9618 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

at DFARS 242.803(b)(i)(C) with a riskbased sampling process. The proposed 

risk-based sampling process is a more 

effective and efficient approach. It 

allows for the evaluation of selected 

interim vouchers on a pre-payment 

basis in lieu of the current direct 

submission authorization, which does 

not allow for the pre-payment 

evaluation of higher risk interim 

vouchers. It is anticipated that the 

revised process will provide a more 

comprehensive sample of all vouchers 

and an enhanced oversight of higher 

risk vouchers, while allowing a more 

efficient processing of the vouchers not 

selected for pre-payment review. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 242 

Government procurement. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3659 Filed 2–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2012–0001; 

4500030113] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To List the Thermophilic 

Ostracod as Endangered or 

Threatened 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, announce a 90-day 

finding on a petition to list the 

thermophilic ostracod (Potamocypris 

hunteri) as endangered or threatened 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (Act). Based on our 

review, we find that the petition does 

not present substantial information 

indicating that listing the thermophilic 

ostracod may be warranted. Therefore, 

we are not initiating a status review in 

response to this petition. We ask the 

public to submit to us any new 

information that becomes available 

concerning the status of, or threats to, 

the thermophilic ostracod or its habitat 

at any time. 

DATES: The finding announced in this 

document was made on February 17, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: This finding is available on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov at Docket Number 

FWS–R8–ES–2012–0001. Supporting 

documentation we used in preparing 

this finding is available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Klamath Falls Fish 

and Wildlife Office, 1936 California 

Avenue, Klamath Falls, CA 97601. 

Please submit any new information, 

materials, comments, or questions 

concerning this finding to the above 

street address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurie Sada, Field Supervisor, Klamath 

Falls Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

ADDRESSES), by telephone at 541–885– 

2507, or by facsimile to 541–885–7837. 

If you use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD), please call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

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

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

make a finding on whether a petition to 

list, delist, or reclassify a species 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition, 

supporting information submitted with 

the petition, and information otherwise 

available in our files. To the maximum 

extent practicable, we are to make this 

finding within 90 days of our receipt of 

the petition, and publish our notice of 

the finding promptly in the Federal 

Register. 

Our standard for substantial scientific 

or commercial information within the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with 

regard to a 90-day petition finding is 

‘‘that amount of information that would 

lead a reasonable person to believe that 

the measure proposed in the petition 

may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). 

If we find that substantial scientific or 

commercial information was presented, 

we are required to promptly conduct a 

species status review, which we 

subsequently summarize in our 

12-month finding. 

Petition History 

On March 8, 2011, we received a 

petition dated March 4, 2011, from 

Chris Zinda (Friends of Hunter’s Hot 

Springs) and Drs. Brendan Bohannan 

and Richard Castenholz (University of 

Oregon) requesting that the 

thermophilic ostracod (Potamocypris 

hunteri) be listed as endangered or 

threatened under the Act. The petition 

clearly identified itself as such and 

included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioner, as 

required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a May 

4, 2011, letter to the petitioner, we 

responded that we had reviewed the 

information presented in the petition 

and determined that issuing an 

emergency regulation temporarily 

listing the species under section 4(b)(7) 

of the Act was not warranted. We also 

stated that we were required to 

complete a significant number of listing 

and critical habitat actions in Fiscal 

Year 2011 pursuant to court orders, 

judicially approved settlement 

agreements, and other statutory 

deadlines, but that we had secured 

funding for Fiscal Year 2012 and 

anticipated publishing a finding in the 

Federal Register in 2012. This finding 

addresses the petition. 

Evaluation of Listable Entity 

Section 3(16) of the Act defines the 

term ‘‘species’’ to include ‘‘any 

subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, 

and any distinct population segment of 

any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife 

which interbreeds when mature.’’ 

Entities that meet the Act’s definition of 

a ‘‘species’’ can be considered for listing 

under the Act and are, therefore, 

referred to as ‘‘listable entities.’’ Listable 

entities can then be listed if they are 

determined to meet the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species. Prior to making a determination 

of whether the petition presents 

substantial information to indicate 

whether listing may be warranted, we 

must address the question of whether 

the petition presents substantial 

information to indicate whether the 

petitioned thermophilic ostracod may 

be a listable entity. We may consider the 

petitioned ostracod to be a listable 

entity if information submitted with the 

petition or in our files indicates that 

treatment of this ostracod as a listable 

entity may be warranted. Based on the 

information presented in the petition 

and information in our files, there is a 

considerable amount of uncertainty 

regarding the taxonomy of this entity. 

The following paragraphs present our 

evaluation of whether Potamocypris 

hunteri may be a listable entity. 

Wickstrom and Castenholz (1973, p. 

1063) reported finding what they 

considered to be a new undescribed 

species of Potamocypris at Hunter’s Hot 

Springs (Hunter’s) in southeastern 

Oregon. The Latin name Potamocypris 

hunteri was coined in a footnote in 

1973, but not accompanied by a formal 

description (Wickstrom and Castenholz 

1973, p. 1064). Wickstrom and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 9619 

Castenholz (1973, p. 1064) stated that a 

formal description was forthcoming, 

and suggested that the animal might be 

the same as P. perbrunnea, which is 

discussed in Brues’ (1932, p. 222) paper. 

However, Wickstrom and Castenholz 

(1973) did not provide any description, 

diagnosis, or references to specimens, 

and the animal was not formally 

described. Thus, P. hunteri is a nomen 

nudum (a species lacking a formal 

scientific name) with no standing. 

However, the Service will consider a 

taxon for listing that lacks a formal 

name if there is credible scientific 

evidence indicating that the taxon 

constitutes a listable entity as a species 

or subspecies under section 3(16) of the 

Act. 

Additionally, the petition provides 

documentation of an ostracod named 

Thermopsis thermophila, which was 

validly published with a complete 

description and notes on the habitat 

(Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈ og ̆lu et al. 2003, pp. 114–115). 

Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈ og ̆lu et al. (2003, p. 114) 

established the species in a new genus, 

recognizing that the generic diagnosis is 

provisional. They provided a 

description and diagnosis for 

distinguishing Thermopsis from 

Potamocypris and several other related 

genera (Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈ og ̆lu et al. 2003, pp. 

114–115). The species description was 

based on collections from northern 

Nevada. Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈og ̆lu et al. (2003, p. 

122), in referring to additional 

Potamocypris taxa that have been 

observed, stated: ‘‘We strongly suspect 

Potamocypris perbrunnea, P. varicolor, 

P. hunteri, and above all Wickstrom and 

Castenholz’ (1973, 1985) Potamocypris 

sp. to be identical to Thermopsis 

thermophila.’’ The authors made this 

conclusion due to the lack of taxonomic 

indications and verifications for the 

generic Potamocypris standing of these 

species (Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈ og ̆lu et al. 2003, pp. 

121–122). The authors clearly 

considered all of these undescribed taxa 

to be conspecific with (i.e., belonging to 

the same species as) their T. 

thermophila, although here the petition 

paraphrased this statement as ‘‘* * * 

the similarity was suggested’’ (Zinda et 

al. 2011, p. 5). 

The petition does not provide generic 

descriptions, nor does it provide any 

other morphological, ecological, 

distributional, genetic, or other 

differences to distinguish the petitioned 

entity from thermophilic ostracods in 

other hot springs throughout the Great 

Basin, including Thermopsis 

thermophila. This information could 

indicate whether the petitioned 

Potamocypris hunteri is endemic or 

qualifies as a listable entity even if it 

lacks a validly published name, but no 

description data were provided, nor are 

any available within our files. The 

description provided by the petition, 

within references cited, or within our 

files for P. hunteri consists only of the 

location where the animal is found and 

reference to its ability to withstand 49 

degrees Centigrade (°C) (120 degrees 

Fahrenheit (°F)) (Zinda et al. 2011, p. 5). 

In summary, our review of the 

information supplied with the petition 

and in our files indicates there is a great 

deal of taxonomic uncertainty 

surrounding Potamocypris hunteri as 

evidenced by the 1932, 1973, and 2003 

papers (Brues 1932, p. 222; Wickstrom 

and Castenholz 1973, p. 1064; 

Ku ̈lko ̈ylu ̈ og ̆lu et al. 2003, pp. 114–115). 

Our general practice in recognizing a 

currently undescribed taxon as a 

possible listable entity is, at a minimum, 

to have the scientific community 

recognize the taxonomic validity of an 

entity, even if a formal taxonomic 

treatment has not been published. In 

this case, there is no information that 

would indicate that Potamocypris 

hunteri is a recognized taxon in the 

scientific community. Therefore, the 

information in the petition and in our 

files does not present substantial 

scientific or commercial information to 

indicate the petitioned P. hunteri may 

be a listable entity. Consequently, we 

will not proceed with an evaluation of 

the five factors described in section 

4(a)(1) of the Act. Although we will not 

review the status of the petitioned entity 

at this time, if you wish to provide 

additional information regarding the 

thermophilic ostracod, you may submit 

your information or materials to the 

Field Supervisor, Klamath Falls Fish 

and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES), at 

any time. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited is 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and upon request 

from the Klamath Falls Fish and 

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this notice are 

the staff members of the Klamath Falls 

Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

Dated: February 6, 2012. 

Rowan W. Gould, 

Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3791 Filed 2–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS