Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 19657 

inspector, the manager of the responsible 

Flight Standards Office. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain instructions 

from a manufacturer, the instructions must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, Large Aircraft Section, 

International Validation Branch, FAA; or 

EASA; or Dassault Aviation’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by 

the DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) For EASA AD 2021–0197, contact 

EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 

Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 

000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; internet 

www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this 

EASA AD on the EASA website at https://

ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this 

material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products 

Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 

South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. This 

material may be found in the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2022–0390. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International 

Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des 

Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206– 

231–3226; email Tom.Rodriguez@faa.gov. 

Issued on March 29, 2022. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07099 Filed 4–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2022–0001; 

FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 223] 

RIN 1018–BG36 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Lower Colorado River 

Distinct Population Segment of 

Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta); Gila 

Chub (Gila intermedia) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notification of petition finding; 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, announce a finding on 

a petition to list the Lower Colorado 

River basin distinct population segment 

(DPS) of the roundtail chub (Gila 

robusta) as an endangered or threatened 

species under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a 

thorough review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information, 

we find that it is not warranted at this 

time to list the Lower Colorado River 

roundtail chub DPS as an endangered or 

threatened species. However, in 

conducting the necessary research to 

inform this petition finding, we have 

determined that we should consider 

removing the Gila chub (Gila 

intermedia) from the protections of the 

Act. Therefore, this document includes 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking pertaining to removing the 

Gila chub, currently listed as 

endangered, from the List of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife. We ask the 

public to submit to us any information 

relevant to the status of these species or 

their habitats. 

DATES: Petition finding: The finding in 

this document pertaining to the Lower 

Colorado River basin DPS of the 

roundtail chub (Gila robusta) was made 

on April 5, 2022. 

Comment submission on the advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking: We will 

accept comments pertaining to Gila 

chub (Gila intermedia) that are received 

or postmarked on or before June 6, 2022. 

Comments submitted electronically 

using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on the closing date. 

ADDRESSES: Petition finding: A detailed 

description of the basis for this finding 

is available on the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R2–ES–2022–0001. Supporting 

information used to prepare this finding 

is available by contacting the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Comment submission on the advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking: You 

may submit comments pertaining to 

Gila chub (Gila intermedia) by one of 

the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter FWS–R2–ES–2022–0001, which is 

the docket number for this rulemaking. 

Then, click on the Search button. On the 

resulting page, in the panel on the left 

side of the screen, under the Document 

Type heading, check the Proposed Rule 

box to locate this document. You may 

submit a comment by clicking on 

‘‘Comment.’’ 

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

to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 

FWS–R2–ES–2022–0001, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

Information regarding the Lower 

Colorado River roundtail chub DPS: 

We request that you submit any new 

information concerning the taxonomy 

of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or 

stressors to the Lower Colorado River 

roundtail chub DPS, whenever it 

becomes available, to the person listed 

below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Lamb, Arizona Ecological Services 

Field Office, 9828 North 31st Ave. C3, 

Phoenix, AZ 85051–2517; telephone 

602–242–0210. Individuals in the 

United States who are deaf, deafblind, 

hard of hearing, or have a speech 

disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or 

TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we are required to 

make a finding whether or not a 

petitioned action is warranted within 12 

months after receiving a petition that we 

have determined contains substantial 

scientific or commercial information 

indicating that the petitioned action 

may be warranted (‘‘12-month finding’’). 

We must make a finding that the 

petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted; 

(2) warranted; or (3) warranted but 

precluded by pending proposals 

regarding other species. We must 

publish a notice of these 12-month 

findings in the Federal Register. 

Summary of Information Pertaining to 

the Five Factors 

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

and the implementing regulations at 

part 424 of title 50 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424) 

set forth procedures for adding species 

to, removing species from, or 

reclassifying species on the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants (Lists). The Act states that 

the term ‘‘species’’ includes 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. The 

Act defines an ‘‘endangered species’’ as 

any species that is in danger of 

extinction throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range and a ‘‘threatened 

species’’ as any species that is likely to 

become an endangered species within 

the foreseeable future throughout all or 

a significant portion of its range. The 

Act requires that we determine whether 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
19658 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

any species is an endangered species or 

a threatened species because of any of 

the following five factors: 

(A) The present or threatened destruction, 

modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 

range; 

(B) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(C) Disease or predation; 

(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms; or 

(E) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 

These factors represent broad 

categories of natural or human-caused 

actions or conditions that could have an 

effect on a species’ continued existence. 

In evaluating these actions and 

conditions, we look for those that may 

have a negative effect on individuals of 

the species, as well as other actions or 

conditions that may ameliorate any 

negative effects or may have positive 

effects. 

We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in 

general to actions or conditions that are 

known to or are reasonably likely to 

negatively affect individuals of a 

species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes 

actions or conditions that have a direct 

impact on individuals (direct impacts), 

as well as those that affect individuals 

through alteration of their habitat or 

required resources (stressors). The term 

‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either 

together or separately—the source of the 

action or condition or the action or 

condition itself. However, the mere 

identification of any threat(s) does not 

necessarily mean that the species meets 

the statutory definition of an 

‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened 

species.’’ 

In determining whether a species 

meets either definition, we must 

evaluate all identified threats by 

considering the expected response by 

the species, and the effects of the 

threats—in light of those actions and 

conditions that will ameliorate the 

threats—on an individual, population, 

and species level. We evaluate each 

threat and its expected effects on the 

species, then analyze the cumulative 

effect of all of the threats on the species 

as a whole. We also consider the 

cumulative effect of the threats in light 

of those actions and conditions that will 

have positive effects on the species, 

such as any existing regulatory 

mechanisms or conservation efforts. The 

Secretary determines whether the 

species meets the definition of an 

‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened 

species’’ only after conducting this 

cumulative analysis and describing the 

expected effect on the species now and 

in the foreseeable future. 

The Act does not define the term 

‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in 

the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened 

species.’’ Our implementing regulations 

at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a 

framework for evaluating the foreseeable 

future on a case-by-case basis. The term 

‘‘foreseeable future’’ extends only so far 

into the future as the Service can 

reasonably determine that both the 

future threats and the species’ responses 

to those threats are likely. In other 

words, the foreseeable future is the 

period of time in which we can make 

reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not 

mean ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to 

provide a reasonable degree of 

confidence in the prediction. Thus, a 

prediction is reliable if it is reasonable 

to depend on it when making decisions. 

It is not always possible or necessary 

to define foreseeable future as a 

particular number of years. Analysis of 

the foreseeable future uses the best 

scientific and commercial data available 

and should consider the timeframes 

applicable to the relevant threats and to 

the species’ likely responses to those 

threats in view of its life-history 

characteristics. Data that are typically 

relevant to assessing the species’ 

biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan, 

reproductive rates or productivity, 

certain behaviors, and other 

demographic factors. 

In conducting our evaluation of the 

five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of 

the Act to determine whether the Lower 

Colorado River roundtail chub distinct 

population segment (DPS) meets the 

definition of an endangered species or a 

threatened species, we considered and 

thoroughly evaluated the best scientific 

and commercial information available 

regarding the past, present, and future 

stressors and threats. Petition 

evaluations may include information 

from recognized experts; Federal, State, 

and Tribal governments; academic 

institutions; foreign governments; 

private entities; and other members of 

the public. Therefore, we reviewed the 

petition, information available in our 

files, and other available published and 

unpublished information. 

The species assessment form for the 

species contains more detailed 

biological information, a thorough 

analysis of the listing factors, a list of 

literature cited, and an explanation of 

why we determined that the species 

does not meet the Act’s definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species. Additionally, a thorough review 

of the taxonomy, life history, ecology, 

and stressors to the Lower Colorado 

River roundtail chub DPS is presented 

in the species status assessment report 

(Service 2022, entire). This supporting 

information can be found on the 

internet at https://www.regulations.gov 

under Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2022– 

0001. The following is an informational 

summary for the finding in this 

document. 

Previous Federal Actions 

On August 9, 2002, we published a 

proposed rule to list the Gila chub (Gila 

intermedia), which historically was 

found throughout the Gila River basin in 

southern Arizona, southwestern New 

Mexico, and northeastern Sonora, 

Mexico, as endangered with critical 

habitat (67 FR 51948). On April 14, 

2003, we received a petition from the 

Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) 

requesting that we list both the 

headwater chub (Gila nigra) and a DPS 

of the roundtail chub (Gila robusta) in 

the Lower Colorado River basin as an 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. The petition also requested 

designating critical habitat concurrently 

with the listing for both species. 

Following receipt of the 2003 petition, 

and pursuant to a stipulated settlement 

agreement, we published a 90-day 

finding on July 12, 2005 (70 FR 39981), 

stating that the petitioners had provided 

sufficient information to indicate that 

listing of both species may be 

warranted. 

On November 2, 2005, we published 

a final rule listing the Gila chub (Gila 

intermedia) as endangered with critical 

habitat (70 FR 66664). 

On May 3, 2006, we published a 12- 

month finding (71 FR 26007) that listing 

was not warranted for the Lower 

Colorado River roundtail chub DPS, and 

that listing for the headwater chub was 

warranted but precluded by higher 

priority listing actions. On September 7, 

2006, we received a complaint from 

CBD for declaratory and injunctive 

relief, challenging our decision not to 

list the Lower Colorado River basin DPS 

of the roundtail chub as an endangered 

species under the Act. On November 5, 

2007, in a stipulated settlement 

agreement, we agreed to commence a 

new status review of the petitioned 

Lower Colorado River basin DPS of the 

roundtail chub and to submit a 12- 

month finding to the Federal Register 

by June 30, 2009. 

On July 7, 2009, we published a 12- 

month finding (74 FR 32352) on the 

Lower Colorado River roundtail chub 

DPS. The finding determined that the 

entity qualified as a DPS by satisfying 

the discreteness and significance 

elements of the Interagency Policy 

Regarding the Recognition of Distinct 

Vertebrate Population Segments Under 

the Act (DPS Policy; 61 FR 4722, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 19659 

February 7, 1996). However, we further 

concluded that listing of the Lower 

Colorado River roundtail chub DPS was 

warranted but precluded due to higher 

priority listing actions at the time. The 

DPS remained on the candidate list from 

2009 to 2014 (74 FR 57804, November 

9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, November 10, 

2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 

FR 69993, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 

70103, November 22, 2013; 79 FR 

72449, December 5, 2014). 

On October 7, 2015, following 

completion of a species status 

assessment, we published a proposed 

rule to list the headwater chub and the 

Lower Colorado River roundtail chub 

DPS as threatened species under the Act 

(80 FR 60754). On April 7, 2017, we 

withdrew the 2015 proposed rule 

following a taxonomic revision that 

concluded the available evidence did 

not support species-level status for the 

headwater chub (G. nigra) and the Gila 

chub (G. intermedia), collapsing them 

into roundtail chub (G. robusta) (Page et 

al. 2017, p. 459) (82 FR 16981). 

However, despite this taxonomic 

revision, Gila chub was unaffected by 

the 2017 withdrawal and remains listed 

as endangered on the List of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife. 

In 2018, CBD challenged our 

withdrawal of the proposed rule on the 

headwater chub and Lower Colorado 

River roundtail chub DPS. On March 31, 

2021, the U.S. District Court found the 

withdrawal of the 2015 proposed rule 

was arbitrary and capricious because we 

withdrew the rule based on taxonomic 

revisions, but never fully reevaluated 

the petitioned entity, the DPS. In other 

words, the taxonomic revisions created 

a new biological entity in the Lower 

Colorado River basin that, under the 

Act, we were still obligated to assess 

under the original 2003 petition. The 

court vacated the withdrawal of the 

proposed rule and ordered that a new 

12-month finding be completed by 

March 31, 2022. Importantly, the court 

order concerns only the Lower Colorado 

River basin DPS, since that was the 

portion of the roundtail chub range for 

which the Service was originally 

petitioned. This finding addresses that 

court order. 

Summary of Finding 

The original petition to list roundtail 

chub in the Lower Colorado River basin 

included populations found in the Bill 

Williams, Gila, and Little Colorado 

River basins, which are located in 

Arizona and New Mexico. Traditionally, 

the Colorado River basin has been 

divided into two sections, the Upper 

and Lower basins, that are demarcated 

by Lee’s Ferry, which is located in 

northern Arizona downstream of Glen 

Canyon Dam. This demarcation 

combines the Bill Williams, Gila, and 

Little Colorado River basins into the 

traditional geographical definition of the 

Lower Colorado River basin. 

In regard to roundtail chub 

populations in these basins, genetic 

research has revealed that roundtail 

chub in the Lower and Upper Colorado 

River basins are genetically distinct. 

This research has also found that 

roundtail chub from the Little Colorado 

River, traditionally geographically 

placed in the Lower Colorado River 

basin, belong to the same genetic lineage 

as roundtail chub in the Upper Colorado 

River basin. Therefore, as part of this 

finding, we separated roundtail chub 

occupying the Little Colorado River 

from those occupying the remainder of 

the Lower Colorado River basin (i.e., 

Bill Williams and Gila River basins) and 

considered them a separate biological 

entity. 

After reviewing the DPS Policy, we 

determined that the Lower Colorado 

River basin (i.e., Bill Williams and Gila 

River basins) portion of the roundtail 

chub’s range was both discrete and 

significant. This entity will hereafter be 

referred to as the ‘‘Lower Colorado River 

roundtail chub DPS.’’ Roundtail chub in 

the Little Colorado River do meet the 

threshold of discrete under the policy, 

but not the standard for significant. 

Therefore, this 12-month finding 

specifically addresses the status of 

roundtail chub only in the Lower 

Colorado River DPS. A more thorough 

examination of the DPS determination 

can be found in the species assessment 

form that accompanies this 12-month 

finding. 

Within the Lower Colorado River 

DPS, roundtail chub exhibit a complex 

population structure determined by 

hydrological regimes and connections. 

Roundtail chub occupy a variety of 

aquatic habitats within this range, and 

the amount and complexity of available 

habitat influences population 

abundance and resiliency. Across the 

roundtail chub’s range, there is variation 

in ecological settings and genetic 

diversity that represent potential 

adaptive capacity for the species. 

We have carefully assessed the best 

scientific and commercial information 

available regarding the past, present, 

and future threats to the Lower Colorado 

River roundtail chub DPS, and we 

evaluated all relevant factors under the 

five listing factors, including any 

regulatory mechanisms and 

conservation measures addressing these 

threats. We identified several influences 

that could affect the viability of the 

species. These influences include 

nonnative species and alterations to the 

hydrological regime, which have 

reduced the distribution and abundance 

of roundtail chub in the past and 

continue to impact populations today. 

These influences may be exacerbated by 

climate change into the future, which 

will affect precipitation patterns, 

drought, and water usage. Several 

Federal and State agencies and Tribal 

nations have been implementing 

conservation measures through best 

management practices, specific to the 

roundtail chub, to help sustain the 

species and its habitat where possible. 

These efforts have stabilized most 

existing populations and expanded the 

species’ distribution through 

translocations. Since 2004, to increase 

population sizes and aid in population 

establishment and persistence, 20 

populations of roundtail chub have been 

introduced, reintroduced, or expanded 

within the Lower Colorado River basin 

and at least 37 augmentations in 14 

streams have occurred at locations 

occupied by roundtail chub. 

Currently, we estimate that the Lower 

Colorado River basin roundtail chub 

DPS occupies around 34 percent of its 

historical range in the basin and has 

been extirpated from two of the nine 

major basins it historically occupied. 

Within its current range, 83 populations 

occupy a cumulative total of 1,146 miles 

(1,845 kilometers) of stream length. 

Most of these populations are stable or 

increasing, despite the co-occurrence of 

nonnative species across much of the 

range. 

The factors most likely to influence 

the future status of roundtail chub in the 

Lower Colorado River basin are 

nonnative species, modification to the 

hydrological regime, and conservation 

management. Climate change is also 

expected to affect the Lower Colorado 

River basin roundtail chub DPS, mainly 

by altering the hydrological regime, 

which will influence the amount of 

habitat and periodicity of beneficial 

floods. In the species status assessment 

report, we modeled these effects to 

project trends in roundtail chub 

occupancy into the future (Service 2022, 

pp. 37–51). 

While there may be some reduction in 

occupancy, we concluded that most 

sites that are currently occupied will 

likely continue to be so in the 50-year 

foreseeable future. Even under scenarios 

that incorporated climate change effects, 

most populations were predicted to 

remain extant, and these extant 

populations will be widely distributed 

across the species’ range. All scenarios 

we examined contain a positive effect of 

management actions on Lower Colorado 

River roundtail chub DPS population 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
19660 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

resiliency, and we anticipate these 

efforts will continue to benefit the 

species into the future. Overall, these 

results suggest that populations of this 

DPS will continue to be adequately 

resilient and retain sufficient 

intraspecific diversity to cope with 

changing environments in the future. 

These findings were true for the 

Lower Colorado River roundtail chub 

DPS throughout its range as well as in 

our analysis of any potentially 

significant portions of its range. In 

evaluating any potentially significant 

portions of the species’ range, we 

considered whether the threats are 

geographically concentrated in any 

portion of the DPS’s range at a 

biologically meaningful scale. Based on 

the best available information, we found 

no concentration of threats in any 

portion of the DPS’s range at a 

biologically meaningful scale. 

Therefore, no portion of the Lower 

Colorado River roundtail chub DPS’s 

range provided a basis for determining 

that the species is in danger of 

extinction now or likely to become in 

danger of extinction within the 

foreseeable future in a significant 

portion of its range. 

Accordingly, our review of the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information regarding the past, present, 

and future threats to the species 

indicates that the Lower Colorado River 

roundtail chub DPS is not in danger of 

extinction now nor likely to become 

endangered within the foreseeable 

future throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range and does not meet 

the definition of an endangered species 

or a threatened species in accordance 

with section 3(6) and section 3(20) of 

the Act. Therefore, we find that listing 

the Lower Colorado River roundtail 

chub DPS as an endangered or 

threatened species under the Act is not 

warranted at this time. A detailed 

discussion of the basis for this finding, 

including a summary of the changes in 

information that informed this finding 

relative to the 2015 proposed rule, can 

be found in the species assessment 

form, the revised species status 

assessment report (Service 2022, entire), 

and other supporting documents (see 

ADDRESSES, above). 

New Information 

We request that you submit any new 

information concerning the taxonomy 

of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or 

stressors to the Lower Colorado River 

roundtail chub DPS to the person listed 

above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, whenever it becomes 

available. New information will help us 

monitor this species and make 

appropriate decisions about its 

conservation and status. We encourage 

local agencies and stakeholders to 

continue cooperative monitoring and 

conservation efforts. 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

As mentioned previously, the Gila 

chub (Gila intermedia) remains listed as 

endangered and was unaffected by the 

2017 withdrawal of the 2015 proposed 

rule to list the headwater chub and the 

Lower Colorado River roundtail chub 

DPS as threatened species under the Act 

(82 FR 16981, April 7, 2017), despite the 

taxonomic revision concluding specieslevel status is not warranted for the Gila 

chub. Therefore, we hereby announce 

that we are considering issuing a 

proposed rule to remove Gila chub (Gila 

intermedia) from the List of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 

17.11(h). This document seeks relevant 

comments from the public on the status 

of the species, its taxonomy, or its 

habitats that could serve to inform a 

new rulemaking action. While we are 

requesting information on our 

consideration of issuing a proposed rule 

to remove Gila chub from the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

here, if we determine issuing such a 

proposed rule is supported by the best 

information available, formal 

rulemaking will follow with the 

opportunity for additional review and 

comment. 

As section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs 

that determinations as to whether any 

species is an endangered or a threatened 

species must be made ‘‘solely on the 

basis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available,’’ 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. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking for the 

Gila chub by one of the methods listed 

in ADDRESSES. We request that you send 

comments only by the methods 

described in ADDRESSES. 

If you submit information via https:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. If your submission is 

made via a hardcopy that includes 

personal identifying information, you 

may request at the top of your document 

that we withhold this information from 

public review. However, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

We will post all hardcopy submissions 

on https://www.regulations.gov. 

References Cited 

A list of the references cited in this 

document is available on the internet at 

https://www.regulations.gov under 

Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2022–0001 in 

the species assessment form, or upon 

request from the person listed above 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Authors 

The primary authors of this document 

are the staff members of the Fish and 

Wildlife Service’s Species Assessment 

Team, Ecological Services Program. 

Authority 

The authority for this action is section 

4 of the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). 

Martha Williams, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07165 Filed 4–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1