[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32183-32188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15249]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


Announcement of Draft Policy for Candidate Conservation 
Agreements

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine Fisheries 
Service, NOAA, Commerce.

ACTION: Announcement of draft policy; request for public comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine 
Fisheries Service (Services) announce a joint Draft Policy for 
Candidate Conservation Agreements (Agreements) under the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This policy would provide 
incentives for private and other non-Federal property owners, and State 
and local land managing agencies, to restore, enhance, or maintain 
habitats for proposed, candidate and certain other unlisted species. 
Candidate Conservation Agreements would be developed by participating 
property owners or State or local land managing agencies to remove the 
need to list the covered species as threatened or endangered under the 
Act. The Services will coordinate closely with the appropriate State 
agencies and any affected Native American Tribal governments before 
entering into Candidate Conservation Agreements with property owners to 
conserve covered species.
    Under this policy, either Service, or the Services jointly, would 
provide participating property owners and State and local land managing 
agencies with technical assistance in the development of Candidate 
Conservation Agreements and would provide assurances that, if covered 
species are eventually listed, the property owners or agencies would 
not be required to do more than those actions agreed to in the 
Candidate Conservation Agreement. If a species is listed, incidental 
take authorization would be provided to allow the property owner or 
agency to implement management activities that may result in take of 
individuals or modification of habitat consistent with those levels 
agreed upon and specified in the Agreement.
    Published concurrently in this Federal Register are the Fish and 
Wildlife Service's (FWS) proposed regulations necessary to implement 
this policy. The Services seek public comment on this proposed draft 
policy.

[[Page 32184]]

If adopted in final form, this policy will be incorporated into the 
FWS's Candidate Conservation Handbook.

DATES: Comments on the draft policies must be received by August 11, 
1997.

ADDRESSES: Send any comments or materials concerning the Draft Policy 
for Candidate Conservation Agreement to the Chief, Division of 
Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 452 ARLSQ, 
Washington, D.C. 20240 (Telephone 703/358-2171, Facsimile 703/358-
1735). You may examine comments and materials received during normal 
business hours in room 452, Arlington Square Building, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. You must make an appointment to 
examine these materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E. LaVerne Smith, Chief, Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Division of Endangered Species (Telephone (703) 358-
2171) or Nancy Chu, National Marine Fisheries Service, Chief, 
Endangered Species Division (Telephone (301) 713-1401).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Much of the nation's current and potential fish and wildlife 
habitat is on non-Federal property, owned or regulated by private 
citizens, States, municipalities, Native American Tribal governments, 
and other non-Federal entities, or managed by State and local agencies. 
Conservation efforts on non-Federal lands and waters are critical to 
the long-term conservation of many declining species. More importantly, 
a collaborative stewardship approach is critical for the success of 
such an initiative.
    Emphasis on early conservation efforts for proposed and candidate 
species, and species likely to become either proposed or candidate 
species in the near future, allows the Services to seek opportunities 
for both Federal and non-Federal entities to stabilize and recover 
these species and their ecosystems through Candidate Conservation 
Agreements before listing becomes necessary. By addressing the 
conservation of proposed and candidate species, and species likely to 
become candidates in the near future, the Services and other Federal 
and non-Federal entities retain management flexibility, while ensuring 
measurable conservation actions are implemented for these species 
before their long-term existence is compromised. Implementation of 
effective conservation actions allows the Services to focus their 
limited listing resources on those species facing the greatest threats 
and likely to be in the greatest need of the full range of the Act's 
protective measures. The Services recognize the critical importance of 
seeking opportunities to implement conservation actions for these 
species in full cooperation with other Federal agencies, State and 
Tribal governments, local governments, conservation organizations, 
private landowners, and other stakeholders before listing becomes 
necessary.
    In the past, conservation actions instituted for a candidate 
species may have reduced or entirely removed the threats to the 
species' survival and, in a few instances, completely removed the need 
to list the species. Most of these actions have been accomplished 
through conservation agreements between the Services and other Federal 
agencies. However, given the fact that many proposed and candidate 
species occur on non-Federal lands, it is of critical importance to 
establish voluntary programs that encourage non-Federal landowners to 
implement proactive conservation measures for these declining species. 
By deferring implementation of conservation activities for these 
species until they are listed, the ecological integrity of their 
habitats is compromised, thus in some cases severely limiting recovery 
options available. As a result, costs to achieve species recovery are 
often high. Greater efforts in addressing the conservation needs of 
candidate species before their status becomes critical provide an 
ecologically sound and cost-effective means to conserve species.
    Many property owners are willing to voluntarily manage their lands 
and waters to benefit fish, wildlife, and plants, especially those 
species that are declining. Beneficial management could include actions 
to maintain habitat or improve habitat (e.g., restoring fire by 
prescribed burning, restoring properly functioning hydrological 
conditions). Property owners are particularly concerned about possible 
future uncertainty relative to land-use or resource-use restrictions 
that may result if species colonize their lands or waters or increase 
in numbers or distribution because of the property owners' conservation 
efforts and subsequently become listed as a threatened or endangered 
species. Concern centers primarily on the applicability of the section 
9 ``take'' prohibitions if species occupy their lands or waters and on 
future land-use or resource-use restrictions that may result from their 
conservation-oriented management actions if those species are listed. 
The potential for future restrictions has led property owners to avoid 
or limit land and water management practices that could enhance or 
maintain habitat and benefit or attract fish and wildlife and plants 
that may be listed in the future.
    In 1994, the Service prepared Draft Candidate Species Guidance 
(Guidance), which underwent public review and comment (see 59 FR 65780, 
December 21, 1994). However, it did not address the development of 
Candidate Conservation Agreements with assurances for non-Federal 
property owners. This aspect of Candidate Conservation Agreements is 
addressed in the policy described here.
    Through the implementation of this policy, the Services intend to 
facilitate a collaborative approach for the conservation of proposed 
and candidate species, or species likely to become candidate or 
proposed species in the near future. Such an approach places emphasis 
on the involvement and cooperation among critical stakeholders in the 
conservation of these species, including, but not limited to, private 
property owners, State and local agencies, Native American Tribal 
governments, and non-governmental organizations. Collaborative 
stewardship with State fish and wildlife agencies is particularly 
important given their statutory role under the Act and their 
traditional conservation responsibilities and authorities for resident 
species. In exchange for proactive conservation management activities 
benefitting candidate and proposed species, the Services would provide 
regulatory certainty and assurances to the participating property owner 
in case the covered species is subsequently listed. Once finalized, 
this policy will be incorporated into the final handbook on candidate 
species conservation; the final handbook will be based on the 1994 
Draft Candidate Species Guidance with revisions based on the comments 
received upon the 1994 draft and including the final version of the 
policy proposed here.
    The Services have a long history of working with Federal agencies 
to develop Candidate Conservation Agreements, and such collaborative 
efforts with other Federal agencies will continue to be a high 
priority. Because of the proactive obligations for Federal agencies in 
the Act, providing assurances through Candidate Conservation Agreements 
is not appropriate for Federal agencies.
    Providing assurances to non-Federal property owners is an 
incentive-based approach to encourage these landowners to enter into 
voluntary conservation programs while providing them certainty relative 
to future obligations under the Act. The Services

[[Page 32185]]

can also enter into Candidate Conservation Agreements with State and 
local land management agencies and provide the same assurances under 
this new policy. In addition, the Services could also enter into 
comprehensive ``umbrella'' agreements with State fish and wildlife 
agencies and through such agreements provide assurances to any non-
Federal property owners. These assurances will only be provided to the 
participating landowners or State or local land managing agencies but 
not to State regulatory agencies. Therefore, after the finalization of 
this policy and its incorporation into the Services' Candidate Species 
Guidance, two basic types of Candidate Conservation Agreements would be 
available: (1) Candidate Conservation Agreements without assurances and 
(2) Candidate Conservation Agreements with assurances (exclusive for 
non-Federal landowners).
    The Services will focus the implementation of this policy on 
proposed and candidate species with the goal of removing threats facing 
these species and therefore preclude the need to list these species in 
the future. The benefits derived from these proactive collaborative 
conservation agreements can have significance in the Services' listing 
decisions. This is especially true for Candidate Conservation 
Agreements that provide assurances, since for the Services to provide 
such assurances, the provisions to be carried out under these 
agreements must be expected to remove the need to list the covered 
species covered or be expected to remove the need to list if undertaken 
by similarly situated landowners within the range of the covered 
species. For species occurring primarily on Federal lands, a Candidate 
Conservation Agreement without assurances would also, in some cases, 
eliminate enough of the threats to the species and remove the need to 
list. However, the determination whether these agreements will in fact 
remove the need to list a species will be determined on a case-by-case 
basis and with adequate public participation.
    The Fish and Wildlife Service's proposed regulatory changes 
necessary to implement this draft policy are published elsewhere in 
this issue of the Federal Register. The proposed rule provides the Fish 
and Wildlife Service's procedures to implement both the Safe Harbor 
policy (also published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register) 
and the Candidate Conservation Agreement policy. The National Marine 
Fisheries Service will develop proposed regulatory changes implementing 
these policies, to be published subsequently.

Candidate Conservation Agreement Policy

Part 1. Purpose

    The ultimate goal of Candidate Conservation Agreements developed 
under this policy is to encourage, to the extent feasible and 
controllable by a participating property owner or State or local land 
management agency, the removal of threats to the covered species so as 
to nullify the need to list them as threatened or endangered under the 
Act. Unlike Safe Harbor Agreements, which are developed only for listed 
species, the targets of Candidate Conservation Agreements are proposed 
and candidate species of fish, wildlife, and plants; species likely to 
become candidate species in the near future may also be included. The 
management and conservation benefits of activities carried out under 
Candidate Conservation Agreements, if undertaken on a broad enough 
scale by other property owners similarly situated within the range of 
the species, should be expected to preclude the need for listing 
species covered by the Agreement as threatened or endangered under the 
Act. Safe Harbor Agreements, on the other hand, focus on the 
restoration, enhancement, or maintenance of terrestrial and aquatic 
habitats of listed species thereby contributing to their recovery.
    While some property owners and State and local land management 
agencies are willing to manage their lands and waters to benefit 
proposed and candidate species, or species likely to become candidates 
in the near future, most desire some degree of assurances relative to 
future land- or resource-use restrictions. By providing regulatory 
certainty in these Candidate Conservation Agreements, property owners 
and agencies help define and know in advance what level of land- or 
resource-use restrictions they may incur in the event the Services list 
a species covered by an Agreement. If the Services list a covered 
species in the future, incidental take authorization would be provided 
to allow the property owner or State or local land management agency to 
implement management activities that may result in take of individuals 
or modification of habitat above those levels agreed upon and specified 
in the Agreement. Without such assurances, most property owners and or 
agencies will not have as much incentive to undertake candidate 
conservation initiatives on their property.
    Candidate Conservation Agreements and associated activities will be 
developed in close coordination and cooperation with the appropriate 
State fish and wildlife agencies and other affected State agencies and 
Native American Tribal governments, as appropriate. The need for close 
coordination with State fish and wildlife agencies is particularly 
important given their primary responsibilities for unlisted resident 
species. These Agreements are to be consistent with applicable State 
laws and regulations governing the management of these species and must 
be voluntary for the property owners or State or local land management 
agency.
    The Services must reasonably expect that the management actions 
agreed to and included in any Agreement, if performed by all landowners 
in similar situations, will be adequate to remove the threat(s) to 
proposed, candidate, and species likely to become a candidate or 
proposed species in the near future and are covered by the Agreement, 
thereby eliminating the need to list the covered species. Pursuant to 
section 7 of the Act, the Services must also ensure that those 
management actions do not jeopardize listed or proposed species and do 
not destroy or adversely modify proposed or designated critical 
habitats that may occur in the area.
    The Services recognize that some property owners or State or local 
land managing agencies may not have the necessary resources or 
expertise to develop Candidate Conservation Agreements. In such cases 
where the willing property owner or agency lacks the resources or 
expertise, the Services are committed to providing the necessary 
technical assistance, to the maximum extent practicable and given 
available resources, to develop effective Candidate Conservation 
Agreements that will be sufficient to remove the need to list the 
covered species. Further, the Services may also help carry out some 
management actions (e.g., prescribed burning) or train property owners 
in the implementation of management techniques.
    Either Service or the Services jointly will work with the 
participating landowner in the development of their permit application 
and the Candidate Conservation Agreement. The Services will provide the 
necessary technical assistance to the landowner in developing mutually 
agreeable management actions that the landowner is willing to 
voluntarily undertake or forgo that will provide a net conservation 
benefit and help the landowner describe how these activities will 
benefit covered species. Development of an acceptable permit 
application and an adequate Candidate Conservation agreement is 
intricately

[[Page 32186]]

linked. Either Service or the Services jointly will process the 
participating landowner's permit application following the Candidate 
Conservation permitting process as described in 50 CFR part 17. During 
this permit process all parties to the Agreement will work in close 
coordination in the development of the Agreement to ensure that 
measures included in the agreement are consistent with the terms and 
conditions of the permit. Once the permit is issued the parties to the 
Agreement can finalize and sign the Agreement.
    Availability of resources will also be a governing factor for the 
Services. The Services expect the interest in Candidate Conservation 
Agreements to be high and the demand for technical assistance to 
property owners to be great. Candidate Conservation Agreements are 
developed using candidate conservation funding which is extremely 
limited; thus the Services may have to prioritize their participation 
in Candidate Conservation Agreements based upon the conservation 
benefits provided to the covered species. In addition, priority will be 
given to Agreements where sufficient information exists to develop 
sound conservation measures. The Services will work with State, Tribal, 
and other interested parties to fill information gaps for species 
requirements that have not been adequately documented in the scientific 
literature.

Part 2. Definitions

    The following definitions apply for the purposes of this policy.
    ``Candidate Conservation Agreement'' means an Agreement signed by 
either Service, or both Services jointly, and a property owner, and any 
other cooperator, if appropriate, or with a State or local land 
management agency, that: (a) Sets forth specific management activities 
that the private or non-Federal property owner, or State or local land 
management agency, will voluntarily undertake to conserve the covered 
species; (b) specifies management activities that are adequate to 
remove the need to list the covered species, if such actions were 
undertaken by other property owners similarly situated within the range 
of the species; and (c) for agreements with assurances, provides the 
property owner or State or local land management agency with the 
Candidate Conservation assurances described within the Agreement and 
authorized in the enhancement of survival permit.
    ``Candidate Conservation Assurances'' are assurances provided in 
the Agreement and authorized in an enhancement of survival permit for 
covered species, by either Service, or both jointly, to a non-Federal 
property owner or State or local land management agency that would 
allow the property owner or agency to take individuals of the covered 
species or alter or modify habitat consistent with the levels agreed 
upon and specified in the Agreement, even if the covered species are 
eventually listed. Such assurances may apply to whole parcels, or 
portions thereof, of the property owner's or land management agency's 
property as designated in the Agreement. These assurances are dependent 
upon the Agreement being adequate to remove the need to list the 
covered species, if such actions were undertaken by other property 
owners similarly situated within the range of the species. The 
assurances are also dependent on the property owner's or land 
management agency's compliance with the obligations in the Agreement 
and in the enhancement of survival permit.
    ``Candidate species'' are defined differently by the Services based 
on their different programs. The FWS defines a candidate species as a 
species for which the FWS has sufficient information on file relative 
to status and threats to support issuance of a proposed listing rule. 
The National Marine Fisheries Service defines a candidate species as a 
species for which concerns remain regarding their status, but for which 
more information is needed before they can be proposed for listing. The 
term ``candidate species'' used in this policy refers to those species 
designated as candidates by either of the Services.
    ``Covered species'' means a species that is the subject of a 
Candidate Conservation Agreement. Covered species are limited to 
species that are candidates or proposed for listing and species that 
may become candidates or proposed in the near future. Those species 
covered in the Agreement must be treated as if they were listed.
    ``Enhancement of survival permit'' means a permit issued under the 
authority of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act.
    ``Management activities'' are voluntary conservation actions to be 
undertaken by a property owner or State or local land management agency 
that the Services believe will eliminate the need to list the species.
    ``Property owner'' includes, but is not limited to, private 
individuals, organizations, businesses, Native American Tribal 
governments, and other non-Federal entities.
    ``Proposed species'' is a species for which the Services, based on 
the best available scientific and commercial information, have 
published a proposed rule to list it as an endangered or threatened 
species under provision of section 4 of the Act.

Part 3. Candidate Conservation Agreements

    The Agreement will identify:
    A. At the time the parties negotiate the Agreement, the existing 
population levels (if available or determinable) of the covered 
species, or the existing habitat characteristics that sustain any 
current, permanent, or seasonal use by the covered species on lands or 
waters under the property owner's or State or local land management 
agency's control, or habitat characteristics that support populations 
of covered species in waterways that may not be under the property 
owner's or agency's control must be determined;
    B. The management actions the property owner or State or local land 
management agency is willing to undertake to conserve the covered 
species included in the Agreement. The Services, or either Service, 
must have determined that these management actions are of sufficient 
design to remove the threat(s) to those species adequately to avoid 
listing, or be sufficient enough, if undertaken by other property 
owners or agencies similarly situated, to remove the threat(s) to avoid 
listing;
    C. An estimate of the expected conservation benefits as a result of 
management actions described in B above (e.g., increase in population 
numbers; enhancement, restoration, or preservation of suitable habitat) 
and the conditions that the property owner or State or local land 
management agency agrees to maintain that will remove the threats to 
the species and eliminate the need to list the covered species. The 
conservation benefits must remove the threats to the species adequately 
to eliminate the need to list the species. In many cases, a single 
property owner's or agency's activities alone will not be sufficient to 
eliminate the need to list. In such cases, the Services will enter into 
an Agreement when the activities to be carried out by the property 
owner or agency, if conducted by other property owners or agencies 
throughout the range of the affected species, would be expected to 
adequately remove threat(s) to the species to eliminate the need to 
list;
    D. Assurances provided by the Services that no additional 
management actions would be required of the property owner or State or 
local land

[[Page 32187]]

management agency above those agreed to in B above should the covered 
species be listed in the future. In addition, the Services would 
authorize actions that may result in incidental take consistent with 
those levels agreed to in A and C above through a section 10(a)(1)(A) 
Enhancement of Survival permit;
    E. The level of monitoring necessary to determine how the species 
is responding to the prescribed management activities should be built 
into the Agreement or permission for the Services to conduct such 
monitoring should be included in the Agreement; and,
    F. A notification requirement, where appropriate and feasible, to 
provide the Service, or Services, or appropriate State agencies with a 
reasonable opportunity to rescue individual specimens of a covered 
species before any authorized incidental taking occurs.

Part 4. Benefit to the Species

    Before entering into an Agreement, the Services or either Service 
must make a written finding that species included in such an Agreement 
will receive a sufficient conservation benefit from the activities 
conducted under the Agreement. This benefit must be expected to be of a 
level that, if undertaken on a broad enough scale by other property 
owners or State or local land management agencies similarly situated, 
would be cumulatively significant enough to remove the need to list the 
covered species. Expected benefits could include, but are not limited 
to: reduction in habitat fragmentation rates; restoration and 
enhancement of habitats; maintenance or increase of population numbers; 
and reduction of the effects of catastrophic events. If the Service and 
the property owner or land management agency cannot agree to a set of 
management actions adequate to remove the need to list a species 
covered in the Agreement if such actions were undertaken by other 
property owners or agencies similarly situated within the range of the 
species, the Service will not enter into the Agreement.

Part 5. Assurances to Property Owners

    The Services, in the Candidate Conservation Agreement, will provide 
that if any species covered by the Agreement is listed, and the 
Agreement has been implemented in good faith by the participating 
property owner or State or local land management agencies, the Services 
will not assert additional restrictions or require additional actions 
above those the property owner or State or local land management 
agencies voluntarily committed to conduct, incur, or maintain under the 
terms of the original Agreement. Such assurances will be provided to 
the participating property owner or non-Federal land management agency 
through a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit, which 
will allow the property owner or agency to implement management 
activities that may result in take of individuals or modification of 
habitat consistent with levels agreed upon and specified in the 
Agreement. Under this process, the Services or either Service would 
issue an enhancement of survival permit at the time of entering into 
the Agreement. Such a permit would have a delayed effective date tied 
to the date of any future listing for a covered species. The Services 
believe that an enhancement of survival permit is particularly well 
suited for the Candidate Conservation Agreement program because the 
central purpose of such Agreements is to enhance the survival of 
declining species. It is equally appropriate to issue such a permit to 
a participating property or resource owner as a way of rewarding their 
proactive voluntary conservation efforts and shielding such persons 
from any additional restrictions which might otherwise affect them if a 
species is subsequently listed.

Part 6. Public Review of Candidate Conservation Agreements

    When a draft Candidate Conservation Agreement is developed for a 
proposed species, the draft Agreement will be available for public 
review. Whenever possible, the Services will invite public review and 
comment on these Agreements for at least 30 days. In making final 
listing determinations the Services will consider the conservation 
benefits provided by these agreements and all comments received 
regarding those conservation benefits. When providing assurances to a 
non-Federal landowner or State or local land management agency through 
a Candidate Conservation Agreement, the Services will invite public 
review and comment on the Agreement prior to issuing any enhancement of 
survival permit needed to provide the assurances.

Required Determinations

    A major purpose of this proposed Candidate Conservation Agreements 
Policy is the facilitation of voluntary cooperative programs for the 
proactive management of non-Federal lands and waters for the benefit of 
proposed and candidate species and species likely to become candidates 
in the near future. From the Federal government's perspective, 
implementation of this policy would result in minor expenditures (e.g., 
providing technical assistance in the development of site-specific 
management plans). The benefits derived from such management actions on 
non-Federal lands and waters would remove threats to proposed, 
candidate, or other soon to become candidate species. Non-Federal 
program participants would be provided regulatory certainty as a result 
of their voluntary management actions. In some cases, such participants 
may incur minor expenditures to carry out some management actions on 
their lands or involving their water. The Services have determined that 
the proposed rule would not result in significant costs of 
implementation to the Federal government or to non-Federal program 
participants.
    The Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service certified to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that a 
review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) has revealed that this policy would not have a significant effect 
on a substantial number of small entities, which includes businesses, 
organizations, or governmental jurisdictions. Because of the completely 
voluntary nature of the Candidate Conservation program, no significant 
effects are expected on non-Federal cooperators exercising their option 
to enter into a Candidate Conservation Agreement. Therefore, this 
policy would have minimal effect on such entities. NMFS concurs with 
this certification. This policy was not subject to review by the Office 
of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
    The Services have determined and certify pursuant to the Unfunded 
Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this policy will not impose a 
cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or State 
governments or private entities. The Departments have determined that 
this proposed policy meets the applicable standards provided in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
    The Department has determined that the issuance of the proposed 
policy is categorically excluded under the Department of Interior's 
NEPA procedures in 516 DM 2, Appendix 1.10. NMFS concurs with the 
Department of Interior's determination that the issuance of the 
proposed policy qualifies for a categorical exclusion and falls within 
the categorical exclusion criteria in NOAA 216-3 Administrative Order, 
Environmental Review Procedure.

[[Page 32188]]

Public Comments Solicited

    The Services request comments on their Draft Policy for Candidate 
Conservation Agreements. Particularly sought are comments on the 
procedures or methods for enhancing the utility of the Candidate 
Conservation Agreements Policy in carrying out the purposes of the Act.
    In addition, situations may arise where a property owner may want 
to recover or conserve numerous species, both listed and unlisted on 
their property, and may want to enter into both a Candidate 
Conservation Agreement and a Safe Harbor Agreement. The Services are 
also seeking comments and are interested in ideas and suggestions on 
the ways to streamline and combine these processes when developing 
these two types of agreements with the same property owner. The 
Services will take into consideration the comments and any additional 
information received by the Services by August 11, 1997.

    Dated: May 27, 1997.
John G. Rogers,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

    Dated: June 2, 1997.
Rolland A. Schmitten,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-15249 Filed 6-9-97; 1:26 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P