Je veux savoir à propos de…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

12582

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 41 / Thursday, March 4, 2021 / Proposed Rules
our analysis on evaluating the specific areas or sectors that may incur probable incremental economic impacts as a result of the designation. If there are any unoccupied units in the proposed critical habitat designation, the screening analysis assesses whether any additional management or conservation efforts may incur incremental economic impacts. This screening analysis combined with the information contained in our IEM are what we consider our draft economic analysis DEA of the proposed critical habitat designation for the Arizona eryngo; our DEA is summarized in the narrative below.
Executive Orders E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives in quantitative to the extent feasible and qualitative terms. Consistent with the E.O.
regulatory analysis requirements, our effects analysis under the Act may take into consideration impacts to both directly and indirectly affected entities, where practicable and reasonable. If sufficient data are available, we assess to the extent practicable the probable impacts to both directly and indirectly affected entities. As part of our screening analysis, we considered the types of economic activities that are likely to occur within the areas likely affected by the critical habitat designation. In our evaluation of the probable incremental economic impacts that may result from the proposed designation of critical habitat for the Arizona eryngo, first we identified, in the IEM dated October 15, 2020, probable incremental economic impacts associated with the following categories of activities: 1 Federal lands management Bureau of Land Management; 2 vegetation management; 3 fire and fuels management; and 4 livestock grazing.
We considered each industry or category individually. Additionally, we considered whether their activities have any Federal involvement. Critical habitat designation generally will not affect activities that do not have any Federal involvement; under the Act, designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal agencies. If we list the species, in areas where the Arizona eryngo is present, Federal agencies would be required to consult with the Service under section 7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or implement that may affect the species. If, when we list the species, we also finalize this proposed critical habitat designation, consultations to
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:38 Mar 03, 2021

Jkt 253001

avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat would be incorporated into the existing consultation process.
In our IEM, we attempted to clarify the distinction between the effects that would result from the species being listed and those attributable to the critical habitat designation i.e., difference between the jeopardy and adverse modification standards for the Arizona eryngos critical habitat.
Because the designation of critical habitat for Arizona eryngo is being proposed concurrently with the listing, it has been our experience that it is more difficult to discern which conservation efforts are attributable to the species being listed and those which will result solely from the designation of critical habitat. However, the following specific circumstances in this case help to inform our evaluation: 1 The essential physical or biological features identified for critical habitat are the same features essential for the life requisites of the species, and 2 any actions that would result in sufficient harm to constitute jeopardy to the Arizona eryngo would also likely adversely affect the essential physical or biological features of critical habitat.
The IEM outlines our rationale concerning this limited distinction between baseline conservation efforts and incremental impacts of the designation of critical habitat for this species. This evaluation of the incremental effects has been used as the basis to evaluate the probable incremental economic impacts of this proposed designation of critical habitat.
The proposed critical habitat designation for the Arizona eryngo totals 13.0 acres 5.3 hectares in three units, all of which are occupied. In occupied areas, any actions that may affect the species or its habitat would also affect critical habitat, and it is unlikely that any additional conservation efforts would be recommended to address the adverse modification standard over and above those recommended as necessary to avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of the Arizona eryngo.
Therefore, only administrative costs are expected in the proposed critical habitat designation. While this additional analysis will require time and resources by both the Federal action agency and the Service, it is believed that, in most circumstances, these costs would predominantly be administrative in nature and would not be significant.
The probable incremental economic impacts of the Arizona eryngo critical habitat designation are expected to be limited to additional administrative
PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

effort as well as minor costs of conservation efforts resulting from a small number of future section 7
consultations. Because all of the proposed critical habitat units are occupied by the species, incremental economic impacts of critical habitat designation, other than administrative costs, are unlikely. At approximately $5,300 or less per consultation, in order to reach the threshold of $100 million of incremental administrative impacts in a single year, critical habitat designation would have to result in more than 18,800 consultations in a single year; instead, this designation is expected to result in 12 to 17
consultations in 10 years. Thus, the annual administrative burden is unlikely to reach $100 million.
We are soliciting data and comments from the public on the DEA discussed above, as well as all aspects of this proposed rule and our required determinations. During the development of a final designation, we will consider the information presented in the DEA
and any additional information on economic impacts we receive during the public comment period to determine whether any specific areas should be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under authority of section 4b2 and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19. In particular, 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.
Consideration of National Security Impacts Section 4a3Bi of the Act may not cover all DoD lands or areas that pose potential national-security concerns e.g., a DoD installation that is in the process of revising its INRMP for a newly listed species or a species previously not covered. If a particular area is not covered under section 4a3Bi, national-security or homeland-security concerns are not a factor in the process of determining what areas meet the definition of critical habitat. Nevertheless, when designating critical habitat under section 4b2, the Service must consider impacts on national security, including homeland security, on lands or areas not covered by section 4a3Bi. Accordingly, we will always consider for exclusion from the designation areas for which DoD, Department of Homeland Security DHS, or another Federal agency has requested exclusion based on an
E:FRFM04MRP1.SGM

04MRP1