436, 3288184; 

584416, 3288167; 584405, 3288167; 

584375, 3288184; 584365, 3288180; 

584344, 3288156; 584329, 3288131; 

584320, 3288125; 584298, 3288103; 

584273, 3288067; 584204, 3287997; 

584187, 3287985; 584176, 3287973; 

584152, 3287943; 584147, 3287933; 

584105, 3287880; 584080, 3287862; 

584049, 3287844; 584026, 3287815; 

584021, 3287805; 584013, 3287798; 

584009, 3287787; 583999, 3287775; 

583971, 3287751; 583947, 3287735; 

583927, 3287725; 583920, 3287718; 

583890, 3287704; 583850, 3287673; 

583845, 3287665; 583851, 3287662; 

583860, 3287650; 583865, 3287640; 

583865, 3287629; 583863, 3287622; 

583854, 3287609; 583840, 3287600; 

583836, 3287584; 583829, 3287576; 

583838, 3287552; 583841, 3287535; 

583841, 3287520; 583835, 3287501; 

583804, 3287452; 583790, 3287435; 

583766, 3287416; 583727, 3287406; 

583706, 3287406; 583695, 3287398; 

583686, 3287370; 583699, 3287298; 

583698, 3287288; 583694, 3287282; 

583617, 3287257; 583610, 3287258; 

583605, 3287262; 583597, 3287280; 

583584, 3287277; 583565, 3287270; 

583541, 3287255; 583534, 3287244; 

583518, 3287233; 583510, 3287211; 

583496, 3287192; 583480, 3287183; 

583459, 3287177; 583436, 3287178; 

583419, 3287184; 583400, 3287198; 

583396, 3287205; 583387, 3287251. 

(ii) Note: Comal Springs Unit (Map 2) 

follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39268 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(7) Hueco Springs Unit, Comal 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 583113, 3292498; 

583114, 3292498; 583115, 3292498; 

583116, 3292498; 583117, 3292498; 

583118, 3292497; 583119, 3292497; 

583120, 3292497; 583120, 3292496; 

583121, 3292496; 583122, 3292495; 

583123, 3292495; 583124, 3292494; 

583124, 3292493; 583125, 3292493; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39269 

583126, 3292492; 583126, 3292491; 

583127, 3292490; 583127, 3292489; 

583127, 3292489; 583128, 3292488; 

583128, 3292487; 583128, 3292486; 

583128, 3292485; 583128, 3292484; 

583128, 3292483; 583128, 3292482; 

583128, 3292481; 583128, 3292480; 

583128, 3292479; 583128, 3292478; 

583127, 3292477; 583127, 3292477; 

583127, 3292476; 583126, 3292475; 

583126, 3292474; 583125, 3292473; 

583124, 3292473; 583124, 3292472; 

583123, 3292471; 583122, 3292471; 

583122, 3292470; 583121, 3292470; 

583120, 3292469; 583119, 3292469; 

583118, 3292468; 583117, 3292468; 

583116, 3292468; 583115, 3292468; 

583114, 3292468; 583113, 3292468; 

583112, 3292468; 583111, 3292468; 

583111, 3292468; 583110, 3292468; 

583109, 3292468; 583108, 3292469; 

583107, 3292469; 583106, 3292470; 

583105, 3292470; 583104, 3292471; 

583104, 3292471; 583103, 3292472; 

583102, 3292472; 583102, 3292473; 

583101, 3292474; 583100, 3292475; 

583100, 3292475; 583100, 3292476; 

583099, 3292477; 583099, 3292478; 

583099, 3292479; 583098, 3292480; 

583098, 3292481; 583098, 3292482; 

583098, 3292483; 583098, 3292484; 

583098, 3292485; 583098, 3292486; 

583098, 3292487; 583099, 3292488; 

583099, 3292488; 583099, 3292489; 

583100, 3292490; 583100, 3292491; 

583101, 3292492; 583101, 3292493; 

583102, 3292493; 583103, 3292494; 

583103, 3292495; 583104, 3292495; 

583105, 3292496; 583106, 3292496; 

583107, 3292497; 583108, 3292497; 

583108, 3292497; 583109, 3292498; 

583110, 3292498; 583111, 3292498; 

583112, 3292498; 583113, 3292498. 

(ii) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 583132, 3292420; 

583133, 3292421; 583133, 3292421; 

583133, 3292422; 583134, 3292423; 

583134, 3292424; 583134, 3292425; 

583135, 3292426; 583136, 3292426; 

583136, 3292427; 583137, 3292428; 

583138, 3292428; 583138, 3292429; 

583139, 3292430; 583140, 3292430; 

583141, 3292430; 583142, 3292431; 

583143, 3292431; 583143, 3292431; 

583144, 3292432; 583145, 3292432; 

583146, 3292432; 583147, 3292432; 

583148, 3292432; 583149, 3292432; 

583150, 3292432; 583151, 3292432; 

583152, 3292431; 583153, 3292431; 

583154, 3292431; 583155, 3292430; 

583155, 3292430; 583156, 3292429; 

583157, 3292429; 583158, 3292428; 

583158, 3292427; 583159, 3292427; 

583160, 3292426; 583160, 3292425; 

583161, 3292424; 583161, 3292423; 

583162, 3292422; 583162, 3292422; 

583162, 3292421; 583162, 3292420; 

583163, 3292419; 583163, 3292418; 

583163, 3292417; 583163, 3292416; 

583163, 3292415; 583162, 3292414; 

583162, 3292413; 583162, 3292412; 

583162, 3292411; 583161, 3292410; 

583161, 3292409; 583160, 3292409; 

583160, 3292408; 583159, 3292407; 

583159, 3292406; 583158, 3292406; 

583157, 3292405; 583156, 3292404; 

583156, 3292404; 583156, 3292403; 

583155, 3292402; 583155, 3292402; 

583155, 3292401; 583154, 3292400; 

583154, 3292399; 583153, 3292398; 

583152, 3292398; 583152, 3292397; 

583151, 3292396; 583150, 3292396; 

583149, 3292395; 583149, 3292395; 

583148, 3292394; 583147, 3292394; 

583146, 3292393; 583145, 3292393; 

583144, 3292393; 583143, 3292393; 

583142, 3292393; 583141, 3292393; 

583140, 3292393; 583139, 3292393; 

583138, 3292393; 583137, 3292393; 

583137, 3292393; 583136, 3292394; 

583135, 3292394; 583134, 3292395; 

583133, 3292395; 583132, 3292396; 

583132, 3292396; 583131, 3292397; 

583130, 3292397; 583129, 3292398; 

583129, 3292399; 583128, 3292400; 

583128, 3292400; 583127, 3292401; 

583127, 3292402; 583127, 3292403; 

583126, 3292404; 583126, 3292405; 

583126, 3292406; 583126, 3292407; 

583126, 3292408; 583126, 3292409; 

583126, 3292410; 583126, 3292411; 

583126, 3292412; 583127, 3292413; 

583127, 3292413; 583127, 3292414; 

583128, 3292415; 583128, 3292416; 

583129, 3292417; 583129, 3292418; 

583130, 3292418; 583131, 3292419; 

583131, 3292420; 583132, 3292420. 

(iii) Note: Hueco Springs Unit (Map 3) 

follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39270 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

(i) Insects. 

* * * * * 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle 

(Stygoparnus comalensis). 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Comal and Hays Counties, Texas, on 

the maps below. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39271 

(2) The primary constituent elements 

of critical habitat for the Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle are: 

(i) High-quality water with no or 

minimal levels of pollutants, such as 

soaps and detergents (Brown 1987, p. 

261) and other compounds containing 

surfactants, heavy metals, pesticides, 

fertilizer nutrients, petroleum 

hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and 

veterinary medicines, and semi-volatile 

compounds, such as industrial cleaning 

agents, and including: 

(A) Low salinity with total dissolved 

solids that generally range from 307 to 

368 mg/L; and 

(B) Low turbidity that generally is less 

than 5 nephelometric turbidity units; 

(ii) Aquifer water temperatures that 

range from approximately 68 to 75 °F 

(20 to 24 °C); 

(iii) A hydrologic regime that allows 

for adequate spring flows that provide 

levels of dissolved oxygen in the 

approximate range of 4.0 to 10.0 mg/L 

for respiration of the Comal Springs 

dryopid beetle; and 

(iv) Food supply that includes 

detritus (decomposed materials), leaf 

litter, living plant material, algae, fungi, 

bacteria and other microorganisms, and 

decaying roots. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures (such as buildings, 

aqueducts, roads, and other paved areas) 

and the land on which they are located 

existing with the legal boundaries on 

the effective date of this rule. Where 

lakes are designated, critical habitat is 

only designated for areas where springs 

occur and does not include areas of the 

lake bottom beyond a radius of 50 ft 

(15.2 m) from the spring outlet. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

by using ArcGIS. All coordinates are 

UTM zone 14 coordinate pairs, 

referenced to North American 

Horizontal Datum 1983. Coordinates 

were derived from 2004 digital 

orthophotographs. All acreage and 

mileage calculations were performed 

using GIS. 

(5) Note: Index map of the critical 

habitat units for Comal Springs dryopid 

beetle (Map 1) follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39272 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(6) Comal Springs Unit, Comal 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 583387, 3287251; 

583392, 3287264; 583405, 3287280; 

583404, 3287290; 583407, 3287301; 

583414, 3287307; 583425, 3287308; 

583425, 3287320; 583433, 3287328; 

583444, 3287330; 583454, 3287325; 

583463, 3287301; 583482, 3287272; 

583486, 3287286; 583501, 3287296; 

583520, 3287314; 583547, 3287326; 

583557, 3287333; 583572, 3287335; 

583586, 3287342; 583567, 3287387; 

583560, 3287408; 583559, 3287423; 

583534, 3287403; 583499, 3287359; 

583491, 3287347; 583484, 3287340; 

583471, 3287334; 583461, 3287334; 

583452, 3287340; 583450, 3287350; 

583454, 3287364; 583465, 3287374; 

583494, 3287415; 583521, 3287443; 

583526, 3287453; 583563, 3287477; 

583589, 3287503; 583613, 3287519; 

583643, 3287547; 583662, 3287561; 

583719, 3287617; 583759, 3287669; 

583780, 3287701; 583811, 3287743; 

583833, 3287764; 583848, 3287784; 

583892, 3287826; 583911, 3287850; 

583970, 3287907; 584008, 3287938; 

584047, 3287963; 584055, 3287964; 

584065, 3287960; 584073, 3287948; 

584074, 3287941; 584081, 3287952; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39273 

584131, 3288011; 584164, 3288044; 

584183, 3288062; 584197, 3288071; 

584216, 3288093; 584236, 3288110; 

584258, 3288138; 584284, 3288161; 

584325, 3288209; 584343, 3288223; 

584364, 3288233; 584375, 3288243; 

584386, 3288244; 584401, 3288234; 

584403, 3288218; 584433, 3288201; 

584437, 3288193; 584436, 3288184; 

584416, 3288167; 584405, 3288167; 

584375, 3288184; 584365, 3288180; 

584344, 3288156; 584329, 3288131; 

584320, 3288125; 584298, 3288103; 

584273, 3288067; 584204, 3287997; 

584187, 3287985; 584176, 3287973; 

584152, 3287943; 584147, 3287933; 

584105, 3287880; 584080, 3287862; 

584049, 3287844; 584026, 3287815; 

584021, 3287805; 584013, 3287798; 

584009, 3287787; 583999, 3287775; 

583971, 3287751; 583947, 3287735; 

583927, 3287725; 583920, 3287718; 

583890, 3287704; 583850, 3287673; 

583845, 3287665; 583851, 3287662; 

583860, 3287650; 583865, 3287640; 

583865, 3287629; 583863, 3287622; 

583854, 3287609; 583840, 3287600; 

583836, 3287584; 583829, 3287576; 

583838, 3287552; 583841, 3287535; 

583841, 3287520; 583835, 3287501; 

583804, 3287452; 583790, 3287435; 

583766, 3287416; 583727, 3287406; 

583706, 3287406; 583695, 3287398; 

583686, 3287370; 583699, 3287298; 

583698, 3287288; 583694, 3287282; 

583617, 3287257; 583610, 3287258; 

583605, 3287262; 583597, 3287280; 

583584, 3287277; 583565, 3287270; 

583541, 3287255; 583534, 3287244; 

583518, 3287233; 583510, 3287211; 

583496, 3287192; 583480, 3287183; 

583459, 3287177; 583436, 3287178; 

583419, 3287184; 583400, 3287198; 

583396, 3287205; 583387, 3287251. 

(ii) Note: Comal Springs Unit (Map 2) 

follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39274 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(7) Fern Bank Springs Unit, Hays 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 595131, 3317374; 

595131, 3317375; 595132, 3317376; 

595132, 3317377; 595132, 3317378; 

595132, 3317379; 595133, 3317380; 

595133, 3317381; 595133, 3317382; 

595134, 3317383; 595135, 3317383; 

595135, 3317384; 595136, 3317385; 

595137, 3317386; 595137, 3317386; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39275 

595138, 3317387; 595139, 3317387; 

595140, 3317388; 595141, 3317388; 

595141, 3317388; 595168, 3317398; 

595181, 3317411; 595198, 3317428; 

595198, 3317428; 595199, 3317429; 

595199, 3317430; 595200, 3317430; 

595201, 3317431; 595202, 3317431; 

595203, 3317432; 595204, 3317432; 

595205, 3317432; 595206, 3317432; 

595207, 3317433; 595208, 3317433; 

595209, 3317433; 595210, 3317433; 

595211, 3317433; 595212, 3317433; 

595213, 3317432; 595214, 3317432; 

595214, 3317432; 595215, 3317431; 

595216, 3317431; 595217, 3317430; 

595218, 3317430; 595219, 3317429; 

595219, 3317428; 595220, 3317428; 

595221, 3317427; 595237, 3317406; 

595237, 3317406; 595238, 3317405; 

595238, 3317404; 595239, 3317404; 

595239, 3317403; 595239, 3317402; 

595240, 3317401; 595240, 3317400; 

595240, 3317400; 595240, 3317399; 

595240, 3317398; 595240, 3317397; 

595240, 3317396; 595240, 3317395; 

595240, 3317394; 595240, 3317394; 

595240, 3317393; 595239, 3317392; 

595239, 3317391; 595239, 3317390; 

595238, 3317389; 595238, 3317388; 

595237, 3317388; 595237, 3317388; 

595223, 3317369; 595223, 3317369; 

595222, 3317368; 595221, 3317367; 

595221, 3317366; 595220, 3317366; 

595219, 3317365; 595218, 3317365; 

595217, 3317364; 595217, 3317364; 

595173, 3317343; 595173, 3317343; 

595172, 3317343; 595171, 3317342; 

595170, 3317342; 595169, 3317342; 

595168, 3317342; 595167, 3317342; 

595166, 3317342; 595165, 3317342; 

595164, 3317342; 595163, 3317342; 

595162, 3317343; 595146, 3317347; 

595146, 3317348; 595145, 3317348; 

595144, 3317348; 595143, 3317349; 

595142, 3317349; 595141, 3317350; 

595141, 3317350; 595141, 3317350; 

595140, 3317351; 595139, 3317352; 

595139, 3317352; 595139, 3317353; 

595138, 3317353; 595138, 3317354; 

595137, 3317355; 595137, 3317356; 

595136, 3317357; 595136, 3317357; 

595132, 3317369; 595132, 3317370; 

595132, 3317370; 595132, 3317371; 

595132, 3317372; 595131, 3317373; 

595131, 3317374. 

(ii) Note: Fern Bank Springs Unit 

(Map 3) follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39276 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

Comal Springs riffle beetle 

(Heterelmis comalensis). 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Comal and Hays Counties, Texas, on 

the maps below. 

(2) The primary constituent elements 

of critical habitat for Comal Springs 

riffle beetle are: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.005</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39277 

(i) High-quality water with no or 

minimal levels of pollutants, such as 

soaps and detergents (Brown 1987, p. 

261) and other compounds containing 

surfactants, heavy metals, pesticides, 

fertilizer nutrients, petroleum 

hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and 

veterinary medicines, and semi-volatile 

compounds, such as industrial cleaning 

agents, and including: 

(A) Low salinity with total dissolved 

solids that generally range from 307 to 

368 mg/L; and 

(B) Low turbidity that generally is less 

than 5 nephelometric turbidity units; 

(ii) Aquifer water temperatures that 

range from approximately 68 to 75 °F 

(20 to 24 °C); 

(iii) A hydrologic regime that allows 

for adequate spring flows that provide 

levels of dissolved oxygen in the 

approximate range of 4.0 to 10.0 mg/L 

for respiration of the Comal Springs 

riffle beetle; 

(iv) Food supply that includes 

detritus (decomposed materials), leaf 

litter, living plant material, algae, fungi, 

bacteria and other microorganisms, and 

decaying roots; and 

(v) Bottom substrate in surface water 

habitat of the Comal Springs riffle beetle 

that is free of sand and silt, and is 

composed of gravel and cobble ranging 

in size from 0.3 to 5.0 inches (8 to 128 

millimeters). 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures (such as buildings, 

aqueducts, roads, and other paved areas) 

and the land on which they are located 

existing within the legal boundaries on 

the effective date of this rule. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

by using ArcGIS. All coordinates are 

UTM zone 14 coordinate pairs, 

referenced to North American 

Horizontal Datum 1983. Coordinates 

were derived from 2004 digital 

orthophotographs. All acreage and 

mileage calculations were performed 

using GIS. 

(5) Note: Index map of the critical 

habitat units for Comal Springs riffle 

beetle (Map 1) follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39278 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(6) Comal Springs Unit, Comal 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 583420, 3287293; 

583423, 3287293; 583426, 3287293; 

583428, 3287290; 583429, 3287285; 

583428, 3287280; 583426, 3287273; 

583422, 3287268; 583416, 3287259; 

583415, 3287255; 583415, 3287249; 

583417, 3287238; 583418, 3287233; 

583419, 3287228; 583418, 3287222; 

583421, 3287221; 583427, 3287216; 

583429, 3287207; 583435, 3287204; 

583442, 3287203; 583455, 3287203; 

583464, 3287203; 583468, 3287205; 

583475, 3287209; 583479, 3287213; 

583479, 3287217; 583483, 3287224; 

583486, 3287232; 583490, 3287246; 

583491, 3287248; 583485, 3287247; 

583481, 3287245; 583476, 3287243; 

583471, 3287241; 583461, 3287239; 

583460, 3287242; 583460, 3287248; 

583459, 3287255; 583459, 3287261; 

583458, 3287266; 583455, 3287272; 

583455, 3287277; 583452, 3287282; 

583449, 3287284; 583446, 3287288; 

583445, 3287295; 583441, 3287307; 

583439, 3287314; 583443, 3287315; 

583444, 3287309; 583446, 3287303; 

583449, 3287293; 583450, 3287291; 

583453, 3287288; 583457, 3287284; 

583461, 3287278; 583466, 3287271; 

583468, 3287263; 583469, 3287255; 

583470, 3287251; 583480, 3287257; 

583484, 3287256; 583488, 3287254; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39279 

583492, 3287253; 583493, 3287254; 

583496, 3287255; 583500, 3287257; 

583503, 3287258; 583507, 3287260; 

583509, 3287261; 583509, 3287262; 

583509, 3287265; 583508, 3287266; 

583504, 3287270; 583502, 3287270; 

583499, 3287270; 583497, 3287271; 

583497, 3287273; 583498, 3287276; 

583500, 3287277; 583502, 3287279; 

583505, 3287281; 583508, 3287282; 

583512, 3287285; 583516, 3287291; 

583521, 3287294; 583525, 3287298; 

583528, 3287301; 583531, 3287303; 

583535, 3287305; 583540, 3287306; 

583544, 3287309; 583551, 3287311; 

583556, 3287313; 583560, 3287317; 

583563, 3287319; 583567, 3287320; 

583571, 3287320; 583575, 3287320; 

583578, 3287321; 583580, 3287322; 

583583, 3287324; 583587, 3287326; 

583592, 3287328; 583595, 3287329; 

583597, 3287330; 583600, 3287331; 

583603, 3287332; 583604, 3287333; 

583605, 3287337; 583605, 3287340; 

583604, 3287344; 583601, 3287346; 

583598, 3287353; 583593, 3287363; 

583589, 3287371; 583587, 3287378; 

583581, 3287392; 583580, 3287400; 

583575, 3287411; 583574, 3287420; 

583575, 3287430; 583575, 3287435; 

583575, 3287438; 583575, 3287441; 

583574, 3287442; 583573, 3287442; 

583572, 3287442; 583569, 3287441; 

583567, 3287442; 583563, 3287442; 

583558, 3287441; 583553, 3287437; 

583549, 3287435; 583542, 3287429; 

583539, 3287428; 583536, 3287425; 

583533, 3287420; 583524, 3287415; 

583516, 3287405; 583510, 3287398; 

583505, 3287392; 583499, 3287383; 

583494, 3287378; 583486, 3287368; 

583482, 3287361; 583479, 3287356; 

583475, 3287353; 583467, 3287349; 

583465, 3287349; 583466, 3287355; 

583468, 3287356; 583470, 3287357; 

583471, 3287359; 583473, 3287361; 

583475, 3287362; 583479, 3287367; 

583485, 3287377; 583491, 3287386; 

583498, 3287395; 583506, 3287406; 

583509, 3287407; 583511, 3287412; 

583523, 3287423; 583533, 3287434; 

583535, 3287437; 583537, 3287442; 

583549, 3287449; 583558, 3287455; 

583565, 3287461; 583571, 3287464; 

583576, 3287468; 583584, 3287478; 

583598, 3287491; 583610, 3287498; 

583623, 3287507; 583635, 3287519; 

583653, 3287536; 583672, 3287549; 

583685, 3287562; 583697, 3287574; 

583731, 3287607; 583739, 3287618; 

583753, 3287634; 583761, 3287645; 

583772, 3287660; 583784, 3287679; 

583792, 3287692; 583809, 3287716; 

583823, 3287733; 583844, 3287754; 

583859, 3287773; 583870, 3287784; 

583883, 3287797; 583903, 3287816; 

583913, 3287829; 583922, 3287839; 

583933, 3287849; 583941, 3287857; 

583951, 3287867; 583961, 3287878; 

583971, 3287886; 583980, 3287896; 

583991, 3287905; 584005, 3287917; 

584017, 3287926; 584024, 3287931; 

584038, 3287941; 584049, 3287948; 

584052, 3287949; 584055, 3287948; 

584056, 3287945; 584059, 3287941; 

584059, 3287937; 584055, 3287935; 

584054, 3287932; 584055, 3287929; 

584060, 3287926; 584067, 3287926; 

584071, 3287924; 584078, 3287920; 

584081, 3287921; 584085, 3287929; 

584093, 3287942; 584108, 3287958; 

584116, 3287970; 584128, 3287984; 

584142, 3288000; 584150, 3288007; 

584157, 3288014; 584163, 3288021; 

584169, 3288027; 584174, 3288033; 

584181, 3288039; 584187, 3288044; 

584192, 3288050; 584207, 3288060; 

584216, 3288071; 584227, 3288082; 

584239, 3288093; 584247, 3288099; 

584251, 3288104; 584255, 3288109; 

584261, 3288116; 584265, 3288121; 

584270, 3288128; 584277, 3288132; 

584282, 3288138; 584289, 3288144; 

584296, 3288151; 584303, 3288161; 

584313, 3288171; 584318, 3288178; 

584328, 3288188; 584336, 3288198; 

584342, 3288201; 584347, 3288204; 

584349, 3288207; 584352, 3288210; 

584357, 3288212; 584360, 3288215; 

584366, 3288217; 584371, 3288219; 

584374, 3288221; 584378, 3288225; 

584382, 3288229; 584388, 3288225; 

584388, 3288224; 584388, 3288220; 

584388, 3288216; 584388, 3288214; 

584389, 3288211; 584389, 3288209; 

584395, 3288205; 584401, 3288203; 

584422, 3288191; 584411, 3288181; 

584393, 3288192; 584382, 3288198; 

584376, 3288200; 584371, 3288199; 

584363, 3288197; 584355, 3288191; 

584348, 3288183; 584340, 3288175; 

584332, 3288165; 584326, 3288157; 

584319, 3288147; 584316, 3288143; 

584317, 3288141; 584316, 3288140; 

584314, 3288141; 584309, 3288136; 

584303, 3288129; 584286, 3288113; 

584277, 3288100; 584269, 3288089; 

584261, 3288077; 584253, 3288071; 

584240, 3288057; 584236, 3288052; 

584228, 3288045; 584219, 3288035; 

584210, 3288026; 584203, 3288019; 

584193, 3288008; 584183, 3288002; 

584176, 3287996; 584169, 3287987; 

584165, 3287984; 584158, 3287974; 

584150, 3287966; 584139, 3287951; 

584135, 3287942; 584127, 3287933; 

584114, 3287915; 584105, 3287905; 

584094, 3287891; 584082, 3287884; 

584072, 3287875; 584059, 3287867; 

584047, 3287862; 584038, 3287855; 

584033, 3287848; 584025, 3287840; 

584019, 3287830; 584016, 3287827; 

584016, 3287827; 584013, 3287824; 

584011, 3287820; 584009, 3287814; 

584005, 3287811; 584000, 3287806; 

583996, 3287795; 583988, 3287786; 

583982, 3287780; 583972, 3287771; 

583962, 3287764; 583950, 3287757; 

583939, 3287748; 583928, 3287743; 

583917, 3287737; 583917, 3287737; 

583912, 3287731; 583895, 3287724; 

583881, 3287717; 583872, 3287708; 

583860, 3287701; 583847, 3287692; 

583838, 3287683; 583829, 3287669; 

583828, 3287663; 583830, 3287659; 

583835, 3287653; 583840, 3287651; 

583843, 3287647; 583847, 3287642; 

583850, 3287636; 583850, 3287630; 

583847, 3287625; 583842, 3287619; 

583836, 3287616; 583829, 3287611; 

583824, 3287603; 583823, 3287597; 

583822, 3287591; 583820, 3287588; 

583814, 3287587; 583813, 3287583; 

583812, 3287580; 583814, 3287575; 

583815, 3287570; 583817, 3287565; 

583820, 3287558; 583824, 3287548; 

583826, 3287541; 583826, 3287534; 

583826, 3287522; 583823, 3287515; 

583821, 3287507; 583813, 3287493; 

583807, 3287485; 583803, 3287481; 

583803, 3287478; 583799, 3287472; 

583792, 3287462; 583779, 3287446; 

583769, 3287437; 583757, 3287428; 

583753, 3287427; 583746, 3287426; 

583734, 3287423; 583725, 3287421; 

583715, 3287420; 583709, 3287421; 

583702, 3287421; 583696, 3287418; 

583689, 3287413; 583683, 3287407; 

583679, 3287400; 583677, 3287393; 

583674, 3287383; 583671, 3287371; 

583672, 3287360; 583675, 3287341; 

583678, 3287324; 583680, 3287312; 

583684, 3287297; 583684, 3287293; 

583616, 3287272; 583615, 3287275; 

583610, 3287289; 583606, 3287294; 

583601, 3287295; 583595, 3287296; 

583592, 3287294; 583580, 3287292; 

583569, 3287288; 583557, 3287283; 

583548, 3287276; 583539, 3287271; 

583531, 3287267; 583525, 3287260; 

583523, 3287255; 583517, 3287253; 

583513, 3287248; 583507, 3287243; 

583502, 3287236; 583500, 3287228; 

583497, 3287219; 583493, 3287213; 

583486, 3287203; 583474, 3287197; 

583458, 3287192; 583447, 3287192; 

583439, 3287193; 583434, 3287196; 

583430, 3287198; 583428, 3287197; 

583424, 3287198; 583422, 3287201; 

583419, 3287203; 583415, 3287205; 

583411, 3287209; 583409, 3287221; 

583406, 3287230; 583404, 3287240; 

583402, 3287251; 583405, 3287256; 

583408, 3287259; 583412, 3287263; 

583417, 3287270; 583420, 3287276; 

583422, 3287279; 583421, 3287282; 

583419, 3287285; 583419, 3287288; 

583420, 3287293. 

(ii) Note: Comal Springs Unit (Map 2) 

follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39280 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(7) San Marcos Springs Unit, Hays 

County, Texas. 

(i) Aquatic habitat areas bounded by 

the UTM Zone 14 NAD 83 coordinates 

(meters E, meters N): 602869, 3307092; 

602870, 3307100; 602877, 3307131; 

602892, 3307172; 602926, 3307215; 

602936, 3307229; 602942, 3307237; 

602945, 3307243; 602957, 3307286; 

603007, 3307329; 603072, 3307386; 

603154, 3307462; 603158, 3307463; 

603166, 3307466; 603175, 3307465; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.007</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39281 

603186, 3307473; 603219, 3307486; 

603258, 3307508; 603288, 3307526; 

603307, 3307541; 603317, 3307544; 

603326, 3307539; 603329, 3307527; 

603319, 3307512; 603251, 3307456; 

603234, 3307439; 603224, 3307433; 

603218, 3307419; 603206, 3307412; 

603192, 3307406; 603175, 3307418; 

603170, 3307419; 603153, 3307414; 

603144, 3307404; 603141, 3307389; 

603145, 3307379; 603147, 3307369; 

603152, 3307352; 603141, 3307339; 

603135, 3307339; 603124, 3307337; 

603120, 3307336; 603116, 3307335; 

603114, 3307325; 603109, 3307318; 

603105, 3307315; 603104, 3307314; 

603100, 3307310; 603024, 3307239; 

603023, 3307240; 603019, 3307237; 

603017, 3307233; 603026, 3307203; 

603035, 3307187; 603038, 3307178; 

603038, 3307166; 603033, 3307148; 

603027, 3307138; 603018, 3307123; 

603002, 3307117; 602983, 3307109; 

602968, 3307097; 602962, 3307105; 

602962, 3307105; 602965, 3307112; 

602963, 3307116; 602958, 3307119; 

602954, 3307123; 602946, 3307126; 

602938, 3307129; 602928, 3307129; 

602921, 3307129; 602913, 3307128; 

602896, 3307105; 602894, 3307101; 

602887, 3307097; 602881, 3307091; 

602883, 3307087; 602877, 3307082; 

602875, 3307084; 602872, 3307087; 

602869, 3307092. 

(ii) Note: San Marcos Springs Unit 

(Map 3) follows: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3
39282 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3ER17JY07.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 39283 

* * * * * Dated: June 28, 2007. 

David M. Verhey, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 07–3267 Filed 7–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES3