Quiero saber acerca de...

38254

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 20, 2021 / Proposed Rules
if there are no effects anticipated to the species.
We note that during the public comment period on our prior proposed revised critical habitat rule 85 FR
48487, August 11, 2020, the American Forest Resource Council AFRC 2020
and other commenters provided a new report prepared by The Brattle Group 2020 Brattle report critiquing the 2012 critical habitat economic analysis IEc 2012. The Brattle report included updated estimates of the economic impacts of the 2012 rule using more recent data and/or different assumptions. We contracted with IEc to review the Brattle report and provided a response to the report in the January 15, 2021, final rule 86 FR 4820, pp.
48254827. The Brattle report does not alter our assessment that because we are removing areas from designation rather than adding them, no new economic analysis is needed. Because the entire 2012 designation did not reach the threshold for economic significance under Executive Order 12866, these exclusions, which represent a reduction in the overall cost, also do not meet this threshold.
During the development of a final revised designation, we will consider any additional economic impact information we receive during the public comment period see DATES, and, therefore, additional areas not considered in this proposed rule may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under section 4b2 of the Act and our implementing regulations.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

Consideration of Impacts on National Security We did not exclude areas from our December 4, 2012, revised critical habitat designation based on impacts on national security, but we did exempt Joint Base Lewis-McChord lands based on the integrated natural resources management plan under section 4a3
of the Act 77 FR 71876, pp. 71944
71945. In this document, we are not proposing to exclude any areas from the critical habitat designation on the basis of impacts on national security.
However, during the development of a final rule we will consider any additional information received through the public comment period on the impacts of the proposed designation on national security or homeland security to determine whether any specific areas
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:23 Jul 19, 2021

Jkt 253001

should be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under authority of section 4a3 and our implementing regulations.
Consideration of Other Relevant Impacts When identifying the benefits of inclusion of an area as designated critical habitat, we primarily consider the additional regulatory benefits that that area would receive due to the protection from destruction or adverse modification as a result of actions with a Federal nexus that is, an activity or program authorized, funded, or carried out in whole or in part by a Federal agency, the educational benefits of mapping essential habitat for recovery of the listed species, and any benefits that may result from a designation due to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat. When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result in conservation, or in the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of partnerships.
In the case of the northern spotted owl, the benefits of including an area as designated critical habitat include public awareness of the presence of northern spotted owls and the importance of habitat protection, and, where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for northern spotted owls through the Acts section 7a2
mandate that Federal agencies insure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Additionally, continued implementation of an ongoing management plan for the area that provides conservation equal to or greater than a critical habitat designation would reduce the benefits of including that specific area in the critical habitat designation.
We evaluate existing conservation plans when considering the benefits of inclusion. We consider a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized; how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical or biological features;
whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation management strategies, and actions contained in a management plan, will be implemented into the future; whether
PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

the conservation strategies in the plan are likely to be effective; and whether the plan contains a monitoring program or adaptive management to ensure that the conservation measures are effective and can be adapted in the future in response to new information.
After identifying the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to evaluate whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion.
If our analysis indicates that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion, we then determine whether exclusion would result in extinction of the species. If exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result in extinction, we will not exclude it from the designation under section 4b2 of the Act.
The final decision on whether to exclude any areas under section 4b2
will be based on the best scientific data available at the time of the final designation, including information that we obtain during the comment period.
If we receive credible information regarding the existence of a meaningful economic or other relevant impact supporting a benefit of exclusion, we will conduct an exclusion analysis for the relevant area or areas. We may also exercise the discretion to evaluate any other particular areas for possible exclusion. We may exclude an area from critical habitat if we determine that the benefits of excluding the area outweigh the benefits of including the area, provided the exclusion will not result in the extinction of this species.
Proposed Exclusions We are proposing to exclude the following areas under section 4b2 of the Act from the critical habitat designation for the northern spotted owl. Table 1, below, identifies the specific critical habitat units from the December 4, 2012, final rule 77 FR
71876; codified at 50 CFR 17.95b, that we propose to exclude, at least in part, the approximate areas ac, ha of lands involved, and a brief summary of the rationale for the proposed exclusions.
The Table 8 Addendum that follows displays this same information but in the format used in Table 8 in the December 4, 2012, final rule 77 FR
71876, pp. 7194871949.

E:FRFM20JYP1.SGM

20JYP1