Quiero saber acerca de...

57792

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

designation for the SSN DPS of fisher will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In summary, we have considered whether the proposed designation would result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. For the above reasons and based on currently available information, we certify that, if made final as proposed, the critical habitat designation for the SSN DPS of fisher will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions.
Operation, management, and maintenance activities of utility facilities e.g., hydropower facilities, powerlines, and pipelines have been known to occur within the range of the SSN DPS of fisher and its proposed critical habitat units/subunits Service 2021, Table 3; hydropower activities have primarily occurred in Units 2, 3, 4, and 5, and powerline and pipeline utilities activities have occurred in all units. These are activities that the Service consults on with Federal agencies and their respective permittees, including utility companies under section 7 of the Act. As discussed in the DEA, the costs associated with consultations related to occupied critical habitat would be largely administrative in nature and are not anticipated to reach $100 million in any given year based on the anticipated annual number of consultations and associated consultation costs, which are not expected to exceed $179,300 per year 2021 dollars Industrial Economics Inc. 2021, pp. 2, 1718. In our economic analysis, we did not find that this proposed critical habitat designation would significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use.
Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., we make the following finding:
1 This proposed rule would not produce a Federal mandate. In general,
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:18 Oct 18, 2021

Jkt 256001

a Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal governments, or the private sector, and includes both Federal intergovernmental mandates and Federal private sector mandates.
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C.
65857. Federal intergovernmental mandate includes a regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal governments with two exceptions. It excludes a condition of Federal assistance. It also excludes a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program, unless the regulation relates to a then-existing Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State, local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority, if the provision would increase the stringency of conditions of assistance or place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Governments responsibility to provide funding, and the State, local, or Tribal governments lack authority to adjust accordingly. At the time of enactment, these entitlement programs were:
Medicaid; Aid to Families with Dependent Children work programs;
Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. Federal private sector mandate includes a regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except i a condition of Federal assistance or ii a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program.
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would
PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

not apply, nor would critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above onto State governments.
2 We do not believe that this rule would significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it is not anticipated to reach a Federal mandate of $100 million in any given year; that is, it is not a significant regulatory action under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The designation of critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or local governments. Small governments could be affected only to the extent that any programs having Federal funds, permits, or other authorized activities must ensure that their actions will not adversely affect the critical habitat. By definition, Federal agencies are not considered small entities, although the activities they fund or permit may be proposed or carried out by small entities.
Consequently, we do not believe that the proposed critical habitat designation would significantly or uniquely affect small government entities. Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.
TakingsExecutive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order 12630 Government Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights, we have analyzed the potential takings implications of designating critical habitat for the SSN DPS of fisher in a takings implications assessment. The Act does not authorize the Service to regulate private actions on private lands or confiscate private property as a result of critical habitat designation.
Designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership, or establish any closures or restrictions on use of or access to the designated areas.
Furthermore, the designation of critical habitat does not affect landowner actions that do not require Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude development of habitat conservation programs or issuance of incidental take permits to permit actions that do require Federal funding or permits to go forward. However, Federal agencies are prohibited from carrying out, funding, or authorizing actions that would destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. A takings implications assessment has been completed for the proposed designation of critical habitat for the SSN DPS of fisher, and it concludes that, if adopted, this designation of critical habitat does not pose significant takings implications for lands within or affected by the designation.

E:FRFM19OCP1.SGM

19OCP1