Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules 19259 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket Nos. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0017, 

FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0018, FWS–HQ–ES– 

2015–0019, FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0020, FWS– 

R8–ES–2015–0021, FWS–R1–ES–2014– 

0061, FWS–R8–ES–2015–0022, FWS–R8– 

ES–2015–0023, FWS–R8–ES–2015–0024, 

FWS–R7–ES–2015–0025;4500030115] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 10 

Petitions 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of petition findings and 

initiation of status reviews. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- 

day findings on various petitions to list 

eight species, reclassify one species, and 

delist one species under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 

Based on our review, we find that these 

10 petitions present substantial 

scientific or commercial information 

indicating that the petitioned actions 

may be warranted. Therefore, with the 

publication of this document, we are 

initiating a review of the status of each 

of these species to determine if the 

petitioned actions are warranted. The 

status reviews for two species, the 

golden conure (which appears in the 

List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife as the golden parakeet) and the 

northern spotted owl, will also serve as 

5-year reviews for those species. To 

ensure that these status reviews are 

comprehensive, we are requesting 

scientific and commercial data and 

other information regarding these 

species. Based on the status reviews, we 

will issue 12-month findings on the 

petitions, which will address whether 

the petitioned action is warranted, as 

provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct the status reviews, we request 

that we receive information on or before 

June 9, 2015. Information submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, 

below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the closing date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

information on species for which a 

status review is being initiated by one 

of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter the appropriate docket number 

(see table below). Then click the Search 

button. You may submit information by 

clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ If your 

information will fit in the provided 

comment box, please use this feature of 

http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most 

compatible with our information review 

procedures. If you attach your 

information as a separate document, our 

preferred file format is Microsoft Word. 

If you attach multiple comments (such 

as form letters), our preferred format is 

a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

or hand-delivery to: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate 

docket number; see table below]; U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 

5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 

22041–3803. 

We request that you send information 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all information received on 

http://www.regulations.gov. This 

generally means that we will post any 

personal information you provide us 

(see the Request for Information section, 

below, for more details). 

Species Docket No. 

Clear Lake hitch ........ FWS–R8–ES–2015– 

0017 

Egyptian tortoise ....... FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 

0018 

Golden conure .......... FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 

0019 

Long-tailed chinchilla FWS–HQ–ES–2015– 

0020 

Mojave shoulderband 

snail.

FWS–R8–ES–2015– 

0021 

Northern spotted owl FWS–R1–ES–2014– 

0061 

Relict dace ................ FWS–R8–ES–2015– 

0022 

San Joaquin Valley 

giant flower-loving 

fly.

FWS–R8–ES–2015– 

0023 

Western pond turtle .. FWS–R8–ES–2015– 

0024 

Yellow-cedar ............. FWS–R7–ES–2015– 

0025 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Species Contact information 

Clear Lake 

hitch.

Jennifer Norris, telephone 

(916)-414–6600. 

Egyptian tortoise.Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. 

Golden conure Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. 

Long-tailed 

chinchilla.

Janine Van Norman, telephone (703) 358–2171. 

Mojave 

shoulderband 

snail.

Mendel Stewart, telephone 

(760) 431–9440. 

Northern spotted owl.Paul Henson, telephone 

(503) 231–6179. 

Relict dace ...... Edward D. Koch, telephone 

(775) 861–6300. 

Species Contact information 

San Joaquin 

Valley giant 

flower-loving 

fly.

Jennifer Norris, telephone 

(916) 414–6600. 

Western pond 

turtle.

Jennifer Norris, telephone 

(916) 414–6600. 

Yellow-cedar ... Steve Brockmann, telephone (907) 780–1181. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), please call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Information 

When we make a finding that a 

petition presents substantial 

information indicating that listing, 

reclassification, or delisting a species 

may be warranted, we are required to 

promptly review the status of the 

species (status review). For the status 

review to be complete and based on the 

best available scientific and commercial 

information, we request information on 

these species from governmental 

agencies, Native American Tribes, the 

scientific community, industry, and any 

other interested parties. We seek 

information on: 

(1) The species’ biology, range, and 

population trends, including: 

(a) Habitat requirements; 

(b) Genetics and taxonomy; 

(c) Historical and current range, 

including distribution patterns; 

(d) Historical and current population 

levels, and current and projected trends; 

and 

(e) Past and ongoing conservation 

measures for the species, its habitat, or 

both. 

(2) The factors that are the basis for 

making a listing, reclassification, or 

delisting determination for a species 

under section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: 

(a) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range 

(Factor A); 

(b) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes (Factor B); 

(c) Disease or predation (Factor C); 

(d) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); or 

(e) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence (Factor 

E). 

(3) The potential effects of climate 

change on the species and its habitat. 

(4) For the northern spotted owl, we 

specifically request information on: 

(a) Evidence that any of the factors 

identified under Factor A are having 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
19260 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

population-level effects on the northern 

spotted owl, either singularly or in 

combination; 

(b) Evidence that the West Nile virus 

or predation by barred owls have caused 

population-level impacts on northern 

spotted owls; 

(c) Identification of shortcoming in 

existing regulations that are having 

population-level effects on the northern 

spotted owl; 

(d) Evidence that competition with 

barred owls is having population-level 

effects on the northern spotted owl; and 

(e) Evidence that global climate 

change is having population-level 

effects on the northern spotted owl. 

(5) For those domestic (U.S.) species 

that are not listed, if, after the status 

review, we determine that listing is 

warranted, we will propose critical 

habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) 

of the Act) under section 4 of the Act 

for those species that fall within the 

jurisdiction of the United States, to the 

maximum extent prudent and 

determinable at the time we propose to 

list the species. Therefore, we also 

specifically request data and 

information for Clear Lake hitch, Mojave 

shoulderband snail, relict dace, San 

Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly, 

western pond turtle, and yellow-cedar 

on: 

(a) What may constitute ‘‘physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species,’’ within the 

geographical range occupied by the 

species; 

(b) Where these features are currently 

found; 

(c) Whether any of these features may 

require special management 

considerations or protection; 

(d) Specific areas outside the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species that are ‘‘essential for the 

conservation of the species’’; and 

(e) What, if any, critical habitat you 

think we should propose for designation 

if the species is proposed for listing, and 

why such habitat meets the 

requirements of section 4 of the Act. 

Please include sufficient information 

with your submission (such as scientific 

journal articles or other publications) to 

allow us to verify any scientific or 

commercial information you include. 

Submissions merely stating support 

for or opposition to the actions under 

consideration without providing 

supporting information, although noted, 

will not be considered in making a 

determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the 

Act directs that determinations as to 

whether any species is an endangered or 

threatened species must be made 

‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific 

and commercial data available.’’ 

You may submit your information 

concerning these status reviews by one 

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. If you submit information via 

http://www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the Web site. If you submit a 

hardcopy that includes personal 

identifying information, you may 

request at the top of your document that 

we withhold this personal identifying 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. We will post all 

hardcopy submissions on http://

www.regulations.gov. 

Information and supporting 

documentation that we received and 

used in preparing this finding will be 

available for you to review at http://

www.regulations.gov, or you may make 

an appointment during normal business 

hours at the appropriate lead U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service Field Office (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Background 

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

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 commence 

a review of the status of the species, 

which we will subsequently summarize 

in our 12-month finding. 

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 

and its implementing regulations at 50 

CFR 424 set forth the procedures for 

adding a species to, or removing a 

species from, the Federal Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants. A species may be 

determined to be an endangered or 

threatened species due to one or more 

of the five factors described in section 

4(a)(1) of the Act (see (2) under Request 

For Information, above). 

We may delist a species according to 

50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best available 

scientific and commercial data indicate 

that the species is neither an 

endangered nor threatened species for 

one or more of the following reasons: 

(1) The species is extinct; 

(2) The species has recovered and is 

no longer an endangered or threatened 

species; or 

(3) The original scientific or 

commercial data used at the time the 

species was classified, or the 

interpretation of such data, were in 

error. 

In considering what factors might 

constitute threats, we must look beyond 

the exposure of the species to a factor 

to evaluate whether the species may 

respond to the factor in a way that 

causes actual impacts to the species. If 

there is exposure to a factor and the 

species responds negatively, the factor 

may be a threat, and, during the 

subsequent status review, we attempt to 

determine how significant a threat it is. 

The threat is significant if it drives, or 

contributes to, the risk of extinction of 

the species such that the species may 

warrant listing as an ‘‘endangered 

species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species,’’ as 

those terms are defined in the Act. 

However, the identification of factors 

that could affect a species negatively 

may not be sufficient for us to find that 

the information in the petition and our 

files is substantial. The information 

must include evidence sufficient to 

suggest that these factors may be 

operative threats that act on the species 

to the point that the species may meet 

the definition of an ‘‘endangered 

species’’ or ‘‘threatened species’’ under 

the Act. 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the 

Clear Lake Hitch as an Endangered or 

Threatened Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2015–0017 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda 

chi); California 

Petition History 

On January 13, 2013, the California 

Department of Fish and Wildlife drafted 

a recommendation to the California Fish 

and Game Commission to list the Clear 

Lake hitch as threatened species under 

the California Endangered Species Act. 

On September 25, 2014, we received a 

petition dated September 25, 2014, from 

the Center for Biological Diversity, 

requesting that Clear Lake hitch be 

listed as a endangered or threatened 

species under the Act. The petition 

clearly identified itself as such and 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules 19261 

included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioner, required 

at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding 

addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda 

chi) based on Factors A, B, C, and E. 

Thus, for the Clear Lake hitch, the 

Service requests information on the five 

listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act, including the factors identified 

in this finding (see Request for 

Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the 

Egyptian Tortoise as an Endangered or 

Threatened Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0018 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Egyptian tortoise (Testudo 

kleinmanni); Egypt, Libya, Israel 

Petition History 

On June 9, 2014, we received a 

petition dated May 2014, from Friends 

of Animals, requesting that the Egyptian 

tortoise be listed as an endangered or 

threatened species under the Act. The 

petition clearly identified itself as such 

and included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioner, required 

at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a letter to the 

petitioner, we responded that we 

reviewed the information presented in 

the petition and did not find that the 

species warranted emergency listing. 

This finding addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the Egyptian tortoise (Testudo 

kleinmanni) based on Factors A, B, C, D, 

and E. 

Thus, for the Egyptian tortoise, the 

Service requests information on the five 

listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act (see Request for Information, 

above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To Delist the 

Golden Conure Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0019 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Golden conure (Guaruba guarouba or 

Aratinga guarouba); Brazil. (Note: The 

species is listed as ‘‘golden parakeet’’ 

(Aratinga guarouba) in the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 

50 CFR 17.11(h). However, we refer to 

the species by the common name 

‘‘golden conure’’ in this document.) 

Petition History 

On August 21, 2014, we received a 

petition dated August 20, 2014, from the 

American Federation of Aviculture, Inc., 

requesting that the golden conure be 

removed from the Federal List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

(i.e., ‘‘delisted’’) pursuant to the Act. 

The petition clearly identified itself as 

such and included the requisite 

identification information for the 

petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). 

This finding addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the golden conure (Guaruba guarouba 

or Aratinga guarouba) based on new 

population estimates and Fnew 

information relating to actors A, B, and 

D. 

Thus, for the golden conure, the 

Service requests information on the five 

listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act, including the factors identified 

in this finding (see Request for 

Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the 

Long-Tailed Chinchilla as an 

Endangered or Threatened Species 

Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0020 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla 

lanigera); Chile 

Petition History 

On October 14, 2014, we received a 

petition dated October 7, 2014, from 

Friends of Animals, requesting that the 

long-tailed chinchilla be listed as a 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. The petition clearly identified 

itself as such and included the requisite 

identification information for the 

petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). 

In a November 17, 2014, letter to the 

petitioner, we responded that we 

reviewed the information presented in 

the petition and did not find that the 

species warranted emergency listing. 

This finding addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla 

lanigera) based on Factors A, B, D, and 

E. 

Thus, for the long-tailed chinchilla, 

the Service requests information on the 

five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) 

of the Act, including the factors 

identified in this finding (see Request 

for Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List Mojave 

Shoulderband Snail as an Endangered 

or Threatened Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2015–0021 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Mohave shoulderband snail 

(Helminthoglypta (coyote) greggi); 

California 

Petition History 

On January 31, 2014, we received a 

petition dated January 31, 2014, from 

the Center for Biological Diversity, 

requesting that Mohave shoulderband 

snail be listed as a endangered or 

threatened species under the Act. The 

petition clearly identified itself as such 

and included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioner, required 

at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an April 4, 2014, 

letter to the petitioner, we responded 

that we reviewed the information 

presented in the petition and did not 

find that the species warranted 

emergency listing. This finding 

addresses the petition. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
19262 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the Mohave shoulderband snail 

(Helminthoglypta (coyote) greggi)) based 

on Factors A, C, and E. 

Thus, for the Mojave shoulderband 

snail, the Service requests information 

on the five listing factors under section 

4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors 

identified in this finding (see Request 

for Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify 

the Northern Spotted Owl as an 

Endangered Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R1–ES–2014–0061 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Northern spotted owl (Strix 

occidentalis caurina); California, 

Oregon, and Washington, U.S.A.; British 

Columbia, Canada. 

Petition History 

On August 21, 2012, we received a 

petition dated August 15, 2012, from 

Environmental Protection Information 

Center, requesting that the northern 

spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

be listed as an endangered species 

under the Act. We published a final rule 

to list the northern spotted owl as a 

threatened species under the Act on 

June 26, 1990 (55 FR 28114); the 

effective date of that rule was July 23, 

1990. 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 September 27, 2012, 

letter to the petitioner, we responded 

that we reviewed the information 

presented in the petition and did not 

find that the species warranted 

emergency uplisting. We also issued a 

letter to the petitioner on April 17, 2014, 

informing them of our anticipated 

timeline for publication of the 90-day 

and 12-month findings. This finding 

addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial information that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the northern spotted owl (Strix 

occidentalis caurina) based on Factors 

A, C, D, and E. 

Thus, for the northern spotted owl, 

the Service requests information on the 

five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) 

of the Act, including the factors 

identified in this finding (see Request 

for Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the 

Relict Dace as an Endangered or 

Threatened Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2015–0022 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Relict dace (Relictus solitarius); 

Nevada 

Petition History 

On June 27, 2014, we received a 

petition dated June 27, 2014, from 

Forest Service Employees for 

Environmental Ethics, requesting that 

relict dace be listed as an endangered 

species under the Act on an emergency 

basis. The petition clearly identified 

itself as such and included the requisite 

identification information for the 

petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). 

In an August 25, 2014, letter to the 

petitioner, we responded that we 

reviewed the information presented in 

the petition and did not find that the 

species warranted emergency listing. 

This finding addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the relict dace (Relictus solitarius) based 

on Factors A, D, and E. 

Thus, for the relict dace, the Service 

requests information on the five listing 

factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, 

including the factors identified in this 

finding (see Request for Information, 

above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the San 

Joaquin Valley Giant Flower-Loving Fly 

as an Endangered or Threatened 

Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2015–0023 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly (Rhaphiomidas trochilus); 

California. 

Petition History 

On June 26, 2014, we received a 

petition dated June 26, 2014, from 

Gregory R. Ballmer and Kendall H. 

Osborne, requesting that San Joaquin 

Valley giant flower-loving fly be listed 

as an endangered species under the Act. 

The petition clearly identified itself as 

such and included the requisite 

identification information for the 

petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). 

In a September 12, 2014, letter to the 

petitioner, we responded that we 

reviewed the information presented in 

the petition and did not find that the 

species warranted emergency listing. 

This finding addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the San Joaquin Valley giant flowerloving fly (Rhaphiomidas trochilus) 

based on Factors A and E. 

Thus, for the San Joaquin Valley giant 

flower-loving fly, the Service requests 

information on the five listing factors 

under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, 

including the factors identified in this 

finding (see Request for Information, 

above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List the 

Western Pond Turtle as an Endangered 

or Threatened Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2015–0024 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

Western pond turtle or Pacific pond 

turtle (Actinemys marmorata; formerly 

Clemmys marmorata); California and 

Washington 

Petition History 

On July 11, 2012, we were petitioned 

by the Center for Biological Diversity to 

list 53 amphibian and reptile species 

across the United States. The western 

pond turtle was one of the species 

petitioned for listing. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules 19263 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

the western pond turtle (Actinemys 

marmorata) based on Factor A. 

Thus, for the western pond turtle, the 

Service requests information on the five 

listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act, including the factor identified 

in this finding (see Request for 

Information, above). 

Evaluation of a Petition To List Yellowcedar as an Endangered or Threatened 

Species Under the Act 

Additional information regarding our 

review of this petition can be found as 

an appendix at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R7–ES–2015–0025 under the 

Supporting Documents section. 

Species and Range 

YellowYellow-cedar (Callitropsis 

nootkatensis); Alaska, California, 

Oregon, Washington, U.S.A.; Canada 

Petition History 

On June 24, 2014, we received a 

petition dated June 24, 2014, from 

Center for Biological Diversity, The Boat 

Company, Greater Southeast Alaska 

Conservation Community, and 

Greenpeace, requesting that yellowcedar be listed as a endangered or 

threatenedspecies under the Act. The 

petition clearly identified itself as such 

and included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioner, required 

at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding 

addresses the petition. 

Finding 

Based on our review of the petition 

and sources cited in the petition, we 

find that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted for 

yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis) 

based on Factors A, B, and E. 

Thus, for yellow-cedar, the Service 

requests information on the five listing 

factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, 

including the factors identified in this 

finding (see Request for Information, 

above). 

Conclusion 

On the basis of our evaluation of the 

information presented under section 

4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have 

determined that the petitions 

summarized above for Clear Lake hitch, 

Egyptian tortoise, golden conure, longtailed chinchilla, Mojave shoulderband 

snail, northern spotted owl, relict dace, 

San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving 

fly, western pond turtle, and yellowcedar present substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the requested actions may be warranted. 

Because we have found that the 

petitions present substantial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned actions may be warranted, we 

are initiating status reviews to 

determine whether these actions under 

the Act are warranted. At the conclusion 

of the status reviews, we will issue a 12- 

month finding in accordance with 

section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to 

whether or not the Service believes 

listing, reclassification, or delisting, as 

appropriate, is warranted. 

It is important to note that the 

‘‘substantial information’’ standard for a 

90-day finding as to whether the 

petitioned action may be warranted 

differs from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific 

and commercial data’’ standard that 

applies to the Service’s determination in 

a 12-month finding as to whether a 

petitioned action is in fact warranted. A 

90-day finding is not based on a status 

review. In a 12-month finding, we will 

determine whether a petitioned action is 

warranted after we have completed a 

thorough status review of the species, 

which is conducted following a 

substantial 90-day finding. Because the 

Act’s standards for 90-day and 12- 

month findings are different, as 

described above, a substantial 90-day 

finding does not mean that the 12- 

month finding will result in a warranted 

finding. 

5-Year Review 

The status reviews of golden conure 

and northern spotted owl will also serve 

as the 5-year reviews for thesetheses 

species. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act 

requires that we conduct a review of 

listed species at least once every 5 years. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 

require that we publish a notice in the 

Federal Register announcing those 

species under active review. For 

additional information about 5-year 

reviews, go to http://www.fws.gov/

endangered/what-we-do/recoveryoverview.html, scroll down to ‘‘Learn 

More about 5-Year Reviews,’’ and click 

on our factsheet. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited is 

available on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov and upon request 

from the appropriate lead field offices 

(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this document 

are the staff members of the Branch of 

Foreign Species, Ecological Services 

Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Authority 

The authority for these actions is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

Dated: March 30, 2015. 

Robert Dreher, 

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07837 Filed 4–9–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2015–0013; 

FXES11130900000C6–145–FF09E42000] 

RIN 1018–BA42 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Establishment of a 

Nonessential Experimental Population 

of Black-Footed Ferrets in Wyoming 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), in 

coordination with the State of Wyoming 

and other partners, propose to 

reestablish additional populations of the 

black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), a 

federally listed endangered mammal, 

into occupied prairie dog (Cynomys 

spp.) habitat in Wyoming. We propose 

to reestablish the black-footed ferret 

under section 10(j) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), 

and to classify any reestablished 

population as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP). This 

approach would provide relaxed 

management rules to facilitate 

reintroductions. We are seeking 

comments on this proposal and on our 

draft environmental assessment, 

prepared pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (NEPA), which analyzes the 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed 

reintroduction. 

We are also notifying the public that 

we are amending the List of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife (List) to reflect 

the scientifically accepted historical 

range of the black-footed ferret. The 

revised historical range description 

includes Mexico. The historical range 

information in the List is informational, 

not regulatory. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS