[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26034-26035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10576]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R9-ES-2012-N089; 4500030113]
Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Policy for Evaluation of Conservation
Efforts When Making Listing Decisions (PECE)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) have sent an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for review and approval. We summarize
the ICR below and describe the nature of the collection and the
estimated burden and cost. This information collection is scheduled to
expire on May 31, 2012. We may not conduct or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. However, under OMB
regulations, we may continue to conduct or sponsor this information
collection while it is pending at OMB.
DATES: You must submit comments on or before June 1, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments and suggestions on this information
collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at
OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (email).
Please provide a copy of your comments to the Service Information
Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 2042-
PDM, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203 (mail), or
INFOCOL@fws.gov (email). Please include ``1018-0119'' in the subject
line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request additional information
about this ICR, contact Hope Grey at INFOCOL@fws.gov (email) or 703-
358-2482 (telephone). You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the
Interior collections under review by OMB.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control Number: 1018-0119.
Title: Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making
Listing Decisions (PECE).
Service Form Number(s): None.
Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.
Description of Respondents: Primarily State, local, or tribal
governments. However, individuals, businesses, and not-for-profit
organizations could develop agreements/plans or may agree to implement
certain conservation efforts identified in a State agreement/plan.
Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Completion
Activity Number of Number of time per Total annual
respondents responses response burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Agreement.............................. 4 4 2,000 8,000
Monitoring...................................... 7 7 600 4,200
Reporting....................................... 7 7 120 840
---------------------------------------------------------------
Totals...................................... 18 18 .............. 13,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract: Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) specifies the process by which we can list species as
threatened or endangered. When we consider whether or not to list a
species, the ESA requires us to take into account the efforts being
made by any State or any political subdivision of a State to protect
such species. We also take into account the efforts being made by other
entities. States or other entities often formalize conservation efforts
in conservation agreements, conservation plans, management plans, or
similar documents. The conservation efforts recommended or called for
in such documents could prevent some species from becoming so imperiled
that they meet the definition of a threatened or endangered species
under the ESA.
The Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making
Listing Decisions (PECE) (68 FR 15100, March 28, 2003) encourages the
development of conservation agreements/plans and provides certainty
about the standard that an individual conservation effort must meet for
us to consider whether it contributes to forming a basis for making a
decision about the listing of a species. PECE applies to ``formalized
conservation efforts'' that have not been implemented or have been
implemented but have not yet demonstrated if they are effective at the
time of a listing decision.
Under PECE, formalized conservation efforts are defined as
conservation efforts (specific actions, activities, or programs
designed to eliminate or reduce threats or otherwise improve the status
of a species) identified in a conservation agreement, conservation
plan, management plan, or similar document. To assist us in evaluating
a formalized conservation effort under PECE, we collect information
such as a conservation plan, monitoring results, or progress reports.
The development of such agreements/plans is voluntary. There is no
requirement that the individual conservation efforts included
[[Page 26035]]
in such documents be designed to meet the standard in PECE. The PECE
policy is posted on our Candidate Conservation Web site at http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/candidate-conservation-process.html.
Comments: On November 15, 2011, we published in the Federal
Register (76 FR 70748) a notice of our intent to request that OMB renew
approval for this information collection. In that notice, we solicited
comments for 60 days, ending on January 17, 2012. We received two
comments in response to this notice.
Commenter 1 agreed that the collection of information is necessary.
The commenter recommends that the PECE policy be vetted with
nongovernment organizations (NGOs), States, and Federal agencies so
that when these groups are developing conservation efforts for species
that may be petitioned to be listed under the ESA, they understand the
evaluation bar that must be met in order for their conservation efforts
to be considered as part of the Service's listing determination.
Response: On June 13, 2000, we published a Federal Register notice
(65 FR 37102) soliciting public comments on the draft policy. We
received comments from 44 entities, primarily States and NGOs. We
evaluated these comments and incorporated them into the final policy,
which includes a section on the evaluation criteria that conservation
efforts must meet. The final policy is posted on our Candidate
Conservation Web page (http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/candidate-conservation-process.html) and on our Laws and Policies Web
page (http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/regulations-and-policies.html).
Commenter 2 objected to paying for the collection of information
and said that funding should be eliminated. The commenter also said its
purpose is not explained very well.
Response: Evaluation of conservation actions as part of our listing
decision is required by the ESA, and therefore cannot be eliminated. An
explanation of the policy and the policy itself are posted on our
Candidate Conservation Web page. The commenter did not provide comments
on the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of information; or on the ways to minimize the burden.
Commenter 1 agreed that the PECE policy will not have a $100
million annual effect or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of government in
the collection of data. However, the commenter stated that the
implementation of conservation efforts measures associated with the
listing under the ESA will certainly meet both the monetary bar and the
adverse impacts bar.
Response: The burden estimates for implementing conservation
actions covered by this information collection are limited to the
amount of time needed to prepare the conservation agreements and to
conduct the monitoring and reporting. The burden estimates do not cover
the monetary cost of implementing the conservation measures themselves.
The ESA specifies that we must base listing determinations solely on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available
(emphasis added) after conducting a review of the status of the species
and after taking into account those conservation practices, if any,
being made by any State or any political subdivision of a State to
protect such species. In making a listing determination, we also
consider the conservation efforts of entities other than States and
political subdivisions of States. The PECE policy describes how we will
evaluate, as part of the listing determination, the extent which these
conservation actions reduce the threats facing a species. Under the
requirements of the ESA, we cannot use economic impacts as part of our
listing determination.
Commenter 1 stated that the PECE policy is not well distributed or
understood, and claimed that finding the most recent PECE was
difficult. The commenter suggested that we provide a link to the most
recent version for future review, and stated that better dissemination
and explanation of the policy would bolster the quality, utility and
clarity of the information.
Response: See above for links to the policy.
Commenter 1 stated that it is in the State's best interest to have
conservation programs be successful and to allow activities that have
and will occur across the landscape to continue. The commenter does not
mind providing this information, provided that the Service will be
acting in good faith to advance the conservation program to an approved
State.
Response: We coordinate closely with State wildlife management
agencies in the conservation and management of endangered and
threatened species under the ESA. State wildlife agencies are our
primary conservation partners, and we routinely share data with them.
In addition, under section 6 of the ESA, we provide grants to States
and territories to participate in a wide array of voluntary
conservation projects for candidate, proposed, and listed species. The
grant program provides funding to States and territories for species
and habitat conservation actions on non-Federal lands. A State or
territory must currently have, or enter into, an approved cooperative
agreement with the Secretary of the Interior to receive grants. Most
States and territories have entered into these agreements for both
plant and animal species.
We have not made any changes to our information collection
requirements as a result of these comments.
We again invite comments concerning this information collection on:
Whether or not the collection of information is necessary,
including whether or not the information will have practical utility;
The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this
collection of information;
Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of
public record. Before including your address, phone number, email
address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you
should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal
identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask OMB in your comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it
will be done.
Dated: April 26, 2012.
Tina A. Campbell,
Chief, Division of Policy and Directives Management, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-10576 Filed 5-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P