Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 118 / Monday, June 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 29453 

Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, One Congress Street, 

Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114– 

2023, telephone number (617) 918– 

1664, fax number (617) 918–0664, 

e-mail Burkhart.Richard@epa.gov. 

Dated: June 12, 2009. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England. 

[FR Doc. E9–14604 Filed 6–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Part 441 

[CMS–2296–ANPRM] 

RIN 0938–AP61 

Medicaid Program; Home and 

Community-Based Services (HCBS) 

Waivers 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking announces the 

intention of CMS to publish proposed 

amendments to the regulations 

implementing Medicaid home and 

community-based services waivers 

under section 1915(c) of the Social 

Security Act and solicits advance public 

comments on the merits of providing 

States the option to combine or 

eliminate the existing three permitted 

waiver targeting groups, and on the 

most effective means to define home 

and community. 

DATES: To be assured consideration, 

comments must be received at one of 

the addresses provided below, no later 

than 5 p.m. on August 21, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer 

to file code CMS–2296–ANPRM. 

Because of staff and resource 

limitations, we cannot accept comments 

by facsimile (FAX) transmission. 

You may submit comments in one of 

four ways (please choose only one of the 

ways listed): 

1. Electronically. You may submit 

electronic comments on this regulation 

to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the instructions under the ‘‘More Search 

Options’’ tab. 

2. By regular mail. You may mail 

written comments to the following 

address only: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Attention: 

CMS–2296–ANPRM, P.O. Box 8016, 

Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. 

Please allow sufficient time for mailed 

comments to be received before the 

close of the comment period. 

3. By express or overnight mail. You 

may send written comments to the 

following address only: Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Attention: CMS–2296– 

ANPRM, Mail Stop C4–26–05, 7500 

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244–1850. 

4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, 

you may deliver (by hand or courier) 

your written comments before the close 

of the comment period to either of the 

following addresses: 

a. For delivery in Washington, DC— 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Room 445–G, Hubert 

H. Humphrey Building, 200 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20201 

(Because access to the interior of the 

Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not 

readily available to persons without 

Federal government identification, 

commenters are encouraged to leave 

their comments in the CMS drop slots 

located in the main lobby of the 

building. A stamp-in clock is available 

for persons wishing to retain a proof of 

filing by stamping in and retaining an 

extra copy of the comments being 

filed.). 

b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD— 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. 

If you intend to deliver your 

comments to the Baltimore address, 

please call telephone number (410) 786– 

7195 in advance to schedule your 

arrival with one of our staff members. 

Comments mailed to the addresses 

indicated as appropriate for hand or 

courier delivery may be delayed and 

received after the comment period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Sowers, (410) 786–6814. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Inspection of Public Comments: All 

comments received before the close of 

the comment period are available for 

viewing by the public, including any 

personally identifiable or confidential 

business information that is included in 

a comment. We post all comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period on the following Web 

site as soon as possible after they have 

been received: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the search 

instructions on that Web site to view 

public comments. 

Comments received timely will also 

be available for public inspection as 

they are received, generally beginning 

approximately 3 weeks after publication 

of a document, at the headquarters of 

the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Monday 

through Friday of each week from 8:30 

a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an 

appointment to view public comments, 

phone 1–800–743–3951. 

I. Overview 

We are issuing this advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) to 

announce our intention to publish a 

proposed rule and solicit public 

comments on the changes necessary to 

provide States the option to design 

home and community-based services 

(HCBS) waiver programs serving more 

than one target population. We are 

particularly interested in receiving 

comments on how removal of the 

existing regulatory barrier regarding 

target groups may increase a State’s 

ability to design service packages based 

on need, rather than diagnosis or 

condition. Furthermore, we are 

interested in receiving comments on 

how this change may affect the State’s 

ability to serve individuals requiring an 

institutional level of care and may 

facilitate compliance with the 

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

(ADA). Title II of the ADA prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of disability 

and the Supreme Court ruled in 

Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), 

that unnecessary institutionalization 

may constitute discrimination under the 

ADA. Many States have used the home 

and community-based services waiver 

as a component of their Olmstead 

compliance efforts and we are interested 

in receiving comments about how this 

change may affect these efforts. We are 

intending to propose this change in an 

effort to remove barriers to personcentered, needs-based service delivery 

methods. Consequently, we are also 

hoping to hear from interested parties 

regarding recommendations to 

strengthen person-centered principles 

and practices for the successful 

operation of any HCBS waiver program, 

including those that may serve 

individuals based upon identified 

needs, rather than diagnosis. 

It is also our intention to publish as 

a part of the proposed rule requirements 

related to identifying the home and 

community-based character of the 

settings in which HCBS participants 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
29454 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 118 / Monday, June 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

1 73 FR 18676, http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/ 

2008/pdf/08-1084.pdf. 

reside and/or receive services. During 

the development of the regulation for 

the new State plan HCBS benefit under 

section 1915(i) of the Social Security 

Act 1 (the Act), we received, as solicited, 

extensive comments on this issue. In 

preparation of this ANPRM, we took 

these comments into consideration and 

are contemplating publication of a 

proposed rule that would provide that 

States must define, and CMS approve, 

standards for home and community 

under HCBS waivers. Many commenters 

asked for a deliberative stakeholder 

process for developing criteria for home 

and community standards. This 

announcement provides advance notice 

of such a process in regard to HCBS 

waivers, and provides an opportunity 

for parties to express interest in 

participating. 

II. Background 

Section 1915(c) of the Social Security 

Act (the Act) authorizes the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services to waive 

certain specific Medicaid statutory 

requirements so that a State may offer 

HCBS to State-specified group(s) of 

Medicaid beneficiaries who meet a level 

of institutional care that is provided 

under the Medicaid State plan. This 

provision was added to the Act by the 

Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act 

(OBRA) of 1981 (with a number of 

subsequent amendments). Regulations 

were published to effectuate this 

statutory provision, with final 

regulations issued in the mid-1990s. 

A. Removing Regulatory Barrier To 

Designing 1915(c) Waivers Based on 

Needs Rather Than Diagnosis or 

Condition 

Section 1915(c) of the Act authorizes 

the Secretary to waive section 

1902(a)(10)(B) of the Act, allowing 

States to waive comparability and target 

an HCBS waiver program to a specified 

Medicaid-eligible group or sub-group 

who would otherwise require an 

institutional level of care. A section 

1915(c) waiver may currently only serve 

one of the three target populations 

identified in regulations at 42 CFR 

§ 441.301. These three target groups are: 

Aged or disabled, or both; Mentally 

retarded or developmentally disabled, 

or both; and Mentally ill. States must 

develop separate 1915(c) waivers in 

order to serve more than one of these 

populations. This regulatory provision 

has contributed to States offering 

waivers with service packages tailored 

to different groups of individuals based 

upon diagnosis, rather than the 

individuals’ actual need for support. 

Because the three target populations 

outlined above are typically associated 

with a particular institutional level of 

care, the necessity to offer multiple 

separate waivers, is often framed as an 

inability to combine levels of care. For 

example, waiver costs for persons with 

developmental disabilities are most 

frequently compared to costs of 

Intermediate Care Facilities for Persons 

with Mental Retardation or conditions 

closely related to mental retardation 

(ICFs/MR), while waiver costs for 

persons who are aged or with physical 

disabilities are compared to nursing 

facility costs. However, the impediment 

to serving more than one target group 

through an HCBS waiver relates to the 

division between the target groups 

required in the regulation, not the 

associated institutional settings where 

those target groups would otherwise 

receive services but for the provision of 

HCBS. For example, some individuals 

with the need for mental health services 

may be appropriately served in the 

community at the nursing facility level 

of care. 

Historically, in many cases pre-dating 

the 1915(c) HCBS waiver program, 

States have utilized a targeted approach 

to funding and budgeting for services for 

various populations. The CMS 

regulations published in the mid-1990s 

were modeled after those practices; the 

regulations reflect the funding 

approaches common in some State 

budgets. As the number of HCBS 

waivers across the country has grown to 

more than 350 waivers serving more 

than 1 million individuals, some States, 

with concurrence from stakeholder 

groups and individuals, have expressed 

a desire for the flexibility to combine 

these target groups in order to provide 

services based upon needs rather than 

diagnosis or condition, and for 

administrative relief from operating and 

managing multiple 1915(c) waiver 

programs. 

We have considered these issues and 

intend to propose to change the 

regulations in 42 CFR subpart G to allow 

States the flexibility to combine any of 

the three target groups in one HCBS 

waiver, or possibly to choose to offer 

waiver services to groups defined 

differently from the pre-defined 

targeting groups. The intended proposed 

regulatory change would not mandate 

any change in State criteria for targeting 

HCBS waivers, it would provide 

additional State flexibility. We expect 

that States would continue to appreciate 

the narrow targeting permitted under 

section 1915(c) of the Act, particularly 

for populations with high needs or 

receiving unique services. Under the 

change we are planning to propose, 

States would still have to determine that 

without the waiver, participants would 

require institutional level of care, in 

accordance with section 1915(c) of the 

Act. Likewise, the intended proposal to 

provide additional targeting flexibility 

for States will not affect the costneutrality requirement inherent in 

section 1915(c) waivers. 

In order to assure that individuals 

served by waivers targeting a broad 

range of conditions receive 

individualized care, we further plan to 

propose to require that: (1) The service 

planning process be person-centered, 

and (2) the services specified in the plan 

of care be based upon the needs of the 

individual, not an average need among 

one target group. In addition, we intend 

to update the language in the regulation 

related to the target groups to reflect 

more contemporary, person-first 

language. 

We intend to propose this change to 

provide States with one additional tool 

to better serve their citizens, with 

person-centered delivery systems driven 

by need, not diagnosis or existing 

dedicated funding streams. A Federal 

regulatory change that permits 

combining targeted groups within one 

waiver, while optional for States and 

not an instantaneous change in State 

structures, would remove one barrier for 

States wishing to design waivers across 

various populations. We encourage 

comments on all aspects of the change 

we contemplate proposing, including its 

possible utility in enhancing State 

flexibility, minimizing administrative 

burden, facilitating compliance with the 

ADA, and facilitating a more needsbased service system. 

B. Home and Community-Based 

Characteristics 

We are also intending to propose 

adjusting the regulations at 42 CFR 

subpart G to describe expectations with 

regard to waiver participants being 

served in the home and community. We 

believe such proposed requirements 

would increase choice by providing 

waiver participants with notice of 

housing alternatives, and would create 

greater demand and market incentive for 

person-centered residential settings. Our 

intended proposed changes would 

include methods that States may follow 

to identify appropriate financing 

mechanisms for reducing the size of 

existing larger residences, divesting 

themselves or helping their providers 

divest themselves of sizable properties, 

and assisting providers’ transition to 

smaller, more individualized settings. 

We invite commenters to suggest other 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 118 / Monday, June 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 29455 

forms of technical assistance that CMS 

might provide to assist States in 

enhancing their efforts for optimal 

choice, control, and community 

integration for persons with disabilities 

and individuals who are aging. 

Since the inception of the 1915(c) 

HCBS waiver program in the 1981, the 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services (CMS) (formerly known as 

Health Care Finance Administration 

(HCFA)) has supported State efforts to 

serve individuals in the least restrictive 

setting possible. However, home and 

community have not been explicitly 

defined, and as a consequence, some 

individuals who receive HCBS in a 

residential setting managed or operated 

by a service provider have experienced 

a provider-centered and institution-like 

living arrangement, instead of a personcentered and home-like environment 

with the freedoms that should be 

characteristic of any home and 

community-based setting. For some 

years, we have attempted to address this 

problem indirectly through our review 

of State service definitions for HCBS, 

with limited success. Through this 

ANPRM, we are announcing our 

intention to propose to affirmatively 

identify expectations for characteristics 

of home and community-based settings. 

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 

created a new section 1915(i) of the 

Social Security Act. Section 1915(i) 

permits States to offer the HCBS 

specifically identified in section 

1915(c)(4)(b) of the Act as a State plan 

option without requiring States to 

submit a waiver application. In addition 

to making HCBS available under the 

State plan, Congress expressed interest 

in assuring small, community-based 

home-like environments through 

statutory requirements in section 6071 

of the DRA of 2005 for the Money 

Follows the Person Demonstration 

Program. This program authorized 

grants to States to increase the use of 

HCBS, rather than institutional services, 

and required that community-based 

residential settings include no more 

than a specific limited number of 

residents. 

A regulatory change articulating CMS 

requirements for the nature of home and 

community-based residence under 

section 1915(c) HCBS waivers is 

necessary to ensure that the 

expectations for home and community 

characteristics are consistent across 

section 1915(c) of the Act and section 

1915(i) authorities, and to ensure, most 

importantly, that individuals receiving 

HCBS have meaningful alternatives to 

institutional care, regardless of the 

section of the statute authorizing their 

services. Therefore, we are planning to 

propose adding to 42 CFR subpart G a 

requirement that individuals receiving 

HCBS waiver services must reside in the 

home or community, in accordance with 

either of two criteria enumerated below: 

• Resides in a home or apartment not 

owned, leased or controlled by a 

provider of any health-related treatment 

or support services; or 

• Resides in a home or apartment that 

is owned, leased or controlled by a 

provider of one or more health-related 

treatment or support services, and that 

meets standards for community living, 

as defined by the State and approved by 

the Secretary. 

We believe that this wording takes 

into account the variety of living 

situations that should be exempt from 

evaluation, and avoids indirect 

indicators such as number of residents. 

Only living situations in which a paid 

provider of services has opportunity to 

affect the degree of independence and 

choice will trigger application of 

additional State-defined and CMSapproved standards for community 

living. Standards for community living 

are to optimize participant 

independence and community 

integration, promote initiative and 

choice in daily living, and facilitate full 

access to community services. To ensure 

that these goals are met, standards must 

be developed through strong 

stakeholder input. We would be 

interested in receiving comments 

regarding strategies that States could 

employ to solicit and incorporate strong 

stakeholder input in their efforts to 

define standards for community living. 

We do not contemplate specifying 

criteria for home and community 

standards in the proposed regulation. 

We do solicit stakeholder interest in 

working with CMS to develop policy 

guidelines for State definitions. 

The intent of these guidelines is to 

create the necessary conditions so that 

individuals are able to reside in personcentered, home-like environments 

where they can enjoy all of the liberties 

of community living. We recognize that 

it is difficult for a State to develop and 

monitor standards related to the 

individual’s standing in a landlord/ 

tenant relationship or in 

homeownership without inadvertently 

omitting an arrangement that could be 

ideal for a particular individual. 

Furthermore, we recognize that the 

criteria listed above may not address the 

possibility that some providers may 

undertake efforts to avert stateestablished standards. In light of the 

complexity of this matter, the longstanding HCBS waivers operating in the 

country currently, and the many 

existing efforts to ensure that 

individuals are provided services in the 

setting where they have maximum 

choice, control and individual liberties, 

CMS solicits public input on strategies 

to address this issue of maximum 

individual choice and control for the 

1915(c) waiver participants. We solicit 

comments on pathways that States may 

take to improve their systems to ensure 

that the settings where services are 

rendered are truly home and 

community-based in nature, and that 

individuals are offered meaningful 

opportunities for community living. In 

addition, we solicit input on the 

potential impact of this issue on 

federally recognized tribes. We 

recognize that States will require 

assistance and technical guidance as 

they make changes, and also solicit 

comments on the nature of guidance 

and assistance that may be needed. 

III. Intentions of This Notice 

We encourage comments that assist us 

in determining all implications of our 

contemplated proposed regulatory 

changes, and to assist us in constructing 

the regulations in a manner that 

provides appropriate guidance and 

incentives to result in meaningful, 

positive change for the nearly one 

million individuals currently served 

through 1915(c) HCBS waivers. 

IV. Response to Comments 

Because of the large number of 

comments we normally receive on a 

proposed rule, we are not able to 

acknowledge or respond to them 

individually. However, we will consider 

all comments we receive by the date and 

time specified in the DATES section of 

this advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking, and will address these 

comments in any proposed regulation 

that results from this advance notice. 

V. Collection of Information 

Requirements 

This document does not impose 

information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Consequently, it need not be reviewed 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget under the authority of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the 

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and 

1395hh). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
29456 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 118 / Monday, June 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: May 29, 2009. 

Charlene Frizzera, 

Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare 

& Medicaid Services. 

Approved: June 16, 2009. 

Kathleen Sebelius, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–14559 Filed 6–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

49 CFR Part 107 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2008–0010 (HM–208G)] 

RIN 2137–AE35 

Hazardous Materials Transportation; 

Miscellaneous Revisions to 

Registration and Fee Assessment 

Program 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) is withdrawing the notice of 

proposed rulemaking published under 

this docket on May 5, 2008 (73 FR 

24519). Our revised estimates of 

unexpended balances from previous 

years and revenues expected to be 

generated at current registration fee 

levels indicate that an increase in 

registration fees is not necessary to fund 

the national Hazardous Materials 

Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) grants 

program at its authorized level of 

$28,318,000 for Fiscal Year 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Deborah Boothe, Office of Hazardous 

Materials Standards, (202) 366–8553, or 

David Donaldson, Office of Hazardous 

Materials Planning and Analysis, (202) 

366–4484, Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration, U.S. 

Department of Transportation. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Hazardous Materials Emergency 

Preparedness (HMEP) grants program, as 

mandated by 49 U.S.C. 5116, provides 

Federal financial and technical 

assistance to States and Indian tribes to 

‘‘develop, improve, and carry out 

emergency plans’’ within the National 

Response System and the Emergency 

Planning and Community Right-ToKnow Act of 1986 (Title III), 42 U.S.C. 

11001 et seq. The grants are used to 

develop, improve, and implement 

emergency plans; to train public sector 

hazardous materials emergency 

response employees to respond to 

accidents and incidents involving 

hazardous materials; to determine flow 

patterns of hazardous materials within a 

State and between States; and to 

determine the need within a State for 

regional hazardous materials emergency 

response teams. The HMEP grants 

program is funded by registration fees 

collected from persons who offer for 

transportation or transport certain 

hazardous materials in intrastate, 

interstate, or foreign commerce. 

Congress reauthorized the Federal 

hazardous materials transportation law 

(Federal hazmat law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et 

seq.) in 2005. The Hazardous Materials 

Transportation Safety and Security 

Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Title VII of 

the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A 

Legacy for Users, Pub. L. 109–59, 119 

Stat. 1144, Aug. 10, 2005) authorizes 

$28.3 million per year for the HMEP 

grants program and lowered the 

maximum registration fee from $5,000 

to $3,000. The Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 

110–161, 121 Stat. 2404, Dec. 26, 2007) 

set an obligation limitation of 

$28,318,000 for expenses from the 

HMEP fund, and the Administration’s 

Fiscal Year 2009 budget requests 

$28,300,000 in support of HMEP 

activity. 

II. Current Rulemaking 

To ensure full funding of the HMEP 

grants program for FY 2009, PHMSA 

proposed an increase in registration fees 

to fund the program at the $28.3 million 

level (73 FR 24519, May 5, 2008). For 

those registrants not qualifying as a 

small business or not-for-profit 

organization, we proposed to increase 

the registration fee from $975 (plus a 

$25 administrative fee) to $2,475 (plus 

a $25 administrative fee) for registration 

year 2009–2010 and following years. As 

explained in the NPRM, an existing 

surplus enabled us to delay an increase 

in registration fees, but we concluded 

that we would not be able to fund the 

HMEP grants program at the $28.3 

million level in Fiscal Year 2009 

without an increase. 

We received 13 written comments in 

response to the NPRM from shippers 

and carriers and from the emergency 

response community, including the 

American Trucking Association (ATA), 

Council on the Safe Transportation of 

Hazardous Articles (COSTHA), Institute 

of Makers of Explosives (IME), 

International Association of Fire Chiefs 

(IAFC), National Association of SARA 

Title III Program Officials (NASTTPO), 

and Vessel Operators Hazardous 

Materials Association, Inc. (VOHMA). 

We have recently re-examined our 

estimates for funding the HMEP grants 

program based on updated information 

from the Department of Treasury on the 

HMEP account carry-over balance, deobligations of unused grant and 

administrative funds, increased 

enforcement of the registration 

requirements, and current registrant 

data, and we have further refined our 

estimates of revenues we anticipate 

collecting for registration years 2008– 

2009 (covering July 1, 2008 to June 30, 

2009) and 2009–2010 (covering July 1, 

2009 to June 30, 2010) at current 

registration fee levels. Based on this 

analysis, we have concluded that we 

will be able to fund the HMEP grants 

program at the $28.3 million level in 

Fiscal Year 2009 without an increase in 

registration fees. Accordingly, PHMSA 

is withdrawing the May 5, 2008, NPRM 

and terminating this rulemaking 

proceeding. Depending on appropriated 

and available funding for Fiscal Year 

2010, we may initiate a future 

rulemaking to adjust registration fees for 

future registration years. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 9, 2009 

under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 

106. 

Theodore L. Willke, 

Associate Administrator for Hazardous 

Materials Safety. 

[FR Doc. E9–14569 Filed 6–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[FWS–R6–ES–2009–0037; 92210–1117– 

0000–B4] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Revise Critical Habitat for 

Eriogonum pelinophilum (Clay-Loving 

Wild Buckwheat) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding and initiation of critical habitat 

review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS), announce a 

90–day finding on a petition to revise 

critical habitat for Eriogonum 

pelinophilum (clay-loving wild 

buckwheat) under the Endangered 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS