[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 194 (Thursday, October 7, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62192-62255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24763]



[[Page 62191]]

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

Part II





 Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 17



 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical 
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia); Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 62192]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2009-0038]
[MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AW22


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical 
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate 
final revised critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis (spreading 
navarretia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In 
total, approximately 6,720 acres (ac) (2,720 hectares (ha)) of habitat 
in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, California, fall 
within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. This final 
rule constitutes an overall increase of approximately 6,068 ac (2,456 
ha) from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis.

DATES: This rule becomes effective on November 8, 2010.

ADDRESSES: This final rule and the associated economic analysis are 
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and http://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/. Comments and materials received, as well as 
supporting documentation used in preparing this final rule are 
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business 
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and 
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 
92011; telephone 760-431-9440; facsimile 760-431-5901.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010 
Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011 (telephone 760-431-
9440; facsimile 760-431-5901). If you use a telecommunications device 
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) 
at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to 
the development of the revised designation of critical habitat for 
Navarretia fossalis under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended 
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), in this final rule. For more 
information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of N. fossalis, refer 
to the final listing rule published in the Federal Register (FR) on 
October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975), the final designation of critical 
habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal Register on October 
18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), the proposed revised designation of critical 
habitat published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 
27588), and the document announcing the availability of the draft 
economic analysis (DEA) published in the Federal Register on April 15, 
2010 (75 FR 19575). Additionally, information on this species can be 
found in the Recovery Plan for the Vernal Pools of Southern California 
(Recovery Plan) finalized on September 3, 1998 (Service 1998).

New Information on Subspecies' Description, Life History, Ecology, 
Habitat, and Range

    We did not receive any new information pertaining to the 
description, life history, or ecology of Navarretia fossalis following 
the 2009 proposed rule to revise critical habitat (74 FR 27588; June 
10, 2009). However, the following paragraphs discuss new information 
that we received regarding the species' habitat, geographic range and 
status, and the areas needed for N. fossalis conservation.

Habitat

    Navarretia fossalis habitat was discussed in detail in the proposed 
revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). One 
commenter provided information during the first public comment period 
on the proposed rule, noting several habitat characteristics they felt 
we should have discussed (see Comment 15 below); therefore, we are 
providing additional discussion and clarification here. Navarretia 
fossalis grows in vernal pool habitat, seasonally flooded alkali vernal 
plain habitat (a habitat that includes alkali playa, alkali scrub, 
alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland communities), and 
irrigation ditches and detention basins (Bramlet 1993a, pp. 10, 14, 21-
23; Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127; Spencer 1997, pp. 8, 13). 
Within alkali annual grasslands, this species is restricted to small 
vernal pools or other depressions (Bramlet 2009, p. 3). Researchers 
have also described ``riverine pools'' where N. fossalis occurs as 
having unique floristic elements, such as Trichocoronis wrightii var. 
wrightii (limestone bugheal or Wright's trichocoronis); N. fossalis and 
T. wrightii are only known to co-occur in the San Jacinto River 
(Bramlet 2009, p. 7). Suitability of hydrological conditions for the 
germination of this species varies on an annual basis; therefore, N. 
fossalis can be undetectable for a number of years and the number of 
plants varies depending on the timing, duration, and extent of ponding 
(Bramlet 2009, p. 3). For more habitat information, please see the 
Habitat section in the proposed revised critical habitat designation 
published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).

Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas

    In the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 
10, 2009), we discussed the areas that represent core habitat areas and 
satellite habitat areas for Navarretia fossalis. During the first 
public comment period, one peer reviewer expressed concern regarding 
our use of the word ``core'' and the biological connotation of such 
terminology. The terms ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat 
area'' are descriptive terms defined for the purpose of this rulemaking 
and are not intended to be synonymous with similar terms used in other 
documents, or to describe a population distribution. We defined these 
terms in the proposed revised critical habitat designation published in 
the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588). Core habitat is 
defined as areas that contain the highest concentrations of N. fossalis 
and the largest contiguous blocks of habitat for this species. 
Satellite areas are defined as habitat areas that support occurrences 
that are smaller than those supported by the ``core habitat areas,'' 
but provide the means to significantly contribute to the recovery of N. 
fossalis (for further discussion of this issue see Comment 4 in the 
Summary of Comments and Recommendations section and our response). For 
more information on ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat 
area,'' please see the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and 
Satellite Habitat Areas section in the proposed revised critical 
habitat designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 
(74 FR 27588).

Previous Federal Actions

    On October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), we published our final 
designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. On December 
19, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a complaint in the 
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California challenging 
our

[[Page 62193]]

designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia 
(Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service et al., Case No. 07-CV-02379-W-NLS). This lawsuit challenged 
the validity of the information and reasoning we used to exclude areas 
from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis. On July 25, 
2008, we reached a settlement agreement in which we agreed to submit a 
proposed revised critical habitat designation for N. fossalis to the 
Federal Register for publication by May 29, 2009, and a final revised 
critical habitat designation for publication by May 28, 2010. By order 
dated January 21, 2010, the district court approved a modification to 
the settlement agreement that extends to September 30, 2010, the 
deadline for submission of a final revised critical habitat designation 
to the Federal Register. The proposed revised critical habitat 
designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 
27588).

Summary of Changes From the Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous 
Critical Habitat Designation

    The areas designated as critical habitat in this final rule 
constitute a revision of the critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis 
we designated on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). For this revised 
rulemaking process we:
    (1) Refined the primary constituent elements (PCEs) to more 
accurately define the physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis;
    (2) Revised criteria to more accurately identify critical habitat;
    (3) Improved mapping methodology to more accurately define critical 
habitat boundaries and better represent areas that contain PCEs;
    (4) Evaluated areas considered for exclusion from critical habitat 
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, including identifying 
whether or not areas are conserved and managed for the benefit of N. 
fossalis;
    (5) Reanalyzed the economic impacts to identify baseline and 
incremental costs associated with critical habitat designation; and
    (6) Added, subtracted, and revised areas that do or do not meet the 
definition of critical habitat. Table 1 provides an overview of the 
differences between critical habitat rules for N. fossalis at the unit 
level.

  Table 1. Changes between the October 18, 2005, critical habitat designation; the June 10, 2009, proposed critical habitat designation; the April 15,
                  2010, changes to the June 10, 2009 proposal (availability of the DEA); and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            April 2010 changes to
Critical habitat unit in this final                           October 2005 critical    June 2009 proposed      proposed revised        September 2010
                rule                         County            habitat designation      revised critical       critical habitat       revised critical
                                                                                      habitat designation        designation        habitat designation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange     Los Angeles             326 ac                  161 ac                 176 ac                 176 ac
 Management Area                                             (132 ha)..............  (65 ha)..............  (71 ha)..............  (71 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal  San Diego               22 ac                   9 ac                   9 ac                   9 ac
 Mesa Management Area                                        (9 ha)................  (4 ha)...............  (4 ha)...............  (4 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal  San Diego               0 ac                    110 ac                 108 ac                 103 ac
 Mesa Management Area                                        (0 ha)................  (45 ha)..............  (44 ha)..............  (42 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland            San Diego               159 ac                  206 ac                 206 ac                 206 ac
 Management Area                                             (64 ha)...............  (83 ha)..............  (83 ha)..............  (83 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal  San Diego               145 ac                  711 ac                 753 ac                 749 ac
 Mesa Management Area                                        (59 ha)...............  (288 ha).............  (305 ha).............  (303 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area    Riverside               0 ac                    5,675 ac               6,356 ac               5,477 ac
                                                             (0 ha)................  (2,297 ha)...........  (2,572 ha)...........  (2,217 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals*                                                      652 ac                  6,872 ac               7,608 ac               6,720 ac
                                                             (264 ha)..............  (2,781 ha)...........  (3,079 ha)...........  (2,720 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.

    In 2005, we designated approximately 652 ac (264 ha) as critical 
habitat for Navarretia fossalis in 4 units with 10 subunits (70 FR 
60658; October 18, 2005). In our 2009 proposed revised critical 
habitat, we proposed approximately 6,872 ac (2,781 ha) as critical 
habitat in 6 units with 22 subunits (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). In 
response to information received as public comments on our 2009 
proposed revised critical habitat, we changed the 2009 proposed revised 
rule to propose approximately 7,608 ac (3,079 ha) as critical habitat 
in 6 units with 23 subunits (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). In this 
revised critical habitat rule, we are designating approximately 6,720 
ac (2,720 ha) as critical habitat in 6 units with 19 subunits, 
reflecting exclusion of approximately 871 ac (353 ha) in all or 
portions of 2 units (3 subunits) based on consideration of relevant 
impacts under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Lands that contain the 
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of N. 
fossalis on Marine Corps Air Station

[[Page 62194]]

(MCAS) Miramar and Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton are exempt 
from this critical habitat designation based on section 4(a)(3)(B) of 
the Act. All lands designated as critical habitat in this revised rule 
were included in the 2009 proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588) or the 
document that made available the DEA (75 FR 19575). Table 2 provides 
detailed information about differences between the 2005 final critical 
habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat 
designation, and this revised critical habitat designation for N. 
fossalis. The changes between the 2005 final designation, the 2009 
proposed revisions, and this final designation are described below.

Table 2. A comparison of the areas identified as containing the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis in
      the 2005 critical habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat designation, and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    2005 Critical Habitat  Designation        2009 Proposed Revised Critical           2010 Revised Critical Habitat
                                 ----------------------------------------                 Habitat                               Designation
                                                                         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Location*                                   Area Containing                         Area Containing                         Area Containing
                                        Subunit            Essential            Subunit            Essential            Subunit            Essential
                                                           Features                                Features                                Features
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cruzan Mesa                       1A                  294 ac              1A                  129 ac              1A                  156 ac
                                                      (119 ha)..........                      (52 ha)...........                      (63 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plum Canyon                       1B                  32 ac               1B                  32 ac               1B                  20 ac
                                                      (13 ha)...........                      (13 ha)...........                      (8 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCB Camp Pendleton                4(a)(3) exemption   67 ac               4(a)(3) exemption   145 ac              4(a)(3) exemption   145 ac
                                                      (27 ha)...........                      (59 ha)...........                      (59 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station  2; partially        22 ac               2                   9 ac                2                   9 ac
                                  excluded under      (9 ha)............                      (4 ha)............                      (4 ha)
                                   section 4(b)(2).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley                   Proposed as         --                  Not proposed        --                  Not proposed        --
                                  Unit 3, but.......
                                  determined not
                                   essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates)  --                  --                  3A                  5 ac                Excluded under      5 ac
                                                                                              (2 ha)............   section 4(b)(2)    (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carroll Canyon                    --                  --                  3B                  20 ac               3B                  18 ac
                                                                                              (8 ha)............                      (7 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Drive                       --                  --                  3C                  37 ac               3C                  37 ac
                                                                                              (15 ha)...........                      (15 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAS Miramar                      4(a)(3) exemption   61 ac               4(a)(3) exemption   69 ac               4(a)(3) exemption   69 ac
                                                      (25 ha)...........                      (28 ha)...........                      (28 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montgomery Field                  Excluded under      38 ac               3D                  48 ac               3D                  48 ac
                                   section 4(b)(2)    (16 ha)...........                      (20 ha)...........                      (20 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Upham)                4C1                 34 ac               4C1                 34 ac               4C1                 34 ac
                                                      (14 ha)...........                      (14 ha)...........                      (14 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Universal Boot)       4C2                 32 ac               4C2                 32 ac               4C2                 32 ac
                                                      (13 ha)...........                      (13 ha)...........                      (13 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Bent Avenue)          4D                  7 ac                4D                  5 ac                4D                  5 ac
                                                      (3 ha)............                      (2 ha)............                      (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona                            4E                  86 ac               4E                  135 ac              4E                  135 ac
                                                      (35 ha)...........                      (55 ha)...........                      (55 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62195]]

 
Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3)    5A; partially       89 ac               5A                  95 ac               5A                  95 ac
                                  excluded under      (36 ha)...........                      (38 ha)...........                      (38 ha)
                                   section 4(b)(2).   Excluded..........
                                                      74 ac.............
                                                      (30 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (K1 and K2)     Excluded under      57 ac               Not proposed,       --                  Not proposed,       --
                                   section 4(b)(2)    (23 ha)...........  determined not                          determined not
                                                                           essential.                              essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (M2)            5B and excluded     42 ac               5B                  24 ac               5B                  24 ac
                                   under section      (17 ha)...........                      (10 ha)...........                      (10 ha)
                                   4(b)(2)            Excluded..........
                                                      67 ac.............
                                                      (27 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Mesa (J26)                   5C and excluded     14 ac               Not proposed,       --                  5C***               42 ac
                                   under section      (6 ha)............  determined not                                              (17 ha)
                                   4(b)(2)                                 essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnie's Point                     Proposed as         --                  Not proposed        --                  Not proposed        --
                                   Subunit 5D, but
                                   determined not
                                   essential
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proctor Valley (R1-2)             --                  --                  5F                  88 ac               5F                  88 ac
                                                                                              (36 ha)...........                      (36 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Lakes (K3-5)                 --                  --                  5G                  140 ac              5G                  140 ac
                                                                                              (57 ha)...........                      (57 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool     Excluded under      117 ac              5H                  143 ac              5H                  143 ac
 complexes                         section 4(b)(2)    (47 ha)...........                      (58ha)............                      (58ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool     Excluded under      277 ac              5I                  221 ac              5I                  221 ac
 complexes                         section 4(b)(2)    (112 ha)..........                      (89 ha)...........                      (89 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Jacinto River                 Excluded under      10,774 ac           6A                  3,550 ac            6A***               4,312 ac
                                   section 4(b)(2)    (4,360 ha)........                      (1,437 ha)........                      (1,745 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded     Excluded under      2,233 ac            6B                  1,054 ac            6B                  930 ac
 Alkali Plain                      section 4(b)(2)    (904 ha)..........                      (427 ha)..........                      (376 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wickerd Road and Scott Road       Excluded under      275 ac              6C                  205 ac              6C***               235 ac
 Pools                             section 4(b)(2)    (111 ha)..........                      (83 ha)...........                      (95 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skunk Hollow                      Excluded under      306 ac              6D                  158 ac              Excluded under      158 ac
                                   section 4(b)(2)    (124 ha)..........                      (64 ha)...........   section 4(b)(2)    (64 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesa de Burro                     Excluded under      4,396 ac            6E                  708 ac              Excluded under      708 ac
                                   section 4(b)(2)    (1,779 ha)........                      (287 ha)..........   section 4(b)(2)    (287 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Essential for the      --                  19,399 ac           --                  7,086 ac            --                  7,804 ac
 Conservation of Navarretia                           (7,851 ha)........                      (2,868 ha)........                      (3,158 ha)
 fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62196]]

 
Total Area Exempt Under Section   --                  128 ac              --                  213 ac              --                  213 ac
 4(a)(3)**                                            (52 ha)...........                      (86 ha)...........                      (86 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Excluded Under         --                  18,619 ac           --                  0 ac                --                  871 ac
 Section 4(b)(2)**                                    (7,535 ha)........                      (0 ha)............                      (353 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Designated as          --                  652 ac              --                  N/A                 --                  6,720 ac
 Critical Habitat for Navarretia                      (264 ha)..........                                                              (2,720 ha)
 fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were designated as critical
  habitat in 2005 or proposed in 2009 or discussed in this critical habitat rule.
**Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
***Acreage added in 75 FR 19575 (June 10, 2009) revision.

Summary of Changes From the 2005 Final Designation of Critical Habitat

    In the 2005 final rule, we did not designate areas containing 
essential habitat features if those habitat features were already 
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis because we 
concluded that the areas did not meet the second part of the definition 
of critical habitat under section 3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have 
reconsidered our approach in light of subsequent court decisions and 
have decided that areas containing essential habitat features that 
``may require'' special management considerations or protection do meet 
the definition of critical habitat irrespective of whether the habitat 
features are currently receiving special management or protection. 
Current protection or management does not disqualify an area from 
meeting the definition of critical habitat, rather it is a relevant 
factor to consider under section 4(b)(2) of the Act when we weigh the 
benefits of including a particular area in critical habitat against the 
benefits of excluding the area. In this rule we identified essential 
areas that are conserved and managed for the benefit of the species, 
determined they meet the definition of critical habitat, and then 
analyzed whether the benefits of exclusion from critical habitat 
designation outweigh the benefits of including these areas under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    This rule also uses a new economic analysis to identify and 
estimate the potential economic effects on small business entities 
resulting from implementation of conservation actions associated with 
the proposed revision of critical habitat. The analysis focuses on the 
estimated incremental impacts associated with critical habitat 
designation.
    Of the 652 ac (264 ha) of land included in the 2005 final critical 
habitat rule, approximately 469 ac (190 ha) are included in this 
revised critical habitat designation. Some areas designated in 2005 are 
not designated in this final rule because we used a grid of 2.47-ac (1-
ha) cells (100 m grid) to identify essential habitat in our GIS 
analysis in 2005. In this revised critical habitat, we identified 
essential habitat with heads-up digitizing at various scales using 
imagery of 1-meter resolution, resulting in a more precise 
identification.
    Additionally, we are designating as critical habitat 6,251 ac 
(2,530 ha) of land identified as meeting the definition of critical 
habitat that were not designated in 2005. The primary reason revised 
designated critical habitat is greater than the 2005 designated area is 
that we included several areas that were excluded from the 2005 
critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A 
summary of specific changes from the 2005 critical habitat designation 
is provided below. In addition to revisions to specific subunits, we 
also revised the PCEs, the criteria used to identify critical habitat, 
the economic impacts to include incremental impacts, and the mapping 
methodology for this revised critical habitat designation. For a 
detailed discussion of the changes between the 2005 critical habitat 
rule and the 2009 proposed revision, please see the Summary of Changes 
From Previously Designated Critical Habitat section in the proposed 
revised rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009).
    In this revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia 
fossalis, comparisons to the 2005 critical habitat designation are 
described below using three categories:
    (1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule,
    (2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule, and
    (3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule.
    (1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule are 
found in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4C1, 4C2, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, and 5C. We 
analyzed each of these areas and determined these areas are not 
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis and the 
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion.
    (2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule 
include land in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4D, 5A, and 5B as described in the 
2005 designation. The difference of these subunits between the previous 
rule and this final rule is mostly due to our discontinued use of a 
100-m grid to map critical habitat,

[[Page 62197]]

which captured areas that we determined in this rule did not meet the 
definition of critical habitat. Additionally, the difference in Subunit 
1B was due to more precise Navarretia fossalis habitat location data in 
the vicinity of Plum Canyon.
    (3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule 
include areas within Subunits 1B, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, 5F, 5G, 
5H, 5I, 6A, 6B, and 6C, and part of 5C. Some of these subunits meet the 
definition of critical habitat based on new information. Subunits 1B, 
4D, 4E, and 5B include new areas due to mapping refinements made to 
better capture local watersheds. Subunits 3B, 3D, 5F, 5G, 5H, and 5I 
include vernal pool complexes that provide habitat for Navarretia 
fossalis that were not included in the 2005 final rule, but meet the 
definition of critical habitat for this species (see the 2009 proposed 
rule for details (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009)). Other subunits have 
been designated based on our determination under section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act that the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion 
of these areas because they are not currently conserved and managed for 
the benefit of N. fossalis. All or portions of Subunits 3D, 5A, 5B, 5H, 
5I, 6A, and 6C are the same as areas that met the definition of 
critical habitat in 2005, but were excluded from the 2005 designation 
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The only areas excluded from critical 
habitat in the current rule under section 4(b)(2) of the Act are those 
that are conserved and managed for the benefit of N. fossalis, and 
where the exclusion would not result in extinction of the species (see 
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section of this rule).

Summary of Changes From the 2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical 
Habitat

    We evaluated lands considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) 
of the Act to determine if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 
benefits of inclusion. We excluded 871 ac (353 ha) of lands under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act that are conserved and managed for the 
benefit of Navarretia fossalis We excluded certain lands under two 
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), summarized below and discussed in 
detail in the Exclusions section.
    (1) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands covered by the Carlsbad Habitat 
Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) under the San Diego Multiple Habitat 
Conservation Program (MHCP). In this revised rule, we determined the 
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion for all of the 
lands covered by the Carlsbad HMP because these lands are not both 
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis. However, 
we recognize the efforts made by permittees of the Carlsbad HMP to 
assist in the conservation of N. fossalis and other listed species. We 
look forward to continuing to work with these partners to assure that 
long-term conservation and management is assured for N. fossalis. See 
the Exclusions section below for a summary evaluation of lands 
considered for exclusion under the Carlsbad HMP and our rationale for 
including these lands in this revised critical habitat designation.
    (2) In the proposed revised rule, we considered lands proposed as 
critical habitat within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the 
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP; County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan) for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. In 
this revised rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 
benefits of inclusion for a portion (5 ac (2 ha) in Subunit 3A) of 
lands under the County of San Diego Subarea Plan that are both 
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis, and 
determined exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of 
the species. However, we determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh 
the benefits of exclusion for 81 ac (33 ha) of lands within the County 
of San Diego Subarea Plan. As a result, we excluded approximately 5 ac 
(2 ha) of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included 
approximately 81 ac (33 ha) within the revised critical habitat 
designation. For a complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and 
exclusion for all lands within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan, 
see the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.
    (3) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of 
the permittees of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat 
Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County MSHCP). In this revised 
rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of 
inclusion for 866 ac (351 ha) of the lands owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
that are conserved and managed (Subunits 6D and 6E), and determined 
exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of the species. 
We determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of 
exclusion for 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of lands owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. 
As a result, we excluded approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of these lands 
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included approximately 5,477 ac 
(2,217 ha) within the revised critical habitat designation. For a 
complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and exclusion for all 
lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP, see the Application of 
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.

Critical Habitat

Background

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
    (i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the 
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which 
are found those physical or biological features
    (I) essential to the conservation of the species and
    (II) which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and
    (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas 
are essential for the conservation of the species.
    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means the use 
of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring any 
endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures 
provided under the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and 
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated 
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law 
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live 
trapping, transplantation, and in the extraordinary case where 
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot otherwise be 
relieved, regulated taking.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding, 
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires consultation on Federal 
actions that may affect critical habitat. The designation of critical 
habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, 
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such 
designation does not allow the

[[Page 62198]]

government or public to access private lands. Such designation does not 
require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement 
measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests 
Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a 
listed species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of 
section 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but in the event of a 
destruction or adverse modification finding, the Federal action 
agency's and the applicant's obligation is not to restore or recover 
the species, but to implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to 
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
    For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within 
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed 
must contain the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species, and be included if those features may 
require special management considerations or protection. Critical 
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best 
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide 
essential life cycle needs of the species (areas on which are found the 
physical and biological features laid out in the appropriate quantity 
and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species). Under the 
Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate critical habitat 
in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the 
time it is listed only when we determine that those areas are essential 
for the conservation of the species and that designation limited to the 
geographical area occupied at the time of listing would be inadequate 
to ensure the conservation of the species.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on 
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available. 
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered 
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines 
provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure 
that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available. 
They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and 
with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and 
original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to 
designate critical habitat.
    When determining which areas should be designated as critical 
habitat, our primary source of information is generally the information 
developed during the listing process for the species. Additional 
information sources may include the recovery plan for the species, 
articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by 
States and counties, scientific status surveys and studies, biological 
assessments, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or 
personal knowledge.
    Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to 
another over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for 
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated 
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their 
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic 
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most 
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah et al. 
2005, p.4). Current climate change predictions for terrestrial areas in 
the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air temperatures, more intense 
precipitation events, and increased summer continental drying (Field et 
al. 1999, pp. 1-3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p. 
6; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181). 
Climate change may also affect the duration and frequency of drought 
and these climatic changes may even more dramatic and intense (Graham 
1997). Documentation of climate-related changes that have already 
occurred in California (Croke et al. 1998, pp. 2128, 2130; Brashears et 
al. 2005, p. 15144), and future drought predictions for California 
(such as Field et al. 1999, pp. 8-10; Lenihen et al. 2003, p. 1667; 
Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Brashears et al. 2005, p. 15144; Seager 
et al. 2007, p. 1181) and North America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) indicate 
prolonged drought and other climate-related changes will continue in 
the foreseeable future.
    We anticipate these changes could affect a number of native plants, 
including Navarretia fossalis occurrences and habitat. If the amount 
and timing of precipitation or the average temperature increases in 
southern California, the long term viability of N. fossalis may be 
affected in several ways, including the following: (1) Drier conditions 
may result in a lower germination rate and smaller population sizes; 
(2) a shift in the timing of annual rainfall may favor nonnative 
species that impact the quality of habitat for this species; or (3) 
drier conditions may result in increased fire frequency, making the 
ecosystems in which N. fossalis currently grows more vulnerable to the 
threats of subsequent erosion and nonnative plant invasion.
    At this time, we are unable to identify the specific ways that 
climate change may impact Navarretia fossalis; therefore, we are unable 
to determine if any additional areas may be appropriate to include in 
this final critical habitat rule to address the effects of climate 
change. Additionally, we recognize that critical habitat designated at 
a particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas 
that we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the 
species. For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not 
signal that habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may 
not be required for recovery of the species.
    Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but 
are outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be 
subject to conservation actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of 
the Act. Areas that support populations are also subject to the 
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy 
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available scientific 
and commercial information at the time of the agency action. Federally 
funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside their 
designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings 
in some cases. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the 
basis of the best available information at the time of designation will 
not control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, HCPs, 
or other species conservation planning efforts if new information 
available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different 
outcome.

Physical and Biological Features

    In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the 
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing to 
designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of the species and which may 
require special management considerations or protection. These include, 
but are not limited to:
    (1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal 
behavior;

[[Page 62199]]

    (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or 
physiological requirements;
    (3) Cover or shelter;
    (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development) 
of offspring; and
    (5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are 
representative of the historic, geographical, and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    We consider the specific physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species and laid out in the appropriate 
quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species. 
We derive those specific essential physical and biological features for 
Navarretia fossalis from the biological needs of this species as 
described in the Critical Habitat section of the proposed rule to 
designate critical habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal 
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
    The area designated as final revised critical habitat consists of 
ephemeral wetland habitat for the reproduction and growth of Navarretia 
fossalis, intermixed wetland and upland habitats that comprise the 
local watershed to support ephemeral wetland habitat, and the 
topography and soils required for ponding during winter and spring 
months. The methods of dispersal and pollination for N. fossalis are 
not well understood; therefore, elements required for these processes 
may not be geographically captured by this revised critical habitat 
designation. Likewise, delineating larger watershed areas that support 
ephemeral wetland habitat may require hydrological data and modeling 
that are not available; therefore, areas beyond the local watershed are 
not included in this revised critical habitat designation. The physical 
and biological features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis 
are derived from studies of this species' habitat, ecology, and life 
history as described below, in the Background section of the proposed 
revised critical habitat designation published in the Federal Register 
on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588), the critical habitat designation 
published in the Federal Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), 
and the final listing rule published in the Federal Register on October 
13, 1998 (63 FR 54975).
Habitats That Are Representative of the Historical, Geographical, and 
Ecological Distribution of Navarretia fossalis
    Navarretia fossalis is restricted to ephemeral wetlands in southern 
California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Moran 1977, pp. 
155-156; Oberbauer 1992, p. 7; Day 1993, p. 847; California Natural 
Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2008, pp. 1-44), and primarily associated 
with vernal pools and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats 
(Moran 1977, pp. 155-156; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Day 1993, p. 847; 
Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127). In Los Angeles County, N. 
fossalis is known to occur in vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa and the 
associated drainage of Plum Canyon (such as CNDDB 2008, Element 
Occurrence (EO) 31, 32, and 41). In Riverside County, N. fossalis is 
known to occur in large vernal pools with basins that range in size 
from 0.5 ac (0.2 ha) to 10.0 ac (4.0 ha) (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 42, 
43, and 44), and in temporary wetlands that are described as seasonally 
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat along the San Jacinto River and 
near Salt Creek/Stowe Pool in Hemet (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 22, 23, and 
24). In San Diego County, N. fossalis is found in vernal pools that are 
smaller than those in Riverside County, ranging in size from 0.01 ac 
(0.005 ha) to 0.2 ac (0.09 ha) and are often found in clusters of 
several vernal pools typically referred to as vernal pool complexes 
(such as CNDDB 2008, EO 4, 14, and 19). In Mexico, N. fossalis is known 
from fewer than 12 occurrences, most of which are clustered in three 
areas of Baja California: along the international border, on the 
plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe, and on the San Quintin coastal 
plain (Moran 1977, p. 156).
Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
    Despite variation in the types of habitat where Navarretia fossalis 
is found (i.e., vernal pool habitat and seasonally flooded alkali 
vernal plain habitat), these ephemeral wetlands all share the same 
temporary nature (i.e., areas fill with water during the winter and 
spring and dry completely during summer and fall). Navarretia fossalis 
depends on both the inundation and drying of its habitat for survival. 
This type of ephemerally wet habitat excludes upland plants that live 
in a dry environment year round, or wetland plants that require year-
round moisture to become established (Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998).
    Navarretia fossalis primarily occurs in ephemeral wetland habitat, 
more specifically, vernal pool and seasonally flooded alkali vernal 
plain habitat (Moran 1977, pp. 156-157; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Bramlet 
1993b, p. 14; Day 1993, p. 847). Vernal pools form during the winter 
rains in depressions that are part of a gently sloping and undulating 
landscape, where soil mounds are interspersed with basins (mima-mound 
topography; Cox 1984, pp. 1397-1398). Water ponds in vernal pools in 
part due to an underlying impervious soil layer (hard pan or clay pan). 
Navarretia fossalis can also occur in ditches and other artificial 
depressions associated with degraded vernal pool habitat (Moran 1977, 
p. 155).
    Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat includes alkali 
playa, alkali scrub, alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland 
vegetation types. The hydrologic regime for this habitat involves 
sporadic seasonal flooding (as described above) combined with slow 
drainage of the alkaline soils. Large-scale inundation of flood plains 
occur approximately every 20 to 50 years, which is necessary for long-
term maintenance of the habitat by removing scrub vegetation (Roberts 
2004, p. 4). During a typical seasonal flooding cycle dry period, 
alkali scrub vegetation expands its distribution into the seasonally 
flooded areas of alkali vernal plains habitat and crowds out the 
species associated more with ephemeral wetlands. During a large-scale 
flood, standing and slow-draining waters remain for weeks or months and 
kill alkali scrub vegetation, resulting in favorable conditions for 
annual ephemeral wetland-associated species (such as Navarretia 
fossalis) to expand their range (Bramlet 2004, p. 8; Roberts 2004, p. 
4). Although uncommon, large-scale flooding events maintain N. fossalis 
habitat and likely provide a species dispersal mechanism (Bramlet 2009, 
p. 3). Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain can also persist in 
lightly to moderately disturbed habitat that may obscure or suppress 
expression of PCEs, especially when disturbance consists of soil 
amendments or dryland farming activities (Roberts 2009, p. 2).
Subsurface Water Flow That Creates A Local Watershed of Intermixed 
Wetland and Upland Habitats
    Vernal pools within a complex are hydrologically connected by 
subsurface water, which creates a landscape that is intermixed with 
wetland and upland habitats. This entire area comprises a local 
watershed and provides the appropriate physical and biological features 
necessary to maintain vernal pools within each complex. Seasonally 
flooded alkali vernal plain habitats are also hydrologically connected 
by flowing water when it flows over the surface from one vernal pool to 
another or across the seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain. Due to an 
impervious hard pan, water flows and collects below ground as the soil 
becomes saturated. Movement of the water through vernal pool and 
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain systems results in pools

[[Page 62200]]

filling and holding water continuously for a number of days (Hanes et 
al. 1990, p. 51). For this reason, these ephemeral wetlands are best 
described from a watershed perspective. The local watershed associated 
with a vernal pool complex or seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 
includes all surfaces in the surrounding area from which water flows 
into the complex or plain habitat. Some ephemeral wetlands included in 
this rule (such as the San Jacinto River and the Salt Creek Seasonally 
Flooded Alkali Plain) have large watersheds where the overland flow of 
water contributes to the ponding that supports Navarretia fossalis, 
while other ephemeral wetlands have comparatively small watersheds 
(such as Carroll Canyon and Nobel Drive) and fill almost entirely from 
direct rainfall (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998, p. 
38). It is also possible that subsurface flow occurs within a watershed 
and contributes water to some vernal pools and seasonally flooded 
alkali vernal plains (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 
1998, p. 48). In summary, N. fossalis depends on an entire local 
watershed that includes subsurface water flow over an area that is 
comprised of intermixed wetland and upland habitats.
Topography and Soils That Support Ponding During Winter and Spring
    Topography and soils support ponding that occurs during winter and 
spring months. Impervious subsurface layers combined with flat to 
gently sloping topography serve to inhibit rapid infiltration of 
rainwater, resulting in ponding of vernal pools and seasonally flooded 
alkali vernal plains (Bramlet 1993a, p. 1; Bauder and McMillian 1998, 
pp. 57-59). Soils also function to moderate water chemistry and rate of 
water loss to evaporation (Zedler 1987, pp. 17-30). In Los Angeles 
County, vernal pools that support Navarretia fossalis are found on 
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca676. In western Riverside 
County, seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats that support N. 
fossalis are found on Domino, Traver, Waukena, Chino, (Bramlet 1993a, 
pp. 1, 10) (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994) and Willows soils (Bramlet 
2009, p. 4). In San Diego County, vernal pool habitats that support N. 
fossalis are found on Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and 
Redding soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca073).
Primary Constituent Elements for Navarretia Fossalis
    Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to 
identify the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Navarretia fossalis. The physical and biological 
features are the primary constituent elements (PCEs) laid out in the 
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement essential to the 
conservation of the species. Areas designated as critical habitat for 
N. fossalis were occupied at the time of listing (see the Geographic 
Range and Status section of the proposed revised rule for a more 
detailed explanation), are currently occupied, are within the species' 
historic geographical range, and contain sufficient PCEs to support N. 
fossalis.
    Based on our current knowledge of the life history, biology, and 
ecology of Navarretia fossalis, and habitat characteristics required to 
sustain the essential life history functions of the species, we 
determined that the PCEs specific to N. fossalis are:
    (1) PCE 1--Ephemeral wetland habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 
ha)) and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that become inundated 
by winter rains and hold water or have saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6 
months during a year with average rainfall (i.e., years where average 
rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the rainy 
season (between October and May)). This period of inundation is long 
enough to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for 
Navarretia fossalis and other native species typical of vernal pool and 
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat, but not so long that 
true wetland species inhabit the areas.
    (2) PCE 2--Intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the 
local watershed. Areas characterized by mounds, swales, and depressions 
within a matrix of upland habitat that result in intermittently flowing 
surface and subsurface water in swales, drainages, and pools described 
in PCE 1.
    (3) PCE 3--Soils that support ponding during winter and spring. 
Soils found in areas characterized in PCEs 1 and 2 that have a clay 
component or other property that creates an impermeable surface or 
subsurface layer. These soil types include, but are not limited to: 
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles County; Domino, Traver, 
Waukena, Chino, and Willows soils in Riverside County; and Huerhuero, 
Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and Redding soils in San Diego County.
    With this revised designation of critical habitat, we intend to 
conserve the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species, through the identification of the 
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to 
support the life-history functions of the species. For Navarretia 
fossalis, the size of the ephemeral wetland habitat can vary a great 
deal, but the most important factor (i.e., the appropriate quantity and 
spatial arrangement of the PCEs) in any of the subunits designated as 
critical habitat is that the vernal pool or alkali playa habitat has 
intact and functioning hydrology and intact adjacent upland areas that 
ensure a functioning ecosystem. All units and subunits designated as 
critical habitat contain the PCEs in the appropriate quantity and 
spatial arrangement essential to the conservation of this species and 
are currently occupied by N. fossalis.

Special Management Considerations or Protection

    When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the areas 
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of 
listing contain the features that are essential to the conservation of 
the species and which may require special management considerations or 
protection.
    Researchers estimate that greater than 90 percent of the vernal 
pool habitat in southern California has been converted as a result of 
past human activities (Bauder and McMillian 1998, pp. 56-67; Keeler-
Wolf et al. 1998, pp. 10, 60-61, 63-64). A detailed discussion of 
threats to Navarretia fossalis and its habitat can be found in the 
final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13, 1998), the previous 
critical habitat designation (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005), and the 
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of Southern California (Service 1998, 
pp. 1-113, appendices). The features essential to the conservation of 
N. fossalis may require special management considerations or protection 
to reduce the following threats: habitat destruction and fragmentation 
from urban and agricultural development; pipeline construction; 
alteration of hydrology and floodplain dynamics; excessive flooding; 
channelization; water diversions; off-road vehicle (OHV) activity; 
trampling by cattle and sheep; weed abatement; fire suppression 
practices (including discing and plowing to remove weeds and create 
fire breaks); competition from nonnative plant species; direct and 
indirect impacts from some human recreational activities (63 FR 54975, 
October 13, 1998; Service 1998, p. 7); and manure dumping (Roberts 
2009, pp. 2-14).
    In particular, manure dumping on private property along the San 
Jacinto River area is impacting habitat within the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP

[[Page 62201]]

area. These impacts are occurring despite identification of these areas 
as important for the survival and recovery of Navarretia fossalis and 
other sensitive species (such as Brodiaea filifolia) addressed in the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP. Dumping of manure and sewage sludge 
should be avoided in all areas containing populations of N. fossalis. 
As outlined in the Western Riverside County MSHCP, we have been working 
with permittees to implement additional ordinances that will help to 
control activities (such as manure dumping) that may impact the 
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP conservation 
objectives. To date, the City of Hemet is the only Western Riverside 
County MSHCP permittee that has addressed the negative impacts that 
manure dumping has on species such as N. fossalis and B. filifolia and 
their habitat trough the enactment of Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the 
ordinance that prevents manure dumping activities and educates its 
citizens). We will continue to work with Riverside County and 
permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP to address activities 
that may impact the species within this plan area, as well as other 
HCPs and plan areas that may have other activities that impact N. 
fossalis and its habitat.
    Special management considerations or protection are required within 
critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management activities 
that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not limited to) 
fencing Navarretia fossalis occurrences to prevent soil compaction and 
providing signage to discourage encroachment by hikers, cattle, sheep, 
and OHV activity; control of nonnative plants using methods shown to be 
effective; guiding the design of development projects to avoid impacts 
to N. fossalis habitat; enacting local ordinances to prohibit manure 
dumping; and restoring and maintaining natural hydrology and floodplain 
dynamics of watersheds associated with N. fossalis occurrences where 
feasible. These management activities will protect the PCEs for the 
species by reducing soil compaction to help maintain an impermeable 
surface (PCE 3) that supports ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), which 
is needed to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for N. 
fossalis. Additionally, management of critical habitat lands will help 
maintain both the wetland and upland habitat that acts as the local 
watershed and provides intermittent flowing water on the surface and 
subsurface (PCEs 2 and 3).

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

    As required by section 4(b) of the Act, we used the best scientific 
and commercial data available to designate critical habitat. We only 
designate areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species 
when a designation limited to its present range would be inadequate to 
ensure the conservation of the species (50 CFR 424.12 (e)). We are not 
designating any areas outside the geographical area occupied by 
Navarretia fossalis because occupied areas are sufficient for the 
conservation of the species.
    This revised rule updates our 2005 final designation of critical 
habitat for Navarretia fossalis with the best available scientific 
information. For some areas analyzed in 2005, we have new information 
from survey reports and public comments that led us to either add or 
remove areas from critical habitat designation.
    This section provides details of the process and criteria we used 
to delineate a final revised critical habitat designation for 
Navarretia fossalis. This revised rule is based largely on areas that 
are identified as required for the conservation of N. fossalis in the 
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of Southern California (Service 1998, 
pp.1-113, appendices), the 2005 final critical habitat designation, and 
new information obtained since that designation. Table 3 in this rule 
depicts the areas essential for N. fossalis conservation; it does not 
include all locations occupied by N. fossalis. It includes only those 
locations that were:
    (1) Included in Appendix F or G of the Recovery Plan;
    (2) designated, excluded, or exempt in the 2005 final critical 
habitat designation;
    (3) proposed as critical habitat in the 2009 rule or proposed as 
critical habitat in the Federal Register notice published on April 15, 
2010 (75 FR 19575); or
    (4) designated, excluded, or exempt in this final revised critical 
habitat designation.
    The unit names used in this revised critical habitat for N. 
fossalis are based on those used for management areas in the 1998 
Recovery Plan. The specific changes made to the 2005 final critical 
habitat designation are summarized in the Summary of Changes From 
Previously Designated Critical Habitat section of this rule.
    We analyzed the biology, life history, ecology, and distribution 
(historical, at the time of listing, and current) of Navarretia 
fossalis. Based on this information, we are designating revised 
critical habitat in areas within the geographical area occupied by N. 
fossalis at the time of listing and currently occupied that contain the 
PCEs in the quantity and spatial arrangement to support life-history 
functions essential to the conservation of the species (see the 
Geographic Range and Status section in the proposed revised rule (74 FR 
27588; June 10, 2009) for more information). We are not designating any 
areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time 
of listing. All units and subunits contain the PCEs in the appropriate 
quantity and spatial arrangement essential to the conservation of N. 
fossalis.

Table 3. Areas necessary for Navarretia fossalis conservation as described in the 1998 Recovery Plan, 2005 final
critical habitat designation, 2009 proposed revised critical habitat designation, 2010 revisions proposed in the
               availability of the DEA, and this 2010 final revised critical habitat designation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Proposed Revised
                                                                           Critical Habitat
                                     Recovery Plan      Final Critical    Subunits (based on     Final Revised
            Location*                  Appendix        Habitat Subunits    2009 proposal and   Critical Habitat
                                                            (2005)         2010 availability    Subunits (2010)
                                                                              of the DEA)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cruzan Mesa                       F                   1A                  1A                  1A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plum Canyon                       N/A                 1B                  1B                  1B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62202]]

 
Stuart Mesa, Marine Corps Base    F                   4(a)(3) exemption   4(a)(3) exemption   4(a)(3) exemption
 (MCB) Camp PendletonRecovery
 plan (RP)** name: Stuart Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wire Mountain, MCB Camp           F                   --                  4(a)(3) exemption   4(a)(3) exemption
 Pendleton RP name: Wire
 Mountain
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station  F                   2 (partially        2                   2
 RP name: JJ 2 Poinsettia Lane                         excluded under
                                                       section 4(b)(2))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates)  N/A                 --                  3A                  Excluded under
                                                                                               section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carroll Canyon (D 5-8)            --                  --                  3B                  3B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Drive (X 5)                 --                  --                  3C                  3C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large Pool northwest of runway,   N/A                 --                  4(a)(3) exemption   4(a)(3) exemption
 MCAS Miramar
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EE1-2, MCAS Miramar RP name: EE1- F                   4(a)(3) exemption   --                  --
 2, Miramar Interior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kearny Mesa (U 19)                N/A                 4(a)(3) exemption   --                  --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Century (BB 2)RP name: BB 2   G                   --                  --                  --
 New Century
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montgomery Field RP name: N1-4,   F                   Excluded under      3D                  3D
 6 Montgomery Field                                    section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (North L 15)RP name:   G                   --                  --                  --
 L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Northwest L 14)RP     G                   --                  --                  --
 name: L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 1-6)RP name: L 1-   F                   4C1                 4C1                 4C1
 6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 9-10)RP name: L 1-  F                   4C2                 4C2                 4C2
 6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 11-13)RP name: L 1- F                   4D                  4D                  4D
 6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62203]]

 
San Marcos (North L 15)RP name:   G                   --                  --                  --
 L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona RP name: Ramona            F                   --                  --                  --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona RP name: Ramona T          G                   4E                  4E                  4E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3)RP  F                   5A ( partially      5A                  5A
 name: Sweetwater Lake                                 excluded under
                                                       section 4(b)(2))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (M2)            --                  5B                  5B                  5B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Mesa (J26)RP name: J 26      F                   5C                  5C                  5C
 Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proctor Valley (R1)RP name: R     F                   --                  5F                  5F
 Proctor Valley
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Reservoir (K3-5)RP name: K3- F                   --                  5G                  5G
 5 Otay River
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K1, 2 RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7 Otay  G                   Excluded under      Does not meet the   --
 River                                                 section 4(b)(2)    definition of
                                                                           Critical.
                                                                          Habitat...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K 6, 7 RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7      G                   --                  --                  --
 Otay River
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool     F / G               Excluded under      5H / 5I             5H / 5I
 complexes RP name: J 2, 5, 7,                         section 4(b)(2)
 11-21, 23-30 Otay Mesa / J 3
 Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool     N/A                 --                  5H                  5H
 complexes (J 32 (West Otay A +
 B), J 33 (Sweetwater High
 School))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool     F / G               Excluded under      5H / 5I             5H / 5I
 complexes RP name: 23-30 Otay                         section 4(b)(2)
 Mesa / J 22 Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool     --                  Excluded under      Does not meet the   --
 complexes RP name: J 19, 27,                          section 4(b)(2)    definition of
 28E, 28W Otay Mesa                                                        Critical.
                                                                          Habitat...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RP name: J (undescribed)          G                   --                  --                  --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Jacinto River RP name: San    F                   Excluded under      6A                  6A
 Jacinto                                               section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62204]]

 
Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded     F                   Excluded under      6B                  6B
 Alkali Plain RP name: Hemet/                          section 4(b)(2)
 Salt Creek
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wickerd Road and Scott Road       N/A                 --                  6C                  6C
 Pools
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skunk Hollow RP name: Skunk       --                  Excluded under      6D                  Excluded under
 Hollow                                                section 4(b)(2)                         Section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RP name: Temecula                 F                   --                  --                  --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesa de Burro RP name: Santa      F                   Excluded under      6E                  Excluded under
 Rosa Plateau                                          section 4(b)(2)                         Section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Areas (out of 39 areas      27                  22                  28                  28
 listed in this table)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This table does not include all locations occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations
  included in Appendix F or G of the Recovery Plan (``RP'' in above table); designated, excluded, or exempt in
  2005; proposed as critical habitat in the 2009 rule; proposed as revisions to proposed rule as identified in
  the document making available the DEA; or designated, excluded, or exempt in this final rule. Note: The alpha-
  numeric vernal pool labels were applied in the Recovery Plan.
**RP name = Name in Recovery Plan, if different from the current rule.

    Appendices F and G of the Recovery Plan provide information on the 
areas needed to stabilize (prevent extinction of) Navarretia fossalis 
(Appendix F) and the areas that should be conserved and managed to 
reclassify or recover N. fossalis (Appendix G). In Table 3, we 
summarized the data from the Recovery Plan. According to this summary, 
27 locations were highlighted as areas that should be conserved and 
managed to recover N. fossalis. Our 2005 final rule to designate 
critical habitat (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) used the Recovery Plan 
as the basis for designating critical habitat; however, the rule 
included some additions to and subtractions from those areas deemed 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis in the Recovery Plan. Nine 
areas that the Recovery Plan identified as necessary for recovery were 
not identified in the 2005 final rule as essential to the conservation 
of N. fossalis, and four areas not in the Recovery Plan were added. 
These nine areas were sites where we did not have specific occurrence 
data or areas where recent surveys had not found N. fossalis. The four 
areas added to the 2005 final rule were locations where occurrence data 
indicated that these areas contained the features essential to the 
conservation of N. fossalis. A total of 22 areas were identified in the 
2005 final rule as essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis 
(see Table 3).
    We did not include seven occurrences of N. fossalis highlighted in 
the Recovery Plan in the proposed revised critical habitat designation 
or this final rule. We do not have detailed information on these 
occurrences, and N. fossalis has not been observed during recent 
surveys at some of these sites. Additionally, we included areas in this 
revised critical habitat (based on new data) that were not identified 
as necessary for recovery in the Recovery Plan. While some of the areas 
are different, non-inclusion of some areas in the Recovery Plan and 
inclusion of other areas for which we have better data will achieve the 
overall goal of the Recovery Plan for N. fossalis and provide for 
conservation of this species.
    In this revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia 
fossalis, using the best scientific and commercial information, we 
selected areas that possess those physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species, and which may require 
special management considerations or protection. We took into account 
past conservation planning for N. fossalis in the Recovery Plan and in 
the 2005 critical habitat designation. For this revised rule, we 
completed the following steps to delineate critical habitat:
    (1) Compiled all available data on N. fossalis into a GIS database;
    (2) Reviewed data to ensure accuracy;
    (3) Determined which occurrences were known to occur at the time of 
listing;
    (4) Determined which areas are currently occupied;
    (5) Defined the areas containing the features essential to the 
conservation of N. fossalis in terms of core habitat areas and 
satellite habitat areas;
    (6) Determined if each occupied area represents core habitat or 
satellite habitat and, therefore, should be designated as critical 
habitat; and
    (7) For both core and satellite habitat areas, mapped the specific 
locations that contain the essential physical and biological features 
(PCEs in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement needed to 
support life-history functions essential to the conservation of N. 
fossalis).
These steps are described in detail below.
    (1) We compiled all available data on Navarretia fossalis into a 
GIS database. Data on locations where N. fossalis occurs were based on 
collections and

[[Page 62205]]

observations made by botanists (both amateur and professional), 
biological consultants, and academic researchers. We compiled data from 
the following sources to create our GIS database for N. fossalis: (a) 
Data used in the Recovery Plan and in the 2005 final critical habitat 
rule for N. fossalis (70 FR 60658); (b) the CNDDB data report for N. 
fossalis and accompanying GIS records (CNDDB 2008, pp. 1-44); (c) data 
presented in the City of San Diego's Vernal Pool Inventory for 2002-
2003 (City of San Diego 2004, pp. 1-125, appendices); (d) the data 
report for N. fossalis from the California Consortium of Herbaria and 
accompanying Berkeley Mapper GIS records (Consortium of California 
Herbaria 2008, pp. 1-17); (e) the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
species GIS database; and (f) the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office's 
internal species GIS database, which includes the species data used for 
the San Diego MSCP and the San Diego MHCP, reports from section 7 
consultations, and Service observations of N. fossalis (Carlsbad Fish 
and Wildlife Office's internal species GIS database).
    (2) We reviewed the Navarretia fossalis data that we compiled to 
ensure its accuracy. We checked each data point in our database to 
ensure that it represented an original collection or observation of N. 
fossalis. Data that did not represent an original collection or 
observation were removed from our database. We checked each data point 
to ensure that it was mapped in the correct location. Data points that 
did not match the description for the original collection or 
observation were remapped in the correct location or removed from our 
database.
    (3) We determined which Navarretia fossalis occurrences existed at 
the time of listing. We concluded that all known occurrences, except 
for a single occurrence translocated after this species was listed, 
were extant at the time of listing. We drew this conclusion because N. 
fossalis has limited dispersal capabilities. We believe the 
documentation of additional occurrences after the species was listed 
was due to an increased effort to survey for this species. In other 
words, we do not believe this species has naturally colonized any new 
areas since it was listed.
    (4) We determined which areas are currently occupied by Navarretia 
fossalis. For areas where we had past occupancy data for the species, 
we assumed the area is currently occupied unless: (a) Two or more rare 
plant surveys conducted during the past 10 years did not find N. 
fossalis (providing the surveys were conducted in years with average 
rainfall (i.e., years where average rainfall amounts for a particular 
area are reached during the rainy season between October and May)) and 
during the appropriate months to find this species (i.e., March, April, 
and May); or (b) the site was significantly disturbed since the last 
observation of the species at that location.
    (5) We defined the areas necessary for conservation of Navarretia 
fossalis in terms of ``core habitat areas'' and ``satellite habitat 
areas.'' See the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite 
Habitat Areas section in this rule for definitions of these areas.
    (6) We determined if each occupied area represents core habitat or 
satellite habitat. In the final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13, 
1998), we stated that 60 percent of the known Navarretia fossalis 
occurrences are concentrated in three locations: Otay Mesa in southern 
San Diego County, along the San Jacinto River in western Riverside 
County, and near Hemet in Riverside County (referred to as the Salt 
Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain in this final critical habitat 
rule). These three areas represent core habitat for N. fossalis. In 
addition to these three core habitat areas, Mesa de Burro in Riverside 
County represents core habitat for this species due to the large 
species abundance observed there in 2008, and the large amount of 
intact vernal pool habitat on this mesa. In total, we identified four 
core habitat areas for N. fossalis. Large populations of N. fossalis 
are currently present in these four areas, but there have been 
significant impacts to these areas in the form of habitat 
fragmentation, nonnative plant invasion, agricultural activities, and 
unauthorized recreational use. Because these four areas represent 
large, interconnected ephemeral wetland areas and large N. fossalis 
populations, they are essential to, and will serve as anchors for, the 
overall conservation effort for this species. Additionally, the 
conservation of these four areas will sustain the largest populations 
of N. fossalis, allowing the species to persist where it will be less 
constrained by the threats that negatively impact its essential habitat 
features (PCEs).
    Habitat areas outside the four core habitat areas also support 
stable, intact occurrences of Navarretia fossalis. These satellite 
areas represent unique habitat within this species' range that also 
contain the PCEs laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial 
arrangement essential to the conservation of the species. The satellite 
habitat areas occur over a wide range of soils and at various 
elevations that include several occurrences over a range of 
environmental variables, the preservation of which will help maintain 
the genetic diversity of N. fossalis. The satellite habitat areas are 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis because they allow for 
connections between existing occurrences of the species, and together 
with the core habitat areas, will create a sustainable matrix of 
habitat for N. fossalis that will enable it to evolve and potentially 
respond to future environmental changes.
    Areas of essential habitat that are smaller than core habitat areas 
were selected as satellite habitat areas if Navarretia fossalis 
persists from year to year (i.e., areas that may be isolated and likely 
to be genetically unique), and are: (a) on the periphery of this 
species' geographical distribution; (b) geographically isolated from 
other occurrences; or (c) provide connections between other satellite 
or core habitat areas. Additional discussion about exceptions to the 
assignment of satellite areas is found below in the Critical Habitat 
Units section of this rule.
    (7) For the core and satellite habitat areas, we mapped the 
specific areas that contain the physical and biological features (the 
PCEs) in the quantity and spatial arrangement needed to support life 
history functions essential to Navarretia fossalis. We first mapped the 
ephemeral wetland habitat in the occupied area using occurrence data, 
aerial imagery, and 1:24,000 topographic maps. We then mapped the 
intermixed wetland and upland habitats that make up the local 
watersheds and the topography and soils that support the occupied 
ephemeral wetland habitat. We identified the gently sloping area 
associated with ephemeral wetland habitat and any adjacent areas that 
slope toward and contribute to the hydrology of the ephemeral wetland 
habitat. In most cases, we delineated the border of revised critical 
habitat around the occupied ephemeral wetlands and associated local 
watershed areas to follow natural breaks in the terrain such as 
ridgelines, mesa edges, and steep canyon slopes.
    When determining the revised critical habitat boundaries, we made 
every effort to map precisely only the areas that contain the PCEs and 
provide for the conservation of Navarretia fossalis. However, due to 
the mapping scale that we use to draft critical habitat boundaries, we 
cannot guarantee that every fraction of revised critical habitat 
contains the PCEs. Additionally, we made every attempt to avoid 
including developed areas such as lands underlying buildings, paved 
areas, and other structures that lack PCEs for N.

[[Page 62206]]

fossalis. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for 
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the 
exclusion of such developed areas. Any developed structures and the 
land under them inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries 
shown on the maps of this revised critical habitat designation are 
excluded by text in this rule and are not designated as critical 
habitat. Therefore, Federal actions involving these lands would not 
trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the 
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific actions may 
affect the species or PCEs in adjacent critical habitat.

Revised Critical Habitat Designation

    We are designating 6 units that include 19 subunits as critical 
habitat for Navarretia fossalis. Table 4 identifies the approximate 
area of each critical habitat subunit by land ownership. These 
subunits, which generally correspond to the geographic area of the 
subunits delineated in the 2005 designation, replace the current 
critical habitat designation for N. fossalis in 50 CFR 17.96(a). The 
critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our best assessment 
of areas determined to be occupied at the time of listing that contain 
the primary constituent elements in the appropriate quantity and 
spatial arrangement (i.e., essential features) which may require 
special management considerations or protection. We are not designating 
any unoccupied areas or areas outside of the species' historical range 
because we determined that occupied lands within the species' 
historical range are sufficient for the conservation of N. fossalis 
provided that these lands are protected or receive special management 
considerations for N. fossalis.

                     Table 4. Area and ownership for lands included in the Navarretia fossalis revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Location                       Federal            State Government        Local Government           Private                 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A. Cruzan Mesa                      --                      --                      --                     156 ac                 156 ac
                                                                                                            (63 ha)..............  (63 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B. Plum Canyon                      --                      --                      --                     20 ac                  20 ac
                                                                                                            (8 ha)...............  (8 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station  --                      --                      6 ac                   3 ac                   9 ac
                                                                                     (3 ha)...............  (1 ha)...............  (4 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B. Carroll Canyon                   --                      --                      17 ac                  1 ac                   18 ac
                                                                                     (7 ha)...............  (< 1 ha).............  (7 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3C. Nobel Drive                      --                                              37 ac                  --                     37 ac
                                                                                     (15 ha)..............                         (15 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3D. Montgomery Field                 --                      --                      48 ac                  --                     48 ac
                                                                                     (20 ha)..............                         (20 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C1. San Marcos (Upham)              --                      --                      --                     34 ac                  34 ac
                                                                                                            (14 ha)..............  (14 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C2. San Marcos (Universal Boot)     --                      --                      15 ac                  17 ac                  32 ac
                                                                                     (6 ha)...............  (7 ha)...............  (13 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4D. San Marcos (Bent Avenue)         --                      --                      --                     5 ac                   5 ac
                                                                                                            (2 ha)...............  (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4E. Ramona                           --                      --                      3 ac                   132 ac                 135 ac
                                                                                     (1 ha)...............  (53 ha)..............  (55 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5A. Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3)   23 ac                   1 ac                    71 ac                  --                     95 ac
                                     (9 ha)................  (<1 ha)...............  (29 ha)..............                         (38 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5B. Otay River Valley (M2)           --                      --                      --                     24 ac                  24 ac
                                                                                                            (10 ha)..............  (10 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5C. Otay Mesa (J26)                  --                      2 ac                    24 ac                  16 ac                  42 ac
                                                             (1 ha)................  (10 ha)..............  (7 ha)...............  (17 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5F. Proctor Valley (R1-2)            --                      --                      51 ac                  37 ac                  88 ac
                                                                                     (21 ha)..............  (15 ha)..............  (36 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 62207]]

 
5G. Otay Lakes (K3-5)                --                      --                      140 ac                 --                     140 ac
                                                                                     (57 ha)..............                         (57 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5H. Western Otay Mesa vernal pool    --                      --                      41 ac                  98 ac                  139 ac
 complexes                                                                           (17 ha)..............  (40 ha)..............  (56 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5I. Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool    --                      --                      --                     221 ac                 221 ac
 complexes                                                                                                  (89 ha)..............  (89 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6A. San Jacinto River                --                      1,504 ac                --                     2,808 ac               4,312 ac
                                                             (608 ha)..............                         (1,136 ha)...........  (1,745 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6B. Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded    --                      --                      --                     930 ac                 930 ac
 Alkali Plain                                                                                               (376 ha).............  (376 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6C. Wickerd Road and Scott Road      --                      --                      --                     235 ac                 235 ac
 Pools                                                                                                      (95 ha)..............  (95 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                23 ac                   1,507 ac                453 ac                 4,737 ac               6,720 ac
                                     (9 ha)................  (610 ha)..............  (183 ha).............  (1,917 ha)...........  (2,720 ha)*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.

Critical Habitat Units

    Presented below are brief descriptions of all subunits included in 
the Navarretia fossalis revised critical habitat designation and 
reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for the 
species. The units in this revised critical habitat correspond to the 
management areas described in the 1998 Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools 
of Southern California. Each subunit contains either: (1) A core 
habitat area; or (2) a satellite habitat area that provides 
connectivity between core habitat areas or other satellite habitat 
areas. Areas identified as subunits that harbor satellite habitat areas 
were identified as containing features essential to the conservation of 
the species (compared to other areas not identified as essential 
habitat) due to a combination of their geographic proximity to core 
habitat areas, their status as an area that supports a stable 
occurrence (representing occurrences that continue to persist within a 
given geographic area), and the likelihood that these particular 
habitat areas support genetically unique occurrences. Other areas not 
qualifying as satellite areas are occurrences that are represented by 
one or more of the following characteristics: Occurrence consisting of 
few individuals; no detailed information on occurrence; lack of 
observations during recent surveys; locations not identified in the 
Recovery Plan; or areas have low likelihood of persistence due to 
fragmentation or enclosure by developed areas.
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin--Orange Management Area
    Unit 1 is located in northwestern Los Angeles County and consists 
of two subunits totaling 176 ac (71 ha) of private land.

Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa

    Subunit 1A is located near the City of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles 
County. This subunit is on Cruzan Mesa, northwest of Forest Park and 
the Sierra Highway and southwest of Vasquez Canyon Road. Subunit 1A 
consists of 156 ac (63 ha) of private land and meets our selection 
criteria as satellite habitat. Cruzan Mesa is one of the only areas in 
Los Angeles County that supports mesa-top vernal pools. As satellite 
habitat, this subunit supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia 
fossalis, provides potential connectivity with Subunit 1B, and likely 
supports a genetically distinct occurrence because of the separation of 
these two northern occurrences from other occurrences of N. fossalis. 
This subunit and Subunit 1B (described below) represent the most 
northern occurrences of this species. Subunit 1A contains the physical 
and biological features that are essential to the conservation of N. 
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed 
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and 
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as mowing or grading) that 
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management 
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of 
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management 
considerations.

Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon

    Subunit 1B is located near the City of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles 
County. This subunit is in Plum Canyon, west of Forest Park and the 
Sierra Highway and north of Plum Canyon Road. Subunit 1B consists of 20 
ac (8 ha) of private land and meets our selection criteria as satellite 
habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit supports a stable 
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis, provides potential connectivity with 
Subunit 1A, and likely supports a genetically distinct occurrence 
because of the separation of these two northern occurrences from other 
occurrences of N. fossalis. The Plum Canyon vernal pool habitat occurs 
on a flat area down-slope from the

[[Page 62208]]

vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa. The vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa (Subunit 
1A) and Plum Canyon represent the only habitat for N. fossalis in Los 
Angeles County and the most northern occurrences of this species. 
Subunit 1B contains the physical or biological features essential to 
the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat 
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local 
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding 
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit 
may require special management considerations or protection to address 
threats from nonnative plant species within this subunit. Please see 
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.
Unit 2: San Diego--Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station
    Unit 2 is located in the City of Carlsbad in San Diego County and 
contains 6 ac (3 ha) of land owned by the North County Transit District 
and 3 ac (1 ha) of private land. This unit is loosely bounded by 
Avenida Encinas on the north, a housing development on the east, 
Poinsettia Lane on the south, and train tracks on the west. Unit 2 
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a 
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential 
connectivity between occurrences on MCB Camp Pendleton and Subunits 
4C1, 4C2, and 4D. The Poinsettia Lane vernal pool complex consists of a 
series of vernal pools that run parallel to a berm created by the train 
tracks. Unit 2 contains the physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral 
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that 
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that 
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical 
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in 
this unit may require special management considerations or protection 
to address threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as 
unauthorized recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. 
Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section 
of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.
Unit 3: San Diego--Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
    Unit 3 is located in central coastal San Diego County and consists 
of three subunits totaling 103 ac (42 ha). This unit contains 102 ac 
(42 ha) owned by State and local governments, and approximately 1 ac 
(less than 1 ha) of private land.

Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon

    Subunit 3B is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County. 
This subunit is located to the southwest of the intersection of 
Parkdale Avenue and Osgood Way, and is loosely bounded by residential 
development on the north, open space to the east, and a quarry to the 
south and west. Subunit 3B consists of approximately 18 ac (7 ha) that 
includes 17 ac (7 ha) of land owned by State or local governments and 1 
ac (less than 1 ha) of private land. Subunit 3B meets our selection 
criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a stable occurrence 
of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity between 
occurrences in Subunits 3A and 3C. The Carroll Canyon vernal pool 
complex consists of a group of vernal pools on the edge of a mesa north 
of Carroll Canyon. Historically, there may have been more habitat for 
this species; however, the majority of vernal pool habitat in the 
vicinity of this subunit has been developed. Subunit 3B contains the 
physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation 
of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed 
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and 
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as trespass or illegal 
trash dumping) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the 
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule 
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential 
management considerations.

Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive

    Subunit 3C is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County. 
This subunit is loosely bounded by the 805 interstate on the northeast, 
train tracks on the south, and Nobel Drive on the northwest. Subunit 3C 
consists of 37 ac (15 ha) of land owned by local government and meets 
our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a 
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential 
connectivity between occurrences in Subunits 3B and 3D. The Nobel Drive 
vernal pool complex consists of a group of vernal pools on a mesa-top 
north of Rose Canyon. Subunit 3C contains the physical and biological 
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, 
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the 
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring 
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized 
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the 
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule 
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential 
management considerations.

Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field

    Subunit 3D is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County. 
This subunit is located at Montgomery Field (airport) to the northeast 
of the runway area. Subunit 3D consists of 48 ac (20 ha) of land owned 
by the City of San Diego and meets our selection criteria as satellite 
habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit supports a stable 
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity 
with the occurrence in Subunit 3C. The Montgomery Field vernal pool 
complex consists of a large group of vernal pools east of the runway 
area at Montgomery Field, although only the northeastern portion of 
this vernal pool complex is being designated as critical habitat 
because the southeastern portion of this vernal pool complex has been 
hydrologically disconnected from other vernal pools by past 
development, is now isolated, and does not meet the definition of 
essential habitat. Navarretia fossalis has not been documented in the 
southeastern portion of this vernal pool complex. Subunit 3D contains 
the physical and biological features that are essential to the 
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local 
watershed (PCE 2),

[[Page 62209]]

and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and 
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.
Unit 4: San Diego--Inland Management Area
    Unit 4 is located within inland San Diego County and consists of 
four subunits totaling 206 ac (83 ha). This unit contains 18 ac (7 ha) 
owned by State and local governments, and 188 ac (76 ha) of private 
land.

Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D: San Marcos

    Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D are located in the City of San Marcos in 
San Diego County. These three subunits consist of three separate vernal 
pool complexes. The first (Subunit 4C1) is loosely bounded by La Mirada 
Drive on the northeast, Las Posas Road on the southeast, Linda Vista 
Drive on the southwest, and South Pacific Street on the northwest. The 
second (Subunit 4C2) is loosely bounded by Linda Vista Drive on the 
northeast, Las Posas Road on the east, West San Marcos Boulevard on the 
south, and South Pacific Street on the west. The third (Subunit 4D) is 
loosely bounded by South Bent Avenue on the northeast, commercial 
development on the southeast and southwest, and Linda Vista Drive on 
the northwest. Subunit 4C1 consists of 34 ac (14 ha) of private land, 
Subunit 4C2 consists of 15 ac (6 ha) of land owned by local government 
and 17 ac (7 ha) of private land, and Subunit 4D consists of 5 ac (2 
ha) of private land. These three subunits meet our selection criteria 
as satellite habitat areas because they support stable occurrences of 
Navarretia fossalis and provide potential connectivity between 
occurrences in Unit 2 and Subunit 4E. We grouped these vernal pool 
complexes because of the clustered nature of these occurrences. These 
subunits have separate subunit numbers to be consistent with the 
numbering identified in the 2005 critical habitat designation. Subunits 
4C1, 4C2, and 4D contain the physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral 
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that 
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that 
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical 
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in 
these subunits may require special management considerations or 
protection to address threats from nonnative plant species and 
activities (such as commercial development, trespass, or OHV use) that 
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management 
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of 
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management 
considerations.

Subunit 4E: Ramona

    Subunit 4E is located in the unincorporated community of Ramona. 
This subunit is loosely bounded by the Ramona Airport and Ramona 
Airport Road on the north, Sawday Road on the east, Santa Maria Creek 
on the south, and a series of rock outcrops on the west. Subunit 4E 
consists of approximately 135 ac (55 ha) that includes 3 ac (1 ha) of 
land owned by State or local governments and 132 ac (53 ha) of private 
land. Subunit 4E meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat 
because it supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and 
provides potential connectivity with occurrences in Subunits 4C1, 4C2, 
and 4D. The vernal pools in this subunit occur in gently sloping 
grassland habitat and are at the highest elevation where N. fossalis is 
known to occur. Subunit 4E contains the physical and biological 
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, 
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the 
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring 
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as agricultural activities 
or recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see 
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.
Unit 5: San Diego--Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
    Unit 5 is located in southern San Diego County and consists of six 
subunits totaling 748 ac (303 ha). This unit contains 28 ac (11 ha) of 
federally owned land, 330 ac (134 ha) of land owned by State and local 
governments, and 390 ac (158 ha) of private land.

Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools

    Subunit 5A is located southwest of the Sweetwater Reservoir. This 
subunit is loosely bounded by the Sweetwater Reservoir on the north, 
steeply sloping topography on the east, State Route 125 on the south, 
and an unnamed drainage on the west. Subunit 5A consists of 
approximately 95 ac (38 ha) and includes 23 ac (9 ha) of Federal land 
that is part of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 ac 
(less than 1ha) of land owned by the State, and 71 ac (29 ha) of land 
owned by local government. This subunit meets our selection criteria as 
satellite habitat. This satellite habitat subunit supports a stable 
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity 
between occurrences in Subunits 5B and 5F. Some of the area occupied by 
N. fossalis was lost during the construction of State Route 125. The 
soil from that area was salvaged and is being used to restore other 
vernal pools in this subunit. Subunit 5A contains the physical and 
biological features that are essential to the conservation of N. 
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed 
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and 
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized 
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the 
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule 
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential 
management considerations.

Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley

    Subunit 5B is located in the City of Chula Vista and unincorporated 
San Diego County. This subunit is loosely bounded by Olympic Parkway on 
the north, a housing development on the east, and a landfill to the 
southwest. Subunit 5B consists of 24 ac (10 ha) of private land and 
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a 
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential 
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 5A and 5H. 
Subunit 5B contains the

[[Page 62210]]

physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation 
of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed 
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and 
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized 
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the 
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule 
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential 
management considerations.

Subunit 5C: Otay Mesa

    Subunit 5C is located on the eastern portion of Otay Mesa, directly 
northwest of and adjacent to the George F. Bailey Detention Facility at 
the terminus of Alta Road. Subunit 5C consists of 26 ac (11 ha) of 
State and local government-owned land, and 16 ac (7 ha) of private 
land, and it meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because 
it supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides 
potential connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 
5G and 5I. Subunit 5C contains the physical and biological features 
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including 
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). 
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
the species in this subunit may require special management 
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant 
species and activities (such as unauthorized recreational use) that 
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management 
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of 
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management 
considerations.

Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley

    Subunit 5F is located between the unincorporated communities of 
Eastlake and Jamul in San Diego County. This subunit is located along 
Proctor Valley Road in Proctor Valley. Subunit 5F consists of 
approximately 88 ac (36 ha) and includes 51 ac (21 ha) of land owned by 
the City of San Diego and 37 ac (15 ha) of private land. Subunit 5F 
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a 
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential 
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 5A and 5G. 
The vernal pools in this subunit occur in Proctor Valley on a flat area 
that is slightly elevated from the stream channel that runs through 
this valley. The vernal pools in this subunit to the west of Proctor 
Valley Road are severely impacted by OHV use, but the vernal pools to 
the east of Proctor Valley road remain relatively intact. Subunit 5F 
contains the physical and biological features that are essential to the 
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local 
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding 
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit 
may require special management considerations or protection to address 
threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as 
unauthorized recreational use or OHV use) that occur in the vernal pool 
basins. Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection 
section of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis 
habitat and potential management considerations.

Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes

    Subunit 5G is located east of the City of Chula Vista in San Diego 
County. This subunit is loosely bounded by Lower Otay Reservoir to the 
north and west and by the slopes of Otay Mountain to the southeast. 
Subunit 5G consists of 140 ac (57 ha) of land owned by State or local 
governments and meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat 
because this location supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia 
fossalis and provides potential connectivity between occurrences of N. 
fossalis in Subunits 5F and 5I. The vernal pool complexes in this 
subunit are located on the flat areas to the south of Lower Otay 
Reservoir. Subunit 5G contains the physical and biological features 
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including 
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). 
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
the species in this subunit may require special management 
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant 
species and activities (such as unauthorized recreational use) that 
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management 
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of 
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management 
considerations.

Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes

    Subunit 5H is located within the Otay Mesa Community planning area 
of the City of San Diego. Subunit 5H consists of approximately 139 ac 
(56 ha) that includes 41 ac (17 ha) of land owned by local governments 
and 98 ac (40 ha) of private land. Subunit 5H and Subunit 5I encompass 
the core habitat on Otay Mesa. As core habitat, this subunit contains a 
large area of habitat that supports sizable occurrences of Navarretia 
fossalis and provides potential connectivity between occurrences in 
Subunits 5G and 5I. This subunit contains several mesa-top vernal pool 
complexes on western Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J 2N, J 
2S, J 2W, J 4, J 13N, J 13S, J 14, J 33, J 34 as in Appendix D of City 
of San Diego, 2004). Subunit 5H contains the physical and biological 
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, 
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the 
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring 
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized 
recreational use or residential and commercial development) that occur 
in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management 
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of 
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management 
considerations.

Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes

    Subunit 5I is located in the City of San Diego. This subunit 
contains several mesa top vernal pool complexes on eastern Otay Mesa. 
Subunit 5I consists of 221 ac (89 ha) of private land. Subunit 5I and 
Subunit 5H encompass the core habitat on Otay Mesa. As core habitat, 
Subunit 5I contains a large area of habitat that supports sizable 
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity 
between occurrences in Subunits 5B and 5H.

[[Page 62211]]

 This subunit contains several mesa-top vernal pool complexes on 
eastern Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J 22, J 29, J 30, J 
31N, J 31S as in Appendix D of City of San Diego, 2004 and Service 
GIS). Subunit 5I contains the physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral 
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that 
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that 
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical 
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in 
this subunit may require special management considerations or 
protection to address threats from nonnative plant species and 
activities (such as unauthorized recreational use or residential and 
commercial development) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
    Unit 6 is located in western Riverside County and consists of three 
subunits totaling 5,477 ac (2,217 ha). This unit contains 1,504 ac (609 
ha) of land owned by the State of California's Department of Fish and 
Game and 3,973 ac (1,608 ha) of private land.

Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River

    Subunit 6A is generally located along the San Jacinto River near 
the cities of Hemet and Perris in Riverside County. This subunit is 
loosely bounded by Mystic Lake on the northeast and by the Perris 
Airport on the southwest. Subunit 6A consists of approximately 4,312 ac 
(1,745 ha), including 1,504 ac (609 ha) of land owned by State or local 
governments and 2,808 ac (1,136 ha) of private land. Subunit 6A 
encompasses core habitat along the San Jacinto River. As core habitat, 
this subunit contains a large area of habitat that supports sizable 
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity 
between occurrences in Subunits 6B and 6C. This subunit consists of 
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that occur along the San 
Jacinto River. Subunit 6A contains the physical and biological features 
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including 
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). 
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
the species in this subunit may require special management 
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant 
species and activities (such as manure dumping or flood control) that 
occur in the vernal pool basins and associated watershed area. Please 
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.

Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain

    Subunit 6B is located near the City of Hemet and west of the Hemet-
Ryan Airport in Riverside County. This subunit is loosely bounded by 
Devonshire Avenue on the north, the boundary for the City of Hemet on 
the east, train tracks on the south, and low-lying hills on the west. 
Subunit 6B consists of 930 ac (376 ha) of private land that encompasses 
the core habitat along the Upper Salt Creek drainage west of the City 
of Hemet. As core habitat, this subunit contains a large area of 
habitat that supports sizable occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and 
provides potential connectivity between occurrences in Subunits 6A and 
6C. This subunit consists of seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains 
not subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer jurisdiction. Subunit 6B 
contains the physical and biological features that are essential to the 
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local 
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding 
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit 
may require special management considerations or protection to address 
threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as manure 
dumping, grazing, flood control, or discing for vegetation control) 
that occur in the vernal pool basins and associated watershed area. 
Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section 
of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 
potential management considerations.

Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road Pools

    Subunit 6C is located in the City of Menifee in Riverside County, 
California. This subunit is loosely bounded by low lying hills north of 
Garbani Road on the north, Briggs Road on the east, Scott Road on the 
south, and Menifee Road on the west. Subunit 6C consists of 235 ac (95 
ha) of private land. This subunit meets our selection criteria as 
satellite habitat because this location supports a stable occurrence of 
Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity among 
occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 6A, 6B, and with Subunit 6D that 
we are excluding under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Application 
Section 4(b)(2) of the Action section). This subunit consists of two 
large vernal pools. Subunit 6C contains the physical and biological 
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, 
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the 
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring 
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special 
management considerations or protection to address threats from 
nonnative plant species and activities (such as manure dumping, 
residential or agricultural development, discing for vegetation 
control, or maintenance of existing pipelines) that occur in the vernal 
pool basins and associated watershed area. Please see the Special 
Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a 
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential 
management considerations.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the 
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are 
not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Decisions 
by the Fifth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have invalidated our 
definition of ``destruction or adverse modification'' (50 CFR 402.02) 
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 
F. 3d 1059 (9\th\ Cir 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5\th\ Cir 2001)), and we do not 
rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is 
likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the 
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse 
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the 
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain 
functional (or retain those physical and biological features that 
relate to the ability of the

[[Page 62212]]

area to periodically support the species) to serve its intended 
conservation role for the species (Service 2004a, p. 3).
    If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section 
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities 
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of the species or to destroy or adversely modify 
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species 
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) 
must enter into consultation with us. As a result of this consultation, 
we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through 
our issuance of:
    (1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but 
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or designated 
critical habitat; or
    (2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that are likely to 
adversely affect listed species or designated critical habitat.
    When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or 
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we also provide 
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are 
identifiable. We define ``Reasonable and prudent alternatives'' at 50 
CFR 402.02 as alternative actions identified during consultation that:
    (1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended 
purpose of the action,
    (2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal 
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
    (3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
    (4) Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid jeopardizing the 
continued existence of the listed species or destroying or adversely 
modifying critical habitat.
    Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project 
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs 
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are 
similarly variable.
    Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate 
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have 
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that 
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary 
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary 
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal 
agencies may need to request reinitiation of consultation with us on 
actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if those 
actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect 
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
    Federal activities that may affect Navarretia fossalis or its 
designated critical habitat require section 7 consultation under the 
Act. Activities on State, Tribal, local, or private lands requiring a 
Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(Corps) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et 
seq.) or a permit from us under section 10 of the Act) or involving 
some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal Highway 
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency) are subject to the section 7 consultation 
process. Federal actions not affecting listed species or critical 
habitat, and actions on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that are 
not federally funded, authorized, or permitted, do not require section 
7 consultations.

Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard

    The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is 
whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the 
affected critical habitat would remain functional to serve its intended 
conservation role for the species. Activities that may destroy or 
adversely modify critical habitat are those that alter the physical and 
biological features to an extent that appreciably reduces the 
conservation value of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. As 
discussed above, the role of critical habitat is to support the life 
history needs of the species and provide for the conservation of the 
species. For N. fossalis, this includes supporting viable occurrences 
and recovery of the species in core habitat areas and satellite habitat 
areas.
    Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and 
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical 
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or 
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such 
designation.
    Activities that, when carried out, funded, or authorized by a 
Federal agency, may affect critical habitat and, therefore, should 
result in consultation for Navarretia fossalis include, but are not 
limited to (please see Special Management Considerations or Protection 
section for a more detailed discussion on the impacts of these actions 
to the listed species):
    (1) Actions that would impact the ability of an ephemeral wetland 
to continue to provide habitat for Navarretia fossalis and other native 
species that require this specialized habitat type. Such activities 
could include, but are not limited to, water impoundment, stream 
channelization, water diversion, water withdrawal, and development 
activities. These activities could alter the biological and physical 
features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis that provide the 
appropriate habitat for the species by eliminating ponding habitat; 
changing the duration and frequency of the ponding events on which this 
species relies; making the habitat too wet, thus allowing obligate 
wetland species to become established; making the habitat too dry, thus 
allowing upland species to become established; causing large amounts of 
sediment or manure to be deposited in N. fossalis habitat; or causing 
increased erosion and incising of waterways.
    (2) Actions that would impact the soil and topography that cause 
water to pond during the winter and spring months. Such activities 
could include, but are not limited to, deep ripping of soils, 
trenching, soil compaction, and development activities. These 
activities could alter the biological and physical features essential 
to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that provide the appropriate 
habitat for the species by eliminating ponding habitat, impacting the 
impervious nature of the soil layer, or making the soil so impervious 
that water pools for an extended period that is detrimental to N. 
fossalis (as described in the PCEs).

Exemptions

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act

    The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) 
required each military installation that includes land and water 
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to 
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by 
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military 
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources 
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
    (1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation, 
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
    (2) A statement of goals and priorities;
    (3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented

[[Page 62213]]

to provide for these ecological needs; and
    (4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
    Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and 
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife 
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement, 
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and 
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. 
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as 
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ``The Secretary shall not 
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas 
owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its 
use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources management 
plan prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if 
the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit 
to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for 
designation.''
    We consult with the military on the development and implementation 
of INRMPs for installations with federally listed species. Any INRMPs 
developed by military installations located within the range of 
Navarretia fossalis and that contain those features essential to the 
species' conservation were analyzed for exemption under the authority 
of section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act.
    Both MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS Miramar have approved INRMPs that 
address Navarretia fossalis, and the Marine Corps (on both 
installations) has committed to work closely with us, California 
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and California Department of Parks 
and Recreation to continually refine the existing INRMPs as part of the 
Sikes Act's INRMP review process. In accordance with section 
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we determined that conservation efforts 
identified in the INRMPs will provide a benefit to N. fossalis 
occurring in habitats within or adjacent to MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS 
Miramar (see the following sections that detail this determination for 
each installation). Therefore, 213 ac (86 ha) of habitat on MCB Camp 
Pendleton and MCAS Miramar are exempt from this revised critical 
habitat for N. fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act.

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (MCB Camp Pendleton)

    In the previous final critical habitat designation for Navarretia 
fossalis (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the proposed revised 
critical habitat designation (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009), we exempted 
MCB Camp Pendleton from the designation of critical habitat. We based 
this decision on the conservation benefits to N. fossalis identified in 
the INRMP developed by MCB Camp Pendleton in November 2001 and the 
updated INRMP that was prepared by MCB Camp Pendleton in March 2007 
(Marine Corp Base Camp Pendleton 2007). We determined that conservation 
efforts identified in the INRMP provide a benefit to the occurrences of 
N. fossalis and vernal pool habitat occurring on MCB Camp Pendleton 
(Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 2007, Section 4, pp. 51-76). This 
conservation protects the 145 ac (59 ha) of habitat that we believe to 
be essential for the conservation of N. fossalis on Stuart Mesa and 
near the Wire Mountain Housing Complex. Therefore, lands containing 
features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis on this 
installation are exempt from this revised critical habitat for N. 
fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For more information on the 
conservation benefits afforded to N. fossalis at MCB Camp Pendleton, 
please see the Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section in 
the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27610).

Marine Corps Air Station Miramar (MCAS Miramar)

    In the previous final critical habitat designation for Navarretia 
fossalis (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the proposed revised 
critical habitat designation (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009), we exempted 
MCAS Miramar from the designation of critical habitat (70 FR 60658; 
October 18, 2005). We based this decision on the conservation benefits 
to N. fossalis identified in the INRMP developed by MCAS Miramar in May 
2000 and the updated INRMP prepared by MCAS Miramar in October 2006 
(Gene Stout and Associates et al. 2006). We determined that 
conservation efforts identified in the INRMP provide a benefit to the 
occurrences of N. fossalis and vernal pool habitat on the 69 ac (28 ha) 
of habitat on the western portion of MCAS Miramar (Gene Stout and 
Associates et al. 2006, Section 7, pp. 17-23). Therefore, lands 
containing features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis on 
this installation are exempt from the revised critical habitat for N. 
fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For more information on the 
conservation benefits afforded to N. fossalis at MCAS Miramar, please 
see the Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section in the 
proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27610).

Exclusions

Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

    Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must designate 
and revise critical habitat on the basis of the best available 
scientific data after taking into consideration the economic impact, 
national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying 
any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an 
area from critical habitat if he determines that the benefits of such 
exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the 
critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the best scientific 
data available, that the failure to designate such area as critical 
habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making that 
determination, the legislative history is clear that the Secretary has 
broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight 
to give to any factor.
    In the following paragraphs, we address a number of general issues 
that are relevant to our analysis under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from 
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, national 
security impacts, or any other relevant impacts. In considering whether 
to exclude a particular area from the designation, we must identify the 
benefits of including the area in the designation, identify the 
benefits of excluding the area from the designation, and determine 
whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion. 
If based on this analysis, we make this determination, then we can 
exclude the area only if such exclusion would not result in the 
extinction of the species.
    When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider 
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the 
protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of 
actions with a Federal nexus; 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

[[Page 62214]]

area is likely to result in long-term conservation; the continuation, 
strengthening, or encouragement of partnerships that result in 
conservation of listed species; or implementation of a management plan 
that provides equal to or more conservation than a critical habitat 
designation would provide. Specifically, when evaluating a conservation 
plan we consider, among other factors: whether the plan is finalized; 
how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical and 
biological features; whether the conservation management strategies and 
actions contained in a management plan are in place and there is a 
strong likelihood they will be implemented into the future; whether 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 evaluating the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of 
exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to determine whether the 
benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If we determine that 
they do, we then determine whether exclusion would result in 
extinction. If exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result 
in extinction, we will not exclude it from the designation.
    In the case of Navarretia fossalis, the revised critical habitat 
designation does not include any Tribal lands or trust resources. 
However, this revised critical habitat designation does include some 
lands covered by three completed HCPs for N. fossalis. No new HCP or 
conservation plan covering the distribution of this species has been 
approved since the proposed revised designation that published in the 
Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
    Based on the information provided by entities seeking exclusion, as 
well as other comments we received, we evaluated whether certain lands 
in the proposed critical habitat Units 3 and 6 were appropriate for 
exclusion from this final designation.
    After considering the following areas under section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act, we are excluding them from the critical habitat designation for 
Navarretia fossalis: Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego Subarea 
Plan under the MSCP, and Subunits 6D and 6E within the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP (see Table 5 below). As described in the 
following exclusion analyses for the two HCPs, we made this 
determination because we believe that:
    (1) Their value for N. fossalis conservation will be preserved for 
the foreseeable future by existing protective actions, and
    (2) They are appropriate for exclusion under the ``other relevant 
factor'' provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.

Table 5. Areas being excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from this
                  revised critical habitat designation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subunit                           Area excluded
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the San Diego MSCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A. Santa Fe Valley: Crosby Estates         5 ac (2 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal County of San Diego Subarea Plan   5 ac (2 ha)
 under the San Diego MSCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Western Riverside County MSHCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6D. Skunk Hollow                            158 ac (64 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6E. Mesa de Burro                           708 ac (287 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal for Western Riverside County       866 ac (351 ha)
 MSHCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                       871 ac (353 ha)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.

Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Factors Habitat Conservation Plans
    We believe that the benefits of excluding from critical habitat 
portions of the essential habitat we identified within the County of 
San Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP and the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP outweigh the benefits of including these areas; therefore, we are 
excluding these areas from this revised critical habitat designation. 
Lands covered by the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP, and portions of the 
lands covered by the County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP, 
and the Western Riverside County MSHCP do not result in the benefits of 
exclusion outweighing the benefits of inclusion under section 4(b)(2) 
of the Act, as described in detail below.

Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP)-- San Diego Multiple Habitat 
Conservation Program (MHCP).

    We considered exclusion of a portion of essential habitat covered 
by the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) 
of the Act. The lands that were under consideration for exclusion 
within the City of Carlsbad include a portion of one vernal pool 
complex located east of the railroad tracks at the Poinsettia Lane 
Commuter Station. The vernal pool complex is partially on land that is 
covered by the Carlsbad HMP (i.e., the 3 ac (1 ha) considered for 
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act) and partially on land that 
is owned by the North County Transportation District (6 ac (2 ha)), 
which is not a participating entity to the Carlsbad HMP and was not 
considered for exclusion. We determined that the benefits of inclusion 
for 3 ac (1 ha) of Unit 2 lands within the Carlsbad HMP area are 
greater than the benefits of exclusion. In making our final decision 
with regard to these HMP-covered lands, we considered several factors, 
including our relationship with the City of Carlsbad, our relationship 
with other MHCP stakeholders, existing consultations, conservation 
measures in place on these lands that benefit Navarretia fossalis, 
implementation of long-term management strategies, and impacts to 
current and future

[[Page 62215]]

partnerships. We recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined 
in the Carlsbad HMP will be implemented eventually on covered lands as 
the plan is carried out regardless of critical habitat designation. 
This vernal pool complex in Unit 2 is also benefiting from conservation 
efforts as a result of actions associated with four other federally 
listed vernal pool species (i.e., San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 
sandiegonensis) and its designated critical habitat, and Riverside 
fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) and its designated critical 
habitat, and Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii (San Diego button-
celery), and Orcuttia californica (California Orcutt grass)). However, 
the 3 ac (1 ha) portion considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) 
of the Act is not conserved and managed for the long-term protection of 
the species and its habitat at this time. Once this area is conserved 
and managed, it will help with the long-term protection of this vernal 
pool complex, not only for N. fossalis, but also the four other 
federally endangered vernal pool species that already receive 
protection under the plan.
    Protection of this vernal pool area is particularly important 
considering the surrounding area has already been developed. 
Conservation measures for lands within the Carlsbad HMP are outlined in 
the Carlsbad HMP biological opinion (Service 2004c, pp. 312-316). We 
recognize that these lands have been avoided by development associated 
with the Water's End housing project and have been identified as open 
space for the protection of the vernal pool habitat, as outlined in a 
consultation conducted with the Corps (Service 1994) prior to the 
development of the Carlsbad HMP. The developer of the Water's End 
project agreed to grant a conservation easement over the Navarretia 
fossalis habitat to CDFG and provide a management plan with an 
endowment ($100,000) to the City of Carlsbad for management and 
monitoring in perpetuity. Additionally, the land-owners recently 
completed a 5-year restoration of the upland portion of the vernal pool 
complex with coastal sage scrub vegetation (City of Carlsbad 2009, p. 
7). However, a conservation easement has not yet been placed over the 
property and long-term management of the property is not yet in place. 
Thus, we made the determination that the benefits of inclusion outweigh 
the benefits of exclusion and have included all lands in this area 
(i.e., 9 ac (4 ha in Unit 2)) as critical habitat for N. fossalis. We 
recognize and appreciate the conservation actions taken to date at this 
location, such as the $100,000 provided by the Water's End project 
along with an additional $50,000 from the North Coast Transit District 
that are being held by CDFG and will be used to develop and implement 
long-term management to benefit vernal pool species occurring at this 
site, including N. fossalis. We look forward to working with the North 
Coast Transit District and CDFG in the near future to ensure that both 
conservation and long-term management are implemented for N. fossalis 
and its essential habitat at this location.

San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)--County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan.

    We determined approximately 86 ac (35 ha) of habitat in Subunits 
3A, 5B, 5F, and 5I within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan of the 
MSCP contain the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may require special management 
considerations or protection and therefore, these lands meet the 
definition of critical habitat under the Act. In making our final 
decision with regard to lands within the County of San Diego Subarea 
Plan, we considered several factors, including our relationship with 
the participating MSCP jurisdiction, our relationship with other MSCP 
stakeholders, non-covered activities, existing consultations, long-term 
conservation measures management in place on these lands that benefit 
N. fossalis, and impacts to current and future partnerships. We 
recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined in the County of 
San Diego Subarea Plan will be implemented as the plan is carried out 
regardless of whether covered areas are designated as critical habitat. 
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are excluding 5 ac (2 ha) of land 
in Subunit 3A covered by the County of San Diego Subarea Plan from this 
revised critical habitat designation that are currently assured of 
long-term conservation and management. The remaining 81 ac (33 ha) of 
land in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I covered by the County of San Diego 
Subarea Plan are not excluded, and we have designated these areas as 
critical habitat for N. fossalis.
    The MSCP is a subregional HCP made up of several subarea plans that 
has been in place for more than a decade. The subregional plan area 
encompasses approximately 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) (County of San Diego 
1997, p. 1-1; MSCP 1998, pp. 2-1, and 4-2 to 4-4) and provides for 
conservation of 85 federally listed and sensitive species (``covered 
species'') through the establishment and management of approximately 
171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of preserve lands within the Multi-Habitat 
Planning Area (MHPA) (City of San Diego) and Pre-Approved Mitigation 
Areas (PAMA) (County of San Diego). The MSCP was developed in support 
of applications for incidental take permits for several federally 
listed species by 12 participating jurisdictions and many other 
stakeholders in southwestern San Diego County. Under the umbrella of 
the MSCP, each of the 12 participating jurisdictions is required to 
prepare a subarea plan that implements the goals of the MSCP within 
that particular jurisdiction. Navarretia fossalis was evaluated in the 
subregional plan as well as the permitted subarea plans.
    Upon completion of the plan that identifies where mitigation 
activities should be focused, approximately 171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of 
the 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) MSCP plan area will be preserved (MSCP 
1998, pp. 2-1 and 4-2 to 4-4). San Diego County Subarea Plan identifies 
areas where mitigation activities should be focused to assemble its 
preserve areas (i.e., PAMA). Those areas of the MSCP preserve that are 
already conserved, as well as those areas that are designated for 
inclusion in the preserve under the plan, are referred to as the 
``preserve area'' in this revised critical habitat designation. When 
the preserve is completed, the public sector (i.e., Federal, State, and 
local governments, and general public) will have contributed 108,750 ac 
(44,010 ha) (63.3 percent) to the preserve, of which 81,750 ac (33,083 
ha) (48 percent) was existing public land when the MSCP was established 
and 27,000 ac (10,927 ha) (16 percent) will have been acquired. At 
completion, the private sector will have contributed 63,170 ac (25,564 
ha) (37 percent) to the preserve as part of the development process, 
either through avoidance of impacts or as compensatory mitigation for 
impacts to biological resources outside the preserve. Currently and in 
the future, Federal and State governments, local jurisdictions, special 
districts, and managers of privately owned lands will manage and 
monitor their lands in the preserve for species and habitat protection 
(MSCP 1998, pp. 2-1 and 4-2 to 4-4).
    We considered excluding lands within the County of San Diego 
Subarea Plan. After reviewing the areas covered by the County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan, we are excluding approximately 5 ac (2 ha) in 
Subunit 3A that are currently conserved and managed. The areas within 
the plan boundaries of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan in

[[Page 62216]]

Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I were not excluded because we do not believe 
that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion at 
this time. The lands in these subunits are not currently conserved 
under this HCP, and non-covered activities (such as illegal OHV use) 
that could adversely affect Navarretia fossalis and its essential 
habitat are occurring on these lands. Therefore, we believe the 
conservation benefit of including these areas as critical habitat for 
N. fossalis may be significant. Additionally, portions of Subunits 5B 
and 5I are designated as major/minor Amendment Areas under the subarea 
plan and their conservation depends upon the approval of future 
amendments to the plan. Therefore, we did not consider these major/
minor amendment areas for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    The County of San Diego Subarea Plan provides additional 
conservation for the Navarretia fossalis habitat in Subunit 3A (Crosby 
Estates) beyond what occurred when the area was initially developed and 
conserved (i.e., in 1995 prior to the Subarea Plan development). 
Subunit 3A consists of 5 ac (2 ha) of private land within the northern 
portion of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan. This area was set 
aside in 1995 when the surrounding area was developed, and the vernal 
pool habitat area was restored and managed for a 5-year period to 
ensure the conservation of N. fossalis and other vernal pool species. 
Under the County of San Diego Subarea Plan, the area will continue to 
receive periodic monitoring beyond the initial 5-year period. The long-
term management requirements applicable for this area are explained in 
the ``The Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe, Habitat Management Plan, Annual 
Report, 2008'' (Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2008, pp. 1-6). Such 
management will include monitoring and management of invasive species, 
implementing erosion control measures, monitoring and removal of trash/
debris, creating natural fencing barriers to address unauthorized off-
trail activity, installing signage, and developing educational website 
and materials (Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2008, pp. 4-15).
Benefits of Inclusion--County of San Diego Subarea Plan
    The principle benefit of including an area in a critical habitat 
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to ensure actions 
they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to result in the 
destruction or adverse modification of any designated critical habitat, 
the regulatory standard of section 7 of the Act under which 
consultation is completed. Federal agencies must consult with the 
Service on actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid 
destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. Federal agencies 
must also consult with us on actions that may affect a listed species 
and refrain from undertaking actions that are likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of such species. The analysis of effects to 
critical habitat is a separate and different analysis from that of the 
effects to the species. Therefore, the difference in outcomes of these 
two analyses represents the regulatory benefit of critical habitat. For 
some species (including Navarretia fossalis), and in some locations, 
the outcome of these analyses will be similar, because effects to 
habitat will often also result in effects to the species. However, the 
regulatory standard is different, as the jeopardy analysis investigates 
the action's impact to survival and recovery of the species, while the 
adverse modification analysis investigates the action's effects to the 
designated habitat's contribution to conservation. This will, in many 
instances, lead to different results and different regulatory 
requirements. Thus, critical habitat designations may provide greater 
benefits to the recovery of a species than would listing alone.
    Critical habitat may provide a regulatory benefit for Navarretia 
fossalis when there is a Federal nexus present for a project that might 
adversely modify critical habitat. Also, where federally listed animal 
species, such as the Riverside fairy shrimp or San Diego fairy shrimp 
co-occur with N. fossalis and are likely to be taken by a proposed 
action that otherwise lacks a Federal nexus, the project proponent 
would be required to obtain an incidental take permit under section 10 
of the Act, thus resulting an intra-Service section 7 consultation that 
would also include N. fossalis. In the areas that we considered for 
exclusion within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan, Riverside fairy 
shrimp or San Diego fairy shrimp are present in Subunits 3A, 5F, and 
5I. In this context, we anticipate that projects that meet the 
definition of critical habitat within Subunits 3A, 5F, and 5I will 
require a consultation with the Service regardless of whether critical 
habitat is designated. It is possible that in Subunit 5B (where no 
federally listed fairy shrimp are known to exist) the designation of 
critical habitat will result in an increase in the likelihood that 
consultations with the Service will occur. It is also possible that the 
number of consultations that occur in the local watershed areas of 
Subunits 5F and 5I would increase by approximately 20 percent as a 
result of critical habitat designation for N. fossalis within the non-
ponded/watershed areas (Service 2009, p. 2). Therefore, for Subunit 5B 
and to a certain extent Subunits 5F and 5I, it is probable that 
conservation achieved under the Act would increase if the areas are 
designated as critical habitat for N. fossalis, resulting in a small 
regulatory benefit associated with the designation of critical habitat 
in these subunits.
    When consulting under section 7 of the Act in designated critical 
habitat, we conduct independent analyses for jeopardy and adverse 
modification. However, with regard to vernal pool species such as 
Navarretia fossalis, the outcomes of those analyses (in terms of 
potential restrictions on development) are almost always the same. In 
general, a properly functioning hydrologic regime is critical to 
sustain listed vernal pool species and their immediate vernal pool 
habitat (i.e., local watershed). Avoidance or adequate minimization of 
impacts to the wetland area and its associated watershed (which 
collectively creates the hydrologic regime necessary to support N. 
fossalis) is important not only to enable the critical habitat unit to 
carry out its conservation function (i.e., to avoid adverse 
modification), but also to avoid jeopardy to the listed species. 
Navarretia fossalis is completely dependent on a properly functioning 
vernal pool system for its survival; therefore, it is not possible to 
differentiate conservation measures needed to avoid adverse 
modification of critical habitat from those needed to avoid jeopardy to 
the species. Impacts to both wetland features where N. fossalis occurs 
and to the associated local watershed necessary to maintain those 
wetland features should generally be avoided to prevent jeopardy to N. 
fossalis or to prevent adverse modification to N. fossalis critical 
habitat. Service biologists regularly negotiate with project proponents 
to avoid impacts to vernal pool and ephemeral wetland habitat. Whenever 
possible; these negotiations include conservation measures that would 
avoid impacts to both the pools and the associated local watershed 
area. Therefore, we do not believe conservation achieved under the Act 
would differ greatly whether or not the areas are designated as 
critical habitat for N. fossalis. However, while the outcome of 
individual section 7 consultation may not differ, we believe 
designation of lands in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I as critical habitat may 
provide a small regulatory benefit by increasing

[[Page 62217]]

the likelihood and number of consultations in these areas and thereby 
increase the overall level of conservation for N. fossalis.
    Another possible benefit of including lands in a critical habitat 
designation is the educational value of the designation to landowners 
and the public regarding the potential conservation value of an area. 
For example, a critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis may 
help local governments or the public focus conservation efforts on 
areas of high conservation value for this species. Past efforts have 
highlighted the importance of the essential habitat for N. fossalis 
within the jurisdiction of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan. These 
past efforts include public meetings and opportunities for public 
comment that occurred during the process of creating the HCP, the 
development of the Habitat Management Plan for the Crosby at Rancho 
Santa Fe, and development of our Recovery Plan for Southern California 
Vernal Pool Species (Service 1998). While these efforts have helped to 
identify important conservation areas for N. fossalis in the County of 
San Diego Subarea Plan, some of these areas (i.e., Subunits 5B, 5F, and 
5I) still suffer impacts from activities such as grazing on non-
agricultural lands (an activity covered by the plan), and illegal off-
highway vehicle (OHV) use. By designating critical habitat in these 
areas that continue to receive impacts, we will better educate the 
public regarding these and other threats to N. fossalis and the 
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the 
species. The educational information provided in this revised rule and 
the 2005 final rule (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) can be used by the 
public to learn about N. fossalis priority conservation areas. The 
inclusion in revised critical habitat of the approximately 81 ac (33 
ha) of lands in subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I that are not currently 
protected and managed would formally identify these areas as essential 
for the conservation and recovery of N. fossalis and in doing so 
provide a significant educational benefit to the conservation of N. 
fossalis. In contrast, we believe the educational benefit of 
designating Subunit 3A would be insignificant because this area is 
already conserved.
    We considered that the designation of critical habitat for 
Navarretia fossalis may strengthen or reinforce some of the provisions 
in other State and Federal laws, such as the California Environmental 
Quality Act (CEQA) or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These 
laws analyze the potential for projects to significantly affect aspects 
of the environment. In this case for N. fossalis, vernal pools and 
vernal pool species have been a focus of conservation in San Diego 
County for more than 20 years and have been addressed in CEQA and NEPA 
throughout this time period; therefore, we do not believe designation 
of critical habitat for N. fossalis will provide a significant 
additional benefit to analyses conducted under these laws.
    In summary, we believe designating Subunits 3A, 5B, 5F, and 5I as 
revised critical habitat may provide some regulatory benefits under 
section 7 of the Act, particularly in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I, where 
designation may increase the likelihood and number of consultations and 
thus the overall level of conservation for this species and its 
essential habitat, but we do not believe that the outcome of these 
consultations will change greatly with the designation of critical 
habitat. Additionally, we believe that there may be a significant 
benefit associated with the designation of critical habitat due to the 
educational component provided by critical habitat in areas that are 
not currently conserved; specifically, we believe that these benefits 
are significant in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I.
Benefits of Exclusion--County of San Diego Subarea Plan
    We believe significant benefits would be realized by forgoing 
designation of critical habitat on lands covered by the County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan including:
    (1) Continuance and strengthening of our effective working 
relationships with all MSCP jurisdictions and stakeholders to promote 
conservation of Navarretia fossalis and its habitat;
    (2) Allowance for continued meaningful collaboration and 
cooperation in working toward recovering this species, including 
conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur;
    (3) Encouragement for other jurisdictions to complete subarea plans 
under the MSCP (including the City of Santee); and
    (4) Encouragement of additional HCP and other conservation plan 
development in the future on other private lands for this and other 
federally listed and sensitive species.
    The County of San Diego Subarea Plan provides substantial 
protection and management for Navarretia fossalis and the physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and 
addresses conservation issues from a coordinated, integrated 
perspective rather than a piecemeal, project-by-project approach (as 
would occur under sections 7 and 9 of the Act). Many landowners 
perceive critical habitat as an unfair and unnecessary regulatory 
burden given the expense and time involved in developing and 
implementing complex regional and jurisdiction-wide HCPs, such as the 
MSCP. Exclusion of these lands from critical habitat could help 
preserve the partnerships we developed with the County of San Diego in 
the development of the MSCP and County of San Diego Subarea Plan, and 
foster future partnerships and development of future HCPs.
    The primary benefit of excluding lands owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan permittees from 
critical habitat under the MSCP is strengthening of our existing 
partnership with the County of San Diego. The County of San Diego 
requested that we exclude lands covered by their subarea plan during 
the public comment period. If the County of San Diego believes that a 
revised critical habitat designation will impact its ability to 
implement their subarea plan, then designating County of San Diego 
lands may affect our partnership with them.
    In summary, we believe that excluding lands covered by the County 
of San Diego Subarea Plan from critical habitat provides the 
significant benefit of maintaining existing regional HCP partnerships 
and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against Benefits of Inclusion--County of 
San Diego Subarea Plan
    We reviewed and evaluated the benefits of inclusion and benefits of 
exclusion for all lands within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan 
under the MSCP proposed as critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. 
The benefits of including lands currently conserved under the MSCP in 
the critical habitat designation are small. All of the approximately 5 
ac (2 ha) of land in Subunit 3A are already conserved and managed for 
the preservation of vernal pool species, including N. fossalis. 
Therefore, designating this area as critical habitat is unlikely to 
provide significant regulatory or educational benefits. This area is 
currently being managed under a habitat management plan developed in 
part because the area is covered by the County of San Diego Subarea 
Plan. The exclusion of conserved areas of Subunit 3A will benefit the 
partnership that we have with the County of San Diego and encourage the 
conservation of lands associated with the development and 
implementation of future HCPs.

[[Page 62218]]

    Including lands in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I in the critical habitat 
designation for Navarretia fossalis that are not currently conserved or 
protected from activities such as illegal OHV use and unregulated 
grazing in critical habitat will provide additional regulatory 
protection for N. fossalis and its essential habitat under section 7(a) 
of the Act when there is a Federal nexus, and designation will act as 
an educational tool for the public regarding the conservation of N. 
fossalis. Therefore, designating these areas as critical habitat for N. 
fossalis is likely to provide additional regulatory benefits as well as 
a significant educational benefit to the species. We believe that 
excluding these areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act would provide a 
significant benefit to the partnership that we have with the County of 
San Diego, but we believe that the conservation benefits of including 
these lands as critical habitat outweighs the benefit of exclusion.
    In summary, we find that the benefits of excluding lands in areas 
that are conserved and managed for the purpose of protecting Navarretia 
fossalis (Subunit 3A) outweigh the benefits of including those lands as 
critical habitat for N. fossalis. We find that the benefits of 
including lands that are being impacted by activities covered under the 
County of San Diego Subarea Plan and are not yet conserved and managed 
(Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I) outweigh the benefits of excluding those 
lands as critical habitat for N. fossalis.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan
    We determined that the exclusion of approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of 
habitat in Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan from 
the revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis 
will not result in extinction of the species. The County of San Diego 
Subarea Plan and ``The Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe Habitat Management 
Plan'' provide protection and long-term management of lands that meet 
the definition of critical habitat for N. fossalis in Subunit 3A. 
Additionally, the jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act for N. 
fossalis in Subunit 3A provides assurances that the species will not go 
extinct as a result of exclusion from critical habitat designation. The 
consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2) and the attendant 
requirement to avoid jeopardy to N. fossalis for projects with a 
Federal nexus will provide significant protection to the species. 
Therefore, based on the above discussion we are excluding approximately 
5 ac (2 ha) of habitat in Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego 
Subarea Plan from this revised critical habitat designation.

Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 
(Western Riverside County MSHCP)

    We determined that approximately 6,343 ac (2,567 ha) of land owned 
by or under the jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP contain the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may require special 
management considerations or protection, and therefore, these lands 
meet the definition of critical habitat under the Act. In making our 
final decision with regard to these lands, we considered several 
factors including our relationships with participating jurisdictions, 
our relationships with other stakeholders, existing consultations, 
conservation measures and management in place on these lands that 
benefit N. fossalis, and impacts to current and future partnerships. We 
recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined in the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP will be implemented as the plan is carried out 
regardless if covered areas are designated as revised critical habitat. 
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are excluding 866 ac (351 ha) of 
land meeting the definition of critical habitat owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees within 
Unit 6 (Subunits 6D and 6E) from this revised critical habitat 
designation. We are including 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of land that meets 
the definition of critical habitat owned by or under the jurisdiction 
of Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees within Unit 6 (Subunits 
6A, 6B, and 6C) in this revised critical habitat designation. As 
described in our section 4(b)(2) analysis below, we reached this 
determination in consideration of the benefits associated with the 
designation of each area in revised critical habitat balanced against 
the benefits of excluding the area in the final critical habitat 
designation, including such factors as (but not limited to) the 
existence of co-occurring listed species (such as the San Diego and 
Riverside fairy shrimp species) resulting in redundant conservation 
measures, implementation of conservation measures, and non-covered 
activities.
    The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a large-scale, multi-
jurisdictional HCP encompassing approximately 1.26 million ac (510,000 
ha) of land in western Riverside County. The Western Riverside County 
MSHCP addresses 146 listed and unlisted ``covered species,'' including 
Navarretia fossalis. Participants in the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
include 14 cities; the County of Riverside, including the Riverside 
County Flood Control and Water Conservation Agency (County Flood 
Control), Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside County 
Parks and Open Space District, and Riverside County Waste Department; 
California Department of Parks and Recreation; and the California 
Department of Transportation. The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a 
multi-species conservation program that minimizes and mitigates the 
expected loss of habitat and associated incidental take of covered 
species. On June 22, 2004, the Service issued a single incidental take 
permit (Service 2004b, TE-088609-0) under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 
Act to 22 permittees under the Western Riverside County MSHCP for a 
period of 75 years.
    The Western Riverside County MSHCP will establish approximately 
153,000 ac (61,917 ha) of new conservation lands (Additional Reserve 
Lands) to complement the approximate 347,000 ac (140,426 ha) of pre-
existing natural and open space areas (Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) lands) 
in the plan area. These PQP lands include those under Federal 
ownership, primarily managed by the United States Forest Service (USFS) 
and Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and also permittee-owned or 
controlled open-space areas, primarily managed by the State and 
Riverside County. Collectively, the Additional Reserve Lands and PQP 
lands form the overall Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation 
Area. The configuration of the 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of Additional 
Reserve Lands is not mapped or precisely identified (``hard-lined'') in 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Rather, it is based on textual 
descriptions of habitat conservation necessary to meet the conservation 
goals for all covered species within the bounds of the approximately 
310,000 ac (125,453 ha) Criteria Area and is interpreted as 
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP takes place.
    Specific conservation objectives in the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP for Navarretia fossalis include providing 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of 
occupied or suitable habitat for the species in the MSHCP Conservation 
Area. This acreage goal can be attained through acquisition or other 
dedications of land assembled from within the Criteria Area (i.e., the 
Additional Reserve Lands) or Narrow Endemic Plan Species Survey Area 
and

[[Page 62219]]

through coordinated management of existing PQP lands. We internally 
mapped a ``Conceptual Reserve Design,'' which illustrates existing PQP 
lands and predicts the geographic distribution of the Additional 
Reserve Lands based on our interpretation of the textual descriptions 
of habitat conservation necessary to meet conservation goals. Our 
Conceptual Reserve Design was intended to predict one possible future 
configuration of the eventual approximately 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of 
Additional Reserve Lands. The Western Riverside County MSHCP states 
that at least 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of vernal pool and playa habitat 
suitable for N. fossalis within the San Jacinto River, Mystic Lake, and 
Salt Creek areas will be included within the MSHCP Conservation Area 
(Service 2004b, p. 376; FWS-WRIV-870.19).
    Preservation and management of approximately 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of 
Navarretia fossalis habitat under the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
will contribute to the conservation and ultimate recovery of this 
species. Navarretia fossalis is threatened primarily by agricultural 
activities, development, manure dumping (Roberts 2009, pp. 2-14), and 
fuel modification actions within the plan area (Service 2004b, pp. 369-
378). The Western Riverside County MSHCP will remove and reduce threats 
to N. fossalis and the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of the species as the plan is implemented by placing 
large blocks of occupied and unoccupied habitat into preservation 
throughout the Conservation Area. Areas identified for preservation and 
conservation include 13 of the known locations of the species at Skunk 
Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, 
floodplains of the San Jacinto River from the Ramona Expressway to 
Railroad Canyon, and upper Salt Creek west of Hemet.
    The Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation Area will maintain 
floodplain processes along the San Jacinto River and along Salt Creek 
to provide for the distribution of Navarretia fossalis to shift over 
time as hydrologic conditions and seed bank sources change. 
Additionally, the Western Riverside County MSHCP requires surveys for 
N. fossalis as part of the project review process for public and 
private projects where suitable habitat is present within a defined 
narrow endemic species survey area (see Narrow Endemic Species Survey 
Area Map, Figure 6-1 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume I, 
in Dudek 2003). For locations with positive survey results for N. 
fossalis, 90 percent of those portions of the property that provide 
long-term conservation value for the species will be avoided until it 
is demonstrated that the conservation objectives for the species are 
met. Once the objectives are met, avoided areas would be evaluated to 
determine whether they should be released for development or included 
in the MSHCP Conservation Area (see Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant 
Species; Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.3, in 
Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003).
    The survey requirements, avoidance and minimization measures, and 
management for Navarretia fossalis and its PCEs provided for in the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP are expected to benefit this species on 
public and private lands covered by the plan. We determined that 
approximately 6,343 ac (2,567 ha) of private and permittee-owned or 
controlled PQP lands in Unit 6 (Subunits 6A through 6E), within the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area, meet the definition of 
critical habitat for N. fossalis. Projects in areas meeting the 
definition of critical habitat for N. fossalis conducted or approved by 
Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees are subject to the 
conservation requirements of the MSHCP. For projects that may impact N. 
fossalis, various HCP policies (i.e., Narrow Endemic Plant Species 
Policy, and the Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Policy in Dudek and 
Associates, Inc. 2003) provide additional conservation requirements.
    The Western Riverside County MSHCP incorporates several processes 
that allow for Service oversight and participation in program 
implementation. These processes include:
    (1) Consultation with the Service on a long-term management and 
monitoring plan;
    (2) Submission of annual monitoring reports;
    (3) Annual status meetings with the Service; and
    (4) Submission of annual implementation reports to the Service 
(Service 2004b, pp. 9-10).
    Below, we provide a brief analysis of the lands in Unit 6 that we 
are excluding under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and lands we are 
including in the revised critical habitat designation, and how each 
area is covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP or other 
conservation measures.
    Two of the subunits, Subunit 6D (Skunk Hollow) and Subunit 6E (Mesa 
de Burro), consist of lands that are managed and already in permanent 
conservation. The majority of Subunit 6D was conserved as a result of 
the Rancho Bella Vista HCP (Rancho Bella Vista 1999, p. 2; CNLM 2009a, 
p. 1) and the remainder of the land in Subunit 6D was conserved as a 
result of the Assessment District 161 HCP (CNLM 2009b, p. 1), both HCPs 
of which were incorporated into the larger, subregional Western 
Riverside County MSHCP upon its completion. In total, 100 percent of 
the lands in Subunit 6D are conserved and managed specifically for the 
purpose of preserving the vernal pool habitat. Subunit 6E is conserved 
as part of the Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve. This Reserve has 
four landowners: the CDFG, the County of Riverside, the Metropolitan 
Water District of Southern California, and The Nature Conservancy. The 
landowners and the Service (which owns no land on the Plateau) signed a 
cooperative management agreement on April 16, 1991 (Dangermond and 
Associates, Inc. 1991), and meet regularly to implement management of 
the Reserve (Riverside County Parks 2009, p. 2). The vernal pools 
within Subunit 6E are managed and monitored to preserve the unique 
vernal pool plants and animals that occur on the Santa Rosa Plateau.
    The other three units (Subunit 6A, 6B, and 6C) are not conserved or 
managed for Navarretia fossalis at this time; however, as the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP is implemented, we believe that additional areas 
in these subunits may be conserved. Subunit 6A is 99 percent within the 
Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), and Subunits 6B and 
6C are entirely within the NEPSSA. Therefore, biological surveys for N. 
fossalis will occur prior to development of any suitable habitat within 
these subunits. Furthermore, Subunits 6A and 6B have additional 
protections in place either from past conservation efforts (such as the 
establishment of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area and the Metropolitan 
Water District Upper Salt Creek Wetland Preserve), or through 
additional project review requirements within the Criteria Area (Joint 
Project/Acquisition Review Process as described in the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP (Service 2004b, pp. 23, 25; Western Riverside 
County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.6.2 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 
2003, pp. 6-82-6-84)). We anticipate that these areas will receive 
management that would benefit N. fossalis at some point in the near 
future; however, at this time these areas do not receive active 
management that would benefit N. fossalis, as described further below.
    A large portion of Subunit 6A (1,504 ac (609 ha), or approximately 
35 percent) is within the San Jacinto

[[Page 62220]]

Wildlife Area, a wildlife area owned and operated by CDFG. This area 
consists of restored wetlands that provide habitat for waterfowl and 
wading birds, and seasonally flooded vernal plain habitat along the San 
Jacinto River north of the Ramona Expressway that supports Navarretia 
fossalis. Though conserved from development, the CDFG has not 
implemented a management plan that is beneficial to N. fossalis (E. 
Konno, CDFG Biologist, pers. comm. 2010) . In addition to the portion 
of Subunit 6A owned by CDFG, 68 percent (2,919 ac (1,181 ha)) of the 
remaining land is within the Criteria Area. Projects in this area will 
be implemented through the Joint Project Review Process to ensure that 
the requirements of the MSHCP permit and the Implementing Agreement are 
properly met (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.6.2 
in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-82); however, these areas are 
not currently conserved and managed to benefit N. fossalis.
    The majority of Subunit 6B is within the Criteria Area (56 percent; 
525 ac (212 ha) out of a total 943 ac (382 ha)) and projects in this 
area will be implemented through the Joint Project Review Process. A 
portion of this subunit is in the area referred to as West Hemet, which 
is under the jurisdiction of the City of Hemet. Although the West Hemet 
area is not conserved, the City is actively working on addressing 
issues on sensitive vernal pool resources (such as updating the general 
plan), and recently implemented an ordinance against manure dumping, 
which is a threat to the species in this subunit (see the Special 
Management Considerations and Protection section).
    Subunit 6C is not within the Criteria Area for the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP; however, impacts to the pools in this subunit 
should be avoided, minimized, or offset through implementation of the 
Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and 
Vernal Pools guidelines and NEPSSA guidelines. For example, the NEPSSA 
guidelines include protection measures that require surveys in suitable 
habitat for narrow endemic species in an attempt to find areas that 
should be considered as priorities for Western Riverside County MSHCP 
Conservation Area acquisition (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 
1, section 6.0 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003). Additionally, for 
populations identified in NEPSSA surveys, impacts to 90 percent of 
those portions of the property that provide for long-term conservation 
value of the identified Narrow Endemic Plant Species shall be avoided 
until it is demonstrated that Conservation goals for the particular 
species are met (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 
6.1.3 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-39). The Protection of 
Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools 
guidelines require assessments of potentially significant project 
effects as required by CEQA (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, 
section 6.1.2 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-20).
The Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP
    The principle benefit of including an area in a critical habitat 
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to ensure actions 
they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to result in the 
destruction or adverse modification of any designated critical habitat, 
the regulatory standard of section 7(a)(2) of the Act under which 
consultation is completed. Federal agencies must consult with the 
Service on actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid 
destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. Federal agencies 
must also consult with us on actions that may affect a listed species 
and refrain from undertaking actions that are likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of such species. The analysis of effects to 
critical habitat is a separate and different analysis from that of the 
effects to the species. Therefore, the difference in outcomes of these 
two analyses represents the regulatory benefit of critical habitat. For 
some species (including Navarretia fossalis), and in some locations, 
the outcome of these analyses will be similar, because effects to 
habitat will often also result in effects to the species. However, the 
regulatory standard is different, as the jeopardy analysis investigates 
the action's impact to survival and recovery of the species, while the 
adverse modification analysis investigates the action's effects to the 
designated habitat's contribution to conservation. This will, in many 
instances, lead to different results and different regulatory 
requirements. Thus, critical habitat designations may provide greater 
benefits to the recovery of a species than would listing alone.
    Federal agencies must consult with us on actions that may affect 
critical habitat and must avoid destroying or adversely modifying 
critical habitat. Critical habitat may provide a regulatory benefit for 
Navarretia fossalis when there is a Federal nexus present for a project 
that might adversely modify critical habitat. However, all of the 
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of land we are excluding within Units 6 
(Subunits 6D and 6E) are protected open space or on private property, 
with no expected Federal nexus, including no areas connected to 
navigable waters that would typically result in a U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers' Federal nexus. For N. fossalis critical habitat where no 
federally listed fairy shrimp occur, we believe it is unlikely there 
will be Federal nexus because projects that will adversely modify 
critical habitat should not occur in areas conserved under the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 
typically does not assume jurisdiction under section 404 of the Clean 
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) when vernal pool complexes are not 
hydrologically connected to navigable waters of the United States. 
Furthermore, two federally listed fairy shrimp species, Riverside fairy 
shrimp and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchii), are also 
present in some of the vernal pool habitat managed under the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP, and the terms and conditions of the biological 
opinion (USFWS 2004b, pp. 11441153) would also conserve N. fossalis. 
Therefore, we believe there will be indirect benefits to N. fossalis in 
excluded areas covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP based on 
conservation actions achieved under the Act in habitat also occupied by 
a federally listed fairy shrimp species.
    The consultation provisions under section 7(a) of the Act 
constitute the regulatory benefits of designating lands as critical 
habitat. As discussed above, Federal agencies must consult with us on 
actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid destroying or 
adversely modifying critical habitat. Critical habitat may provide a 
regulatory benefit for Navarretia fossalis when there is a Federal 
nexus present for a project that might adversely modify critical 
habitat. Specifically, we expect projects along the San Jacinto River 
would require a 404 permit under the Clean Water Act from the Corps. 
Therefore, critical habitat designation in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C will 
provide an additional regulatory benefit to the conservation of N. 
fossalis by prohibiting adverse modification of habitat essential for 
the conservation of this species.
    As discussed above, the Western Riverside County MSHCP mandates 
protection of Navarretia fossalis habitat considered necessary for 
survival and recovery of the species. For locations with positive 
survey results, impacts to 90 percent of portions of the property that 
provide long-term conservation

[[Page 62221]]

value for the species will be avoided (referring to the ephemeral 
wetland habitat that supports N. fossalis and the local watershed area 
that allows the ephemeral wetland habitat to function properly) until 
it is demonstrated that the conservation objectives for the species 
have been met (see Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species; Western 
Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.3, in Dudek and 
Associates, Inc. 2003). However, the MSHCP does not prohibit manure 
dumping and other soil amendments in habitat that has not yet been 
conserved. As discussed in Comments 6, 13, and 22 below, this threat is 
significant and ongoing within the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan 
area (specifically in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C) in habitat that has not 
been conserved and managed to benefit the species. Manure dumping is 
not a covered activity under the plan. Therefore, for activities 
covered under the plan, we believe that protections provided by the 
designation of critical habitat will be partially redundant with 
protections provided by the HCP; however, additional regulatory 
protection from manure dumping and other soil amendments is needed in 
Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C.
    Local ordinances may address activities not covered by an HCP that 
impact threatened or endangered species, particularly if they accompany 
permanent conservation and management of an area. For example, the City 
of Hemet enacted local Ordinance No. 1666 on April 9, 2002, to control 
the practice of dumping manure on biologically sensitive sites such as 
the vernal pool complex along Salt Creek (Subunit 6B). Although 
Ordinance No. 1666 provides an added level of protection above and 
beyond that provided by the Western Riverside County MSHCP (because 
manure dumping is not a covered activity under the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP), and complements the regulatory protection that would be 
provided by critical habitat designation, these lands are not yet 
conserved and managed for N. fossalis.
    Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is 
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area 
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation 
value for certain species. Any information about Navarretia fossalis 
and its habitat that reaches a wide audience, including parties engaged 
in conservation activities, is valuable. The inclusion of lands in the 
N. fossalis critical habitat designation that are owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
could be beneficial to the species because while the plan establishes 
conservation goals for N. fossalis and identifies criteria for 
identifying habitat to be conserved, the critical habitat designation 
specifically identifies those lands essential to the conservation of 
the species and which may require special management considerations or 
protection. The process of proposing revised critical habitat provided 
an opportunity for peer review and public comment on habitat we 
determined meets the definition of critical habitat. This process is 
valuable to land owners and managers in prioritizing conservation and 
management of identified areas. Information on N. fossalis and its 
habitat also has been provided to the public in the past, through 
meetings, educational materials provided by the County of Riverside, 
and recommendations provided in our Recovery Plan for Southern 
California Vernal Pool Species (Service 1998). In general, we believe 
the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis will provide 
additional information for the public concerning the importance of 
essential habitat in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C that has not already been 
available.
    The benefit of educating the public about Navarretia fossalis 
habitat is significant because the distribution of vernal pool and 
alkali playa habitat in Riverside County is not well known and the 
importance of these habitat areas may not be known to the public. 
Activities that harm habitat where N. fossalis occurs (including the 
associated local watershed areas) are taking place in Riverside County 
possibly due to the lack of public awareness. For example, manure 
dumping on private property along the San Jacinto River and in the 
vicinity of the Wicker Road Pool is adversely affecting habitat within 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan area (Roberts 2009, pp. 2-14). 
We have been working with permittees to implement ordinances that will 
help to control activities (such as manure dumping) that may impact the 
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP conservation 
objectives. To date, the City of Hemet is the only Western Riverside 
County MSHCP permittee that has addressed the negative impacts (alters 
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
N. fossalis) that manure dumping has on N. fossalis and its habitat 
through the enactment of Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the ordinance that 
prevents manure dumping activities, thereby educating its citizens and 
reducing the educational benefits of including this land as critical 
habitat). We believe including areas in the N. fossalis revised 
critical habitat designation where manure dumping still occurs on non-
conserved and non-managed lands will provide information to the public 
and local jurisdictions regarding the importance of addressing this 
threat throughout the areas where manure dumping occurs. Therefore, we 
believe there is an overall significant educational conservation 
benefit of critical habitat designation of essential habitat within 
Subunits 6A, 6B and 6C in the Western Riverside County MSHCP because 
designation will specifically identify for the public and plan 
participants those areas essential for conservation of the species that 
are not currently protected and managed under the plan, and 
particularly for areas outside of the City of Hemet where Ordinance 
1666 has been enacted, will help educate the public about the threats 
to these areas posed by manure dumping.
    The designation of Navarretia fossalis critical habitat may also 
strengthen or reinforce some of the provisions in other State and 
Federal laws, such as CEQA or NEPA. These laws analyze the potential 
for projects to significantly affect the environment. In Riverside 
County, the additional protections associated with critical habitat may 
be beneficial in areas not currently conserved. Critical habitat may 
signal the presence of habitat that is not conserved or protected that 
could otherwise be missed in the review process for these other 
environmental laws.
    In summary, we believe that designating critical habitat is 
unlikely to provide regulatory benefits under the Act in essential 
habitat areas that are currently conserved and managed. In areas that 
are not currently conserved and managed, we believe that there are 
significant regulatory and educational benefits that would result from 
critical habitat designation. The educational benefits of designation 
are somewhat reduced in the non-conserved portion of Subunit 6B within 
the City of Hemit where an ordinance exists to protect N. fossalis 
habitat from manure dumping.
Benefits of Exclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP
    We believe benefits would be realized by forgoing designation of 
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis on lands covered by the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP including:
    (1) Continuance and strengthening of our effective working 
relationships with all Western Riverside County MSHCP

[[Page 62222]]

jurisdictions and stakeholders to promote conservation of N. fossalis 
and its habitat;
    (2) Allowance for continued meaningful collaboration and 
cooperation in working toward recovering this species, including 
conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur;
    (3) Encouragement for local jurisdictions to fully participate in 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP; and
    (4) Encouragement of additional HCP and other conservation plan 
development in the future on other private lands for this and other 
federally listed and sensitive species.
    The Western Riverside County MSHCP provides substantial protection 
and management for Navarretia fossalis and the physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of the species, and addresses 
conservation issues from a coordinated, integrated perspective rather 
than a piecemeal, project-by-project approach (as would occur under 
sections 7 and 9 of the Act or smaller HCPs). Many landowners perceive 
critical habitat as an unfair and unnecessary regulatory burden given 
the expense and time involved in developing and implementing complex 
regional and jurisdiction-wide HCPs, such as the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP (as discussed further in Comment 22 below in the Summary 
of Comments and Recommendations section of this rule). Exclusion of the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP lands from critical habitat would help 
preserve the partnerships we developed with the County of Riverside, 
the City of Hemet, and other local jurisdictions in the development of 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP, and foster future partnerships and 
development of future HCPs.
    In summary, we believe excluding land covered by the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP from critical habitat could provide the 
significant benefit of maintaining existing regional HCP partnerships 
and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against Benefits of Inclusion--Western 
Riverside County MSHCP
    We reviewed and evaluated the benefits of inclusion and benefits of 
exclusion for all lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western 
Riverside County MSHCP permittees as critical habitat for Navarretia 
fossalis. The benefits of including conserved and managed lands in the 
critical habitat designation are small. All of the approximately 158 ac 
(64 ha) of land in Subunit 6D at Skunk Hollow and all of the 
approximately 708 ac (287 ha) of land in Subunit 6E at Mesa de Burro 
are already managed and conserved, and provide a benefit to N. 
fossalis. It is also unlikely that a project with a Federal nexus will 
occur in Subunits 6D, and 6E; therefore, designating these areas as 
critical habitat is unlikely to provide significant regulatory benefit.
    Additionally, the educational benefits of critical habitat 
designation and the potential benefits designation may confer under 
other statutes (such as CEQA and NEPA) are also small in Subunits 6D 
and 6E because these areas are already conserved and managed in 
perpetuity. Therefore, designation of N. fossalis critical habitat in 
Subunits 6D or 6E will not provide a substantial educational benefit.
    In summary, we find that excluding lands from critical habitat in 
areas that are receiving long-term conservation and management for the 
purpose of protecting Navarretia fossalis (Subunits 6D and 6E) will 
help preserve our partnership with the County of Riverside and other 
permittees in the Western Riverside County MSHCP and encourage the 
conservation of lands associated with development and implementation of 
future HCPs. These partnership benefits are significant and outweigh 
the small potential regulatory and educational benefits of including 
these already conserved and managed lands as critical habitat for N. 
fossalis. With regards to lands within the City of Hemet, we 
acknowledge the City's proactive efforts to protect N. fossalis through 
enactment of Ordinance 1666 prohibiting manure dumping in essential N. 
fossalis habitat. This effort somewhat reduces the regulatory and 
educational benefits of designation of that portion of Subunit 6B 
within the City of Hemit. However, these lands are not receiving long-
term conservation and management to benefit N. fossalis. We find that 
including City of Hemet lands (Subunit 6B) and other non-conserved and 
non-managed lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Subunits 
6A and 6C) as critical habitat outweigh the benefits of exclusion. We 
believe that critical habitat designation in these areas will provide 
additional regulatory protection under section 7(a) of the Act when 
there is a Federal nexus, and act as an educational tool for the public 
to lead to conservation and management of N. fossalis and its essential 
habitat. Therefore, designating these areas as critical habitat for N. 
fossalis is likely to provide a regulatory as well as educational 
benefit to the species. While we acknowledge that excluding these areas 
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act would provide a significant benefit to 
the partnership that we have with the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
permittees (including the City of Hemet), we believe that the 
conservation value of including these non-conserved, non-managed lands 
as critical habitat outweighs the benefit of exclusion.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Subunits 6D and 
6E, Western Riverside County MSHCP
    We determined that the exclusion of 866 ac (351 ha) of land in Unit 
6 (Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western 
Riverside County MSHCP permittees from the revised designation of 
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis will not result in extinction 
of the species. These areas are permanently conserved and managed to 
provide a benefit to N. fossalis and its habitat. Additionally, the 
jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act provides assurances the 
species will not go extinct as a result of exclusion from critical 
habitat designation. The consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2) 
and the attendant requirement to avoid jeopardy to N. fossalis for 
projects with a Federal nexus will provide significant protection to 
the species. Therefore, based on the above discussion, we are excluding 
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of conserved and managed land in Unit 6 
(Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western 
Riverside County MSHCP permittees from this revised critical habitat 
designation.

Economics

    An analysis of the economic impacts for the previous proposed 
critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis was conducted and 
made available to the public on August 31, 2005 (70 FR 51742). That 
economic analysis was finalized for the final rule to designate 
critical habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal Register on 
October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). The analysis determined that the costs 
associated with critical habitat for N. fossalis across the entire area 
considered for designation (across designated and excluded areas) were 
primarily a result of the potential effects of critical habitat 
designation on land development, flood control, and transportation. 
After excluding land in Riverside and San Diego Counties from the 2004 
proposed critical habitat (69 FR 60110; October 7, 2004), the economic 
impact was estimated to be between $13.9 and $32.1 million over the 
next 20 years. Based on the 2005 economic analysis, we concluded that

[[Page 62223]]

the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis, as proposed in 
2004, would not result in significant small business impacts. This 
analysis is presented in the document making available the economic 
analysis published in the Federal Register on August 31, 2005 (70 FR 
51742).
    We prepared a new economic impact analysis associated with this 
revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis. In the 
revised DEA, we evaluated the potential economic effects on small 
business entities resulting from implementation of conservation actions 
related to the proposed revision to critical habitat for N. fossalis. 
The analysis is based on the estimated incremental impacts associated 
with the proposed rulemaking as described in sections 3 through 10 of 
the analysis. We announced the availability of the draft economic 
analysis in the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575).
    The final economics analysis determined that the costs associated 
with critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis, across the entire area 
considered for designation (both designated and excluded areas), are 
primarily a result of the potential effects of critical habitat 
designation on transportation, land development, and flood control. The 
incremental economic impact of designating critical habitat was 
estimated to be between $846,000 and $1.2 million over the next 20 
years using a 7 percent discount rate ($70,000 and $100,000 annualized) 
(Entrix 2010, p. ES-3). The difference between the economic impacts 
projected with this designation compared to those in the 2005 
designation are due to the use of an incremental analysis in this 
designation rather than the broader coextensive analysis used in the 
2005 designation. Additionally, the economic analysis for the 2005 
designation included all 31,086 ac (12,580 ha) of essential habitat 
while the 2010 analysis included only the 7,609 ac (3,079 ha) that were 
proposed for designation. Based on the 2010 final economic analysis, we 
concluded that the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis, as 
proposed in 2009, would not result in significant small business 
impacts. This analysis is presented in the Final Economic Analysis of 
Proposed Revised Critical Habitat Designation for Spreading Navarretia 
(FEA)(Entrix 2010).

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    We requested written comments from the public on the proposed rule 
to revise critical habitat for the Navarretia fossalis during two 
comment periods. The first comment period opened with the publication 
of the proposed revised rule in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 
(74 FR 27588), and closed on August 10, 2009. The second comment period 
opened with the publication of the availability of the DEA published in 
the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575) and closed on May 
17, 2010. During both public comment periods, we contacted appropriate 
Federal, State, and local agencies; scientific organizations; and other 
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposed rule to 
revise critical habitat for this species and the associated DEA. During 
the comment periods, we requested all interested parties submit 
comments or information related to the proposed revisions to critical 
habitat, including (but not limited to) the following: unit boundaries; 
species occurrence information and distribution; land use designations 
that may affect critical habitat; potential economic effects of the 
proposed designation; benefits associated with critical habitat 
designation; areas proposed for designation and associated rationale 
for the non-inclusion or considered exclusion of these areas; and 
methods used to designate critical habitat.
    During the first comment period, we received 12 comments directly 
addressing the proposed revised critical habitat designation, 4 from 
peer reviewers and 8 from public organizations or individuals. During 
the second comment period, we received one comment from local 
government addressing the proposed critical habitat designation and the 
DEA. We did not receive any requests for a public hearing.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994 
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions from four knowledgeable 
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with 
the species, the geographic region in which it occurs, and conservation 
biology principles pertinent to the species. We received responses from 
all four peer reviewers who provided additional information, 
clarifications, and suggestions that we incorporated into the rule to 
improve the revised critical habitat designation.
    We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers and the 
public for substantive issues and new information regarding the 
designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. All comments 
are addressed in the following summary and incorporated into the final 
rule as appropriate.

Peer Reviewer Comments

    Comment 1: One peer reviewer was supportive of the proposed revised 
critical habitat rule. The reviewer stated the proposed rule was well 
thought-out, based on sound data, and presented a thorough analysis. 
The reviewer further stated that Navarretia fossalis' specific needs 
for ephemerally wet habitats and limited dispersal ability were 
appropriately analyzed and considered in the proposed revised rule. The 
reviewer concluded our revised methods were thorough, logical and 
biologically supported, and limited the proposed designation to areas 
necessary for maintaining N. fossalis persistence.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review.
    Comment 2: One peer reviewer stated that large, well-established 
Navarretia fossalis populations need to be protected; therefore, the 
reviewer believe the definition of ``core habitat areas'' as relatively 
large areas of intact habitat with existing populations in the proposed 
revised rule was reasonable. The reviewer further stated that limited 
gene flow among populations and the range of soil and water conditions 
among habitats suggest significant range-wide genetic variability of N. 
fossalis; therefore, the reviewer believes populations on the periphery 
of the geographical range and those that occupy unique non-core 
habitats are important to species preservation. The reviewer stated 
that designating only relatively large intact habitat areas as critical 
habitat could lead to significant loss of genetic diversity and 
preclude species' survival and recovery and therefore, agreed with our 
inclusion of both large and smaller areas for N. fossalis.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review and 
have incorporated their comments into the rule as appropriate.
    Comment 3: One peer reviewer offered technical and organizational 
comments. The reviewer stated the proposal writing style was 
professional and understandable. The reviewer noted the proposal was 
better organized than past critical habitat proposals on Navarretia 
fossalis, as well as other critical habitat designations for listed 
species that occur in similar habitat, and the use of tables to help 
explain

[[Page 62224]]

differences between the 2005 and 2009 proposals was helpful. The 
reviewer further stated the usefulness of maps in the printed rule for 
public review of specific units was limited, and the lack of UTM 
coordinates and a 100-m grid made it difficult for the public to 
reproduce maps at different scales, overlay features with mapping 
programs, and confirm map accuracy.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's comments and will 
consider this advice when publishing future proposed critical habitat 
designations.
    Comment 4: One peer reviewer commented on text in the Areas Needed 
for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas section of the 
proposed rule. The reviewer stated since the Service clearly based 
these proposed areas on new information, there should have been a 
citation or explanation as to why Mesa de Burro was considered a ``core 
population.'' The reviewer stated they were able to verify reports of 
large populations qualifying Mesa de Burro as a ``core population,'' 
but the Mesa de Burro site may not be biologically equivalent with the 
other ``core population complexes.'' The reviewer defined ``core 
population complexes'' as numerous vernal pools and argued the Mesa de 
Burro occurrence appears to be restricted to a small number of pools. 
The reviewer suggested it was probably best to describe Mesa de Burro 
as a ``large and important population,'' since it is not really a 
complex of populations or occurrences.
    Our Response: We understand the peer reviewer's concern regarding 
the ecological connotation of terms used for the Navarretia fossalis 
critical habitat designation; however, we never used the terms ``core 
population'' or ``core population complexes'' in the proposed rule. The 
only term used in the proposed revised rule and in this document with 
the word ``core'' is ``core habitat area,'' which is a descriptive term 
of convenience. As described in the proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588) 
and the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas 
section of this rule, ``core habitat area'' denotes those areas that 
contain the highest concentrations of N. fossalis and the largest 
contiguous blocks of habitat for this species and are therefore the 
most critical areas for conservation of this species. The term was not 
intended to be synonymous with similar terms used in other documents. 
The term ``vernal pool complex'' is used in Table 3 to refer to more 
than one geographically proximal pool, but was not further defined.
    Regarding the peer reviewer's suggested description of Mesa de 
Burro as a ``large important population,'' we do not share this 
opinion. We are not aware of any formal definition of ``occurrences'' 
or descriptions of associated pools in a biologically delineated 
population. Mesa de Burro contains a relatively large abundance of 
observed individuals occupying multiple vernal pools, and we believe 
this description appropriately describes the current level of 
scientific knowledge. In general, we are conservative with use of the 
term ``population'' because of the term's frequent misapplication in 
gray literature. We refrain from using the term ``population'' to 
describe a geographically specific occupied area unless data indicate 
appropriate rates of genetic exchange exist among spatially clustered 
individuals and a geographical population distribution has been 
delineated. Therefore, we believe the peer reviewer's concerns 
regarding our use of inappropriate terminology are not well founded. We 
have edited the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite 
Habitat Areas section to clarify the above issues.
    Comment 5: Regarding the discussion of the PCEs in the proposed 
rule, one peer reviewer recommended changing, ``During a typical 
seasonal flooding period, alkali scrub vegetation expands its 
distribution into deeper areas of the seasonally flooded alkali vernal 
plain habitat and crowds out the more ephemeral wetland species'' to 
``During a typical seasonal flooding cycle, alkali scrub vegetation 
expands its distribution during the dry periods into deeper areas of 
the seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains habitat...'' The peer 
reviewer also stated that light to moderate disturbance can mask or 
suppress some PCEs within seasonally flooded vernal alkali plains 
habitat. Therefore, the reviewer recommended the final rule include the 
following qualification regarding habitat quality: ``Seasonally flooded 
alkali vernal plain can persist in light to moderately disturbed 
habitat that may obscure or suppress expression of PCEs, especially 
soil amendments and dryland farming activities. Reasonably restorable 
habitat is considered to have the applicable PCEs within the San 
Jacinto River flood plain and at Old Salt Creek. Many of these sites, 
although currently in degraded condition, are restorable and may be 
necessary to the recovery of the species.'' The peer reviewer also 
noted an apparent omission of the species' occurrence within the alkali 
Chino series soils at Old Salt Creek.
    Our Response: We considered the suggested edits provided by the 
peer reviewer and made changes to the text above as appropriate (see 
Primary Constituent Elements section).
    Comment 6: Regarding the Special Management Considerations or 
Protection section of the proposed rule, one peer reviewer recommended 
adding soil chemistry alteration and manure dumping to the list of 
threats for Navarretia fossalis. The reviewer stated manure dumping has 
reduced or eliminated alkali vernal pools over large portions of the 
San Jacinto River flood plain and may now be the most significant 
immediate threat to N. fossalis. The reviewer cited numerous 
communications with the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office in which the 
reviewer had documented manure dumping in vernal pool habitat.
    Our Response: We considered the suggested text edits to this 
revised critical habitat rule and made changes as appropriate (see 
Special Management Considerations or Protection section). We agree that 
manure dumping is a significant threat to Navarretia fossalis, and we 
agree that this activity is ongoing. We are in the process of working 
with local jurisdictions in Western Riverside County (including the 
County of Riverside) to address manure dumping through initiatives like 
Ordinance No. 1666 that was enacted by the City of Hemet. We hope to 
work further with our partners in Riverside County to reduce the threat 
of manure dumping (see also responses to Comments 12 and 13 below, and 
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this 
rule).
    Comment 7: Regarding the Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat 
section of the proposed revised rule, one peer reviewer argued that 
based on data for similar species, two or more negative surveys during 
the past 10 years is an insufficient effort to confirm extirpation in 
lightly disturbed habitat. The reviewer advised that a lack of positive 
surveys for a decade suggests a population is declining or scarce, but 
without significant habitat disturbance as well, does not mean it is 
extirpated. The peer reviewer recommended that in circumstances where 
habitat has not been significantly altered, the Service should not 
conclude absence based on lack of documentation. In the case of 
comprehensive but negative survey results, the peer reviewer believes 
20 years would be a more reliable indicator of population extirpation. 
The peer reviewer further noted that while this change in methodology 
may not change what areas meet the definition of critical habitat for 
Navarretia fossalis, the limitations of current methods should be 
considered in future critical habitat analyses.

[[Page 62225]]

    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's concerns and have 
considered the argument that more than 20 years without positive survey 
data in suitable habitat is an appropriate criterion for determining 
likely absence of Navarretia fossalis. We would like to reassure the 
peer reviewer that we used more complex criteria than two negative 
surveys over a period of 10 years to determine occupancy. Negative 
surveys must have occurred under appropriate conditions, while habitat 
status was also considered. As discussed in the Criteria Used To 
Identify Critical Habitat section, we assume an area is currently 
occupied for areas where we had past occupancy data unless: (a) Two or 
more rare plant surveys conducted during the past 10 years did not find 
N. fossalis (providing the surveys were conducted in years where 
average rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the 
rainy season (between October and May)) and during the appropriate 
months to find this species (March, April, and May); or (b) the site 
was significantly disturbed since the last observation of the species 
at that location. Therefore, we believe our current methodology is 
appropriate.
    Comment 8: One peer reviewer expressed concerns regarding occupancy 
status of specific pools. The reviewer argued the description of a 
vernal pool in Subunit 5G (Otay Lakes) as partly unoccupied may be 
inappropriate, because Navarretia fossalis is likely still present if 
habitat is intact and minimally disturbed. The reviewer stated a better 
criterion for occupancy determination would be habitat status within 
the vicinity of vernal pools, rather than a lack of occupancy data for 
the past 10 years. The peer reviewer stated they were not necessarily 
suggesting that the vernal pool ``populations'' at Otay River Valley 
and Otay Lakes (Unit 5) be included in critical habitat, only that the 
assumption of species' absence may be false.
    The peer reviewer also stated that because the vernal pool complex 
in Subunit 5C occurs within a core habitat area (Otay Mesa) that has 
experienced significant habitat loss, faces significant threats, and is 
identified in the Recovery Plan as necessary for recovery, it seems 
prudent to include it in critical habitat, or offer a more compelling 
argument for non-inclusion.
    Our Response: In such a scenario of limited survey periods, we use 
the available surveys as the best available science. This situation 
underscores the need for us to address new information as it is 
received. We understand the peer reviewer's concern and have considered 
their argument; however, habitat availability and condition does not 
always necessarily equate to occupancy for vernal pools species because 
other habitat characteristics such as hydroperiod, pool depth, soil 
type and other physical features also play a role. Critical habitat 
designations are to use the best available commercial and scientific 
data to identify lands that we believe contain the physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of the species. 
Without more site specific investigation on occupancy for Subunit 5G, 
we cannot ascertain for certain that all of the areas are occupied 
solely on habitat status as recommended by the peer reviewer and have 
relied on our criteria for occupancy as stated above. Please see the 
response to Comment 7 above for further discussion regarding occupancy 
data and criteria used to identify critical habitat.
    We agree with the peer reviewer that Subunit 5C meets the 
definition of critical habitat. Based on information in our files 
inadvertently excluded from our initial Geographic Information System 
(GIS) analysis, we determined that the previously proposed Subunit 5C 
(69 FR 60110; October 1, 2004) has documented occupancy within the past 
10 years and meets the definition of critical habitat. We proposed 
designation of subunit 5C in our revision to the 2009 proposed. We 
proposed adding subunit 5C in the document that made available the DEA 
for the proposed revised critical habitat published in the Federal 
Register on April 15, 2010 (72 FR 19575). We are designating subunit 5C 
as critical habitat in this final rule. Please see edited Summary of 
Changes From the 2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical Habitat and 
Critical Habitat Units sections for more information.
    Comment 9: One peer reviewer noted that although the proposal 
stated that slopes facing away from Cruzan Mesa were removed from 
Subunit 1A (compared to the 2005 designation), an examination of Google 
Earth imagery indicated some of the mesa top was also removed. The 
reviewer recommended subunit boundaries be modified to include the full 
mesa top.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We 
considered the suggested changes and revised the designated critical 
habitat boundary for Subunit 1A to include those areas containing the 
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the 
species. We explained the revised proposed boundary in the document we 
published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575). The 
revision increased the designated total for Subunit 1A by 27 ac (11 
ha), reflected in Table 2. For more information, see the Summary of 
Changes From Previously Designated and Proposed Revised Critical 
Habitat section.
    Comment 10: One peer reviewer suggested there may not be sufficient 
data to demonstrate the Plum Canyon vernal pool in Subunit 1B meets the 
definition of critical habitat. The reviewer noted that although there 
are two collection records from 1996 and 2003, the CNDDB notes the 
``site requires more field work,'' which usually means there is some 
debate on specific location or population status. The peer reviewer 
added they were not able to confirm the location of this vernal pool 
through examination of aerial photographs. The peer reviewer also 
recommended the western portion of Subunit 3B should not be designated 
critical habitat because Google Earth imagery indicates this area has 
been graded and is unlikely to ever support the PCEs for this species.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We 
considered the suggested changes and revised this final designation by 
removing the western portion of Subunit 3B as discussed in the document 
making available the DEA (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). However, we 
believe Subunit 1B (Plum Canyon) meets the definition of critical 
habitat because this subunit supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia 
fossalis, provides potential connectivity with Subunit 1A, and likely 
supports a genetically distinct occurrence. We believe Subunit 3B 
(Carroll Canyon) meets the definition of critical habitat because it 
supports a stable occurrence of N. fossalis and provides potential 
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 3A and 3C. 
For more information, see the Critical Habitat Units, Criteria Used To 
Identify Critical Habitat, and Summary of Changes From Previously 
Designated and Proposed Revised Critical Habitat sections.
    Comment 11: One peer reviewer recommended multiple changes to the 
boundary of Subunit 6B as follows:
    (1) Remove a central section south of Stetson Road that has been 
developed or disturbed for many years;
    (2) expand the eastern edge boundary to include vernal pools at the 
western end of the airport because this site includes the PCEs, has 
documented historical occupation, includes pools that are more reliably 
filled than pools that were proposed for designation, and

[[Page 62226]]

this land has a likely Federal Aviation Administration Federal nexus;
    (3) include vernal pools and wet depressions that form fairly 
reliably in the northwest portion of the subunit;
    (4) remove the drier area at the northern end just south of 
Devonshire Road; and
    (5) remove the eastern corner because it either has active 
residential development or an approved development proposal and is 
heavily degraded.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We 
considered the suggested changes and revised the final critical habitat 
boundary as noticed in the NOA of the DEA (75 FR 19575; April 15, 
2010). For more information see the Summary of Changes From the 
Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat Designation.
    Comment 12: One peer reviewer believes that manure dumping should 
be specifically mentioned in the section of this critical habitat 
designation that outlines activities that, when carried out, funded, or 
authorized by a Federal agency, may affect critical habitat and, 
therefore, should result in consultation for Navarretia fossalis: 
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation section, subsection (2) titled 
Application of the `Adverse Modification' Standard section, paragraph 
describing ``Actions that would impact soil and topography.'' The peer 
reviewer argued that widespread manure dumping along the San Jacinto 
River, which alters soil chemistry (reducing alkalinity and clay and 
silt composition ratios) and topography (elevates soil surface and 
suppresses depressions formation), is a significant threat to the 
species.
    Our Response: We considered the peer reviewer's suggested edits 
when preparing this revised critical habitat rule and made changes to 
the Effects of Critical Habitat Designation, Application of the 
`Adverse Modification' Standard section. We agree that manure dumping 
is a significant threat to Navarretia fossalis and the PCEs require 
special management considerations or protection to reduce the threat 
(see the Special Management Considerations or Protection). The Western 
Riverside County MSHCP does not prohibit permittees from engaging in 
manure dumping on non-conserved lands where a Federal nexus is present 
and there is no local ordinance to prevent dumping; therefore, we 
determined that designation of critical habitat would provide 
significant additional habitat protection. We also determined that 
education has been inadequate in some areas with regard to the severity 
of this threat; therefore, designation of critical habitat where manure 
dumping can occur would provide a significant educational conservation 
benefit (see also response to Comments 6 and 13, and the Western 
Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Western 
Riverside County MSHCP) section).
    Comment 13: One peer reviewer believes that exclusion of lands 
owned under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
permittees should not be excluded from critical habitat based on 
partnership benefits. As an example, the peer reviewer stated that 
areas along the San Jacinto River and near the city of Hemet have not 
been adequately protected. These areas were identified in the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP as necessary for the conservation of Navarretia 
fossalis and were excluded from the 2005 final critical habitat 
designation. The peer reviewer asserted that habitat vandalism and 
incidental destruction in all vernal pools within the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP plan area have continued, and in some areas increased, 
since the Western Riverside County MSHCP was permitted. The peer 
reviewer discussed at length and in detail evidence that they believe 
suggests land-owners who are aware of the conservation value of vernal 
pools are working to eradicate habitat rather than ``partnering with 
regulators'' to conserve it. Additionally, the peer reviewer argued 
that unlike other approved HCPs, the reviewers believe the Service has 
evidence that the Western Riverside County MSHCP is not providing the 
benefits ``claimed to justify exclusion in the proposed revised 
critical habitat rule.'' The reviewers further hypothesized that should 
impacts continue at the rate and magnitude as occurred during the first 
5 years of the Western Riverside County MSHCP implementation, there 
could be almost no habitat left in 5 years outside the San Jacinto 
Wildlife Area and the Metropolitan Water District Vernal Pool Preserve.
    Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's concerns regarding 
adequate protection of Navarretia fossalis under the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP. Although not specifically stated by the peer reviewer, 
the comment indicates the reviewer believes:
    (1) The benefits of exclusion (based primarily on partnerships 
benefits) would be lower than the benefits of inclusion because these 
partnerships have provided less benefit to N. fossalis to-date than 
anticipated; and
    (2) The benefits of inclusion (non-redundant protections and 
education provided by critical habitat designation) are greater because 
conservation actions mandated by the HCP are not being implemented.
    Benefits provided by existing HCPs are not considered a benefit of 
exclusion because they would remain in place regardless of critical 
habitat designation; however, they do minimize the benefits of 
inclusion to the extent they are redundant with protection measures 
that would be provided by a critical habitat designation. As described 
in the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section, the 
likelihood of a project with a Federal nexus occurring in Subunits 6D 
(Barry Jones Wetland Mitigation Bank) and 6E (PQP lands) in the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP revised critical habitat is small because these 
areas are currently conserved and managed; therefore, the regulatory 
and educational benefits of inclusion are insignificant. Additionally, 
the portion of Subunit 6B that is in the City of Hemet is protected by 
an ordinance that addresses illegal manure dumping, an activity that is 
not covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP; however, this area 
does not receive long-term conservation and management for the benefit 
of Navarretia fossalis and its habitat. Due to this additional 
protection from manure dumping, the benefits of inclusion of this 
portion of Subunit 6B as critical habitat are somewhat lessened.
    Regarding the benefits of exclusion, the adequacy of Navarretia 
fossalis protection under an HCP is relevant to the value of 
partnerships to the extent it demonstrates the overall conservation 
value of a regional HCP permit. We believe the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP generally incorporates ongoing management and protection that 
should benefit the conservation of N. fossalis and its habitat over the 
long term. Please refer to the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act section for further discussion on the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP, including discussion on areas receiving long-term conservation 
and management that we have excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    Based on new information, we did find the benefits of inclusion in 
critical habitat to be greater in some areas within the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP than we estimated in the October 18, 2005, 
critical habitat rule (70 FR 60658). We determined that designation of 
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis would provide significant 
additional habitat protection

[[Page 62227]]

in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C. We came to this determination because the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP does not currently provide for the long-
term conservation and management of N. fossalis in these subunits, and 
the HCP does not prohibit permittees from engaging in manure dumping 
activities (a significant new threat on non-conserved lands that was 
not identified in the HCP or the associated biological opinion (Service 
2004b, pp. 369-378)). Therefore, in areas where a Federal nexus exists 
(see also Comments 6 and 12 above), we concluded that the significant 
regulatory benefit of including the areas in critical habitat outweigh 
the partnership benefits of exclusion. We also determined that 
education to date has been inadequate in some areas with regard to the 
severity of manure dumping; therefore, designation of N. fossalis 
critical habitat where manure dumping can occur would provide a 
significant educational conservation benefit.
    In summary, we found the benefits of exclusion of lands covered by 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the minimal 
benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat designation 
for those areas that are currently conserved and managed (i.e., 
Subunits 6D and 6E). Alternatively, the benefits of inclusion are 
greater for non-conserved, non-managed lands within the plan area 
(i.e., Subunit 6A, 6B, and 6C). See the Application of Section 4(b)(2) 
of the Act section (particularly the Weighing Benefits of Exclusion 
Against Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP section) 
for a complete discussion of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
exclusion analysis.
    Issues discussed by the peer reviewer, while they may reflect valid 
concerns with regard to HCP implementation, do not reduce the benefits 
of exclusion for Subunits 6D and 6E. We believe that conservation is 
adequate in these areas as a result of the long-term conservation and 
management of Subunits 6D and 6E (see Benefits of Exclusion--Western 
Riverside County MSHCP and the Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against 
Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP sections). 
However, we will consider the information submitted by the peer 
reviewer in our ongoing assessments of the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP, and continue to work with permittees to ensure that the HCP is 
properly implemented to benefit Navarretia fossalis and its habitat.
    Comment 14: One peer reviewer stated that the Service should not 
exclude habitat within the plan area of HCP permits that are not yet 
issued. The reviewer stated draft plans provide no guarantee that the 
final HCPs will provide adequate species conservation.
    Our Response: We did not exclude any habitat from this revised 
critical habitat designation that falls within the plan area of an HCP 
permit that has not yet been issued.

Other Comments

    Comment 15: Two commenters provided biological information for our 
consideration.
    (1) One commenter provided information about the presence of 
Navarretia fossalis at one location in San Marcos, California, 
including reference to a website with detailed biological information 
about this location. The commenter indicated that they believe the 
future of the site is uncertain and N. fossalis grows in the larger 
vernal pools onsite.
    (2) A second commenter stated that although ``scrub'' habitat 
elements may expand into alkali playa, the more common process 
currently observed is replacement of alkali playa by alkali grassland 
(regarding the Primary Constituent Elements- Ephemeral Wetland Habitat 
section of the proposed rule). The second commenter also noted that in 
some of the known species' localities, alkali grassland has become 
dominated by species less commonly found in the wetter areas of the 
alkali playa, possibly due to alteration of hydrology.
    (3) The second commenter described distinct ``riverine pools'' 
characterized by unique floristic elements, such as Trichocoronis 
wrightii (limestone bugheal), which only occur with Navarretia fossalis 
within the San Jacinto River Unit.
    (4) The second commenter stated that ``general anecdotal 
observations'' of habitat conditions at the Salt Creek Seasonally 
Flooded Alkali Plain indicate a recent decline in Navarretia fossalis 
densities, especially at the Stowe vernal pool. The commenter 
acknowledged these observations may reflect a response to rainfall 
patterns, but stated the habitat does appear to have experienced drying 
of the ephemeral wetlands and vernal pools, along with an expansion of 
Hordeum marinum subsp. gussoneanum (cheat grass).
    (5) The second commenter stated that a number of the larger vernal 
pools in the Perris plain region occur on Willows soils.
    (6) Finally, the second commenter noted the proposed expansion of 
waterfowl ponds and wet soil management in portions of the San Jacinto 
Wildlife Area (under the Western Riverside County MSHCP) may negatively 
affect Navarretia fossalis. The expansion could benefit N. fossalis by 
providing more habitat for this species; however, ponding duration and 
exotic plant species used to increase the waterfowl habitat suitability 
could conflict with existing or expanded N. fossalis populations within 
the San Jacinto Wildlife Area.
    Our Response: We appreciate all information provided. We are aware 
of the San Marcos vernal pools information, which is identified in 
Table 2 as Subunit 4C1 in the San Marcos Upham location. Additionally, 
the Service regularly works with CDFG to ensure that the seasonally 
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat in the San Jacinto Wildlife Area 
continues to function and provide a benefit to Navarretia fossalis and 
other sensitive species that use this habitat. We will consider the 
information regarding the proposed expansion of waterfowl ponds and wet 
soil management in portions of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area in future 
conservation recommendations and decisions; however, we do not believe 
it is relevant to this revised critical habitat designation for N. 
fossalis.
    We considered the other information provided and edited this 
revised critical habitat rule as appropriate (see Primary Constituent 
Elements--Ephemeral Wetland Habitat and Background--Geographic Range 
and Status sections above).
    Comment 16: One commenter recommended that the total number of 
Navarretia fossalis localities be carefully reviewed and possibly 
updated (regarding the Background--Geographic Range and Status section 
of the proposed rule). The commenter stated that they believe the 
section failed to cite some potentially important references, including 
Brown's (2003) listing of ephemeral pools in western Riverside County, 
and CNDDB collection records from the Elsinore-Murrieta area and from 
San Luis Obispo County.
    Our Response: Regarding the suggested Background section citations, 
the data in Brown's (2003) record table is part of our Service files 
and was incorporated in our GIS database, we are not aware of any CNDDB 
collection records from the Elsinore-Murrieta area (and none were 
provided by the commenter), and the San Luis Obispo County record has 
never been verified; therefore, we did not include those suggested 
record citations in this final rule.
    Comment 17: Two commenters expressed general opposition to revising

[[Page 62228]]

critical habitat because of the resulting costs to taxpayers and 
private companies.
    Our Response: According to sections 3(5)(A) and 4(b) of the Act and 
our implementing regulations under 50 CFR 424.12, we are required to 
designate critical habitat for federally listed species. Following the 
listing of Navarretia fossalis in 1998 and the subsequent designation 
of the species' critical habitat in 2005, the Center for Biological 
Diversity filed a complaint on December 19, 2007, in the U.S. District 
Court for the Southern District of California challenging the 2005 
designation. This lawsuit challenged the validity of the information 
and reasoning we used to exclude areas from the 2005 critical habitat 
designation for N. fossalis. On July 25, 2008, the parties reached a 
settlement agreement, in which we agreed to reconsider the critical 
habitat designation for the species. The action of revising the 
designation is the result of our following a court order. Therefore, 
while we acknowledge the commenters' concern that revising critical 
habitat is costly, we do not have discretion with regard to completion 
of court-ordered actions (see Previous Federal Actions section above 
for more information regarding completion of this revised rule).
    Comment 18: Two commenters provided suggestions regarding the 
proposed critical habitat designation review process. One commenter 
stated that graphics provided in the proposed rule did not allow 
detailed review of areas proposed as revised critical habitat and thus 
recommended the Service post topographic maps or aerial photographs on 
the Internet during open comment periods. A second commenter requested 
that no additional areas be proposed as revised critical habitat 
without recirculation of the entire rule for notice and comment.
    Our Response: We agree it would be advantageous to provide more 
detailed graphics for public review and will consider the practicality 
of doing so when publishing future proposed critical habitat 
designations.
    According to section 4(b)(5) of the Act and the Administrative 
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Subchapter II), we are required to provide an 
adequate opportunity for the public to comment on any critical habitat 
rule. Although it is not fiscally practical for us to recirculate an 
entire rule for notice and comment, any areas proposed as revised 
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis that are in addition to those 
listed in the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 
10, 2009) were described in the document that made available the DEA 
(75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). As a result, the opportunity for public 
review and comment prior to designation of this revised critical 
habitat designation occurred as a result of an initial public comment 
period between June 10, 2009, and August 10, 2009, and a second public 
comment period between April 15, 2010, and May 17, 2010.
    Comment 19: Two commenters recommended adding or removing areas 
from the Navarretia fossalis proposed revised critical habitat. The 
first commenter recommended proposed revised critical habitat be 
expanded at the ``northern and southern boundaries'' of the San Jacinto 
River subunit (Subunit 6A). Specifically they recommended proposed 
revised critical habitat be expanded at the following locations:
    (1) At the northern boundary east to include pond areas within the 
San Jacinto Wildlife Area;
    (2) Around 13\th\ Street east of the County owned property;
    (3) Eastward near Simpson Road in the area of San Jacinto Avenue to 
include areas north of Ellis Avenue;
    (4) North of the San Jacinto river to near Redlands Avenue;
    (5) To include the entire vernal pool found south off Case Road;
    (6) South of the San Jacinto River, possibly to the boundary of 
Green Valley Parkway;
    (7) Westward to include pools in the northwestern corner of the 
Hemet Airport within the Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain; 
and
    (8) At the southern end of the Wickerd Road and Scott Road 
locality.
    A second commenter asserted that the proposed critical habitat 
designation falls short of the Act's ``recovery requirement'' by 
focusing solely on species' survival. They asserted in particular that 
additional areas need to be proposed to ensure ecological features 
required for species' recovery are maintained, such as water quality, 
inundation frequency, and habitat connectivity.
    Our Response: We considered the changes suggested by the first 
commenter and revised this final revised critical habitat designation 
as appropriate as discussed in the document making available DEA (75 FR 
19575; April 15, 2010). For more information see the Summary of Changes 
From the Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat 
Designation section and our response to Comment 11
    Regarding the second commenter's assertion that additional critical 
habitat areas need to be proposed to meet the ``[Act's] recovery 
requirement,'' we believe we have designated all the specific occupied 
areas which are found those physical or biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of the species. We recognize that the 
designation of critical habitat may not include all of the habitat that 
may eventually be determined to be necessary for the recovery of 
Navarretia fossalis, and critical habitat designations do not signal 
that habitat outside the designation is unimportant or may not 
contribute to recovery. Areas outside the revised critical habitat 
designation will continue to be subject to conservation actions 
implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and regulatory protections 
afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard and the prohibitions 
of section 9 of the Act if actions occurring in these areas may affect 
N. fossalis; these protections and conservation tools will continue to 
contribute to recovery of this species. The second commenter did not 
suggest specific additional areas for inclusion in the proposed revised 
critical habitat designation, and we are not aware of any additional 
areas required for species recovery that should be proposed as revised 
critical habitat.
    Comment 20: One commenter suggested edits to the proposed revised 
critical habitat rule text. The commenter stated that more information 
could have been included in the Background section of the proposed rule 
regarding the different substrates, hydrology, and habitat status of 
each core habitat area. The commenter also recommended we expand our 
discussion of the extent of protection during the early phase of HCP 
implementation and for plant species under the Act. The commenter 
specifically recommended the following edits:
    (1) Note that Navarretia fossalis is generally restricted to vernal 
pools and alkali playas, and that in the alkali grasslands, this 
species is restricted to small vernal pools or other depressions within 
this community (Background--Habitat subsection);
    (2) Note that suitability of hydrological conditions for the 
germination of this species vary on an annual basis, which means that 
N. fossalis can be absent for a number of years and the total number of 
plants can vary depending on the timing, duration, and extent of 
ponding (Background--Habitat subsection);
    (3) Describe the unique nature of the ephemeral wetlands found 
along the San Jacinto River, especially how large scale flooding 
events, although uncommon, appear to maintain N. fossalis habitat and 
provide a species dispersal mechanism (Primary

[[Page 62229]]

Constituent Elements; Ephemeral Wetland Habitat subsection);
    (4) Discuss the importance of specific microtopography required to 
provide sufficient ponding duration (hydrology) to support this species 
and the threat posed by alteration of microtopography (Primary 
Constituent Elements; Ephemeral Wetland Habitat subsection); and
    (5) Mention a number of the larger vernal pools in the Perris Plain 
region occur on the Willows Soil Series (Primary Constituent Elements: 
Topography and Soils that Support Ponding During Winter and Spring 
subsection).
    With regard to PCEs in general, the commenter stated:
    (1) The importance of overland water flow and the size of the local 
watershed required to maintain ephemeral wetlands needs to be 
emphasized; and
    (2) More information should be provided on the current condition of 
the PCEs in each subunit.
    The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for 
the Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat section:
    (1) Step 3 should be expanded to note how total proposed area 
reductions in essential habitat were determined and the extent of local 
watershed inclusion in a unit; and
    (2) Step 4 should include notes of any recent field or site 
condition observations.
    The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for 
the Summary of Changes from Previously Designated Critical Habitat 
section of the proposed revised rule:
    (1) Regarding ``Cruzan Mesa'' subsection, they stated the pools 
could not fill by overland flow of water on the mesa, and recommended 
we explain how the habitat could be self-sustaining if the watershed 
area outside of proposed revised critical habitat boundaries was lost;
    (2) Regarding ``Wickerd Road and Scott Road'' subsection, they 
stated more information should be provided on the current condition at 
this pool complex; and
    (3) Regarding the ``Santa Rosa Plateau'' subsection, they 
recommended providing a summary of known Mesa de Burro species' 
distribution information.
    The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for 
the Critical Habitat Units section of the proposed revised rule:
    (1) Expand the discussion of current habitat conditions and threats 
regarding the ``San Jacinto River'' and ``Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 
Alkali Plain'' subsections;
    (2) Discuss what habitat conservation has been or will be achieved 
under the Western Riverside County MSHCP at important occupied 
localities; and
    (3) Note the presence of regionally significant vernal pools in 
addition to the areas of alkali playa and grassland; generally these 
pools are floristically distinct from these communities.
    Our Response: We appreciate these editorial recommendations and 
have made changes to the text of this final rule, where appropriate 
(see Background, Primary Constituent Elements, Criteria Used to 
Identify Critical Habitat, Summary of Changes From the Proposed Revised 
Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat Designation, and Critical 
Habitat Units sections above). In some cases, the amount of detail 
requested by the commenter was not appropriate for the purpose of 
designating critical habitat; therefore some information was not 
incorporated.
    Comment 21: Two commenters stated that they believe lands owned or 
under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees 
should be excluded from the revised Navarretia fossalis critical 
habitat designation. The commenters argued for exclusion because the 
HCP already adequately provides for the survival and recovery of the 
species, and under section 6.9 of the HCP and section 14.10 of the 
associated Implementing Agreement, no critical habitat should be 
designated in the HCP Plan Area. The first commenter also argued that 
case law (``15 vernal pool species court case'') supports exclusion 
where the court upheld the exclusion of the Western Riverside County 
MSHCP. The second commenter stated that although the Western Riverside 
Flood Control and Water Conservation District is a Western Riverside 
County MSHCP permittee whose projects are currently subject to the 
provisions of the HCP, critical habitat designation may affect the 
continued operation, maintenance, and restoration of existing flood 
control facilities as well as the construction of future flood control 
improvements along the San Jacinto River and within the Salt Creek 
watershed. The second commenter also argued designating critical 
habitat within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan boundaries would 
create duplicative regulatory efforts without any additional benefits 
to the species.
    Our Response: With regard to the commenters' assertions that lands 
owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
should be excluded because the HCP adequately provides for the survival 
and recovery of the species, or because the HCP is being fully 
implemented, we agree that the protection afforded Navarretia fossalis 
and its essential habitat under the MSHCP is a relevant consideration 
in our section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. Exclusion is based on our 
determination that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of 
inclusion, and that exclusion of an area will not result in extinction 
of a species. We found the benefits of exclusion of lands covered by 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the minimal 
benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat designation 
in areas that receive long-term conservation and management for the 
species and its habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). For more 
information, see response to Comment 13 and the Application of Section 
4(b)(2) of the Act section for a detailed discussion.
    After public review and comment on the proposed revision to 
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis, we determined through our 
analysis under section 4(b)(2) of the Act that the maximum extent of 
allowable exclusions under the Western Riverside County MSHCP was 
limited to the exclusion of lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of 
the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP in Subunits 6D and 
6E where lands are conserved and managed in perpetuity (see Application 
of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act--Western Riverside County Multiple 
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County MSHCP) 
section above for a detailed discussion of the exclusion analysis.
    We do not foresee additional effects of critical habitat 
designation on flood control operations along the San Jacinto River and 
within the Salt Creek watershed as a result of mandated habitat 
conservation actions. We believe any impacts to partnerships (a benefit 
of exclusion) would be outweighed by the benefits of inclusion as 
explained above. Therefore, the commenter's argument that lands owned 
by or under the jurisdiction of Western Riverside County MSHCP 
permittees should be excluded because of possible impacts to the flood 
control facilities and future flood control improvements is not 
adequately supported.
    Comment 22: Two commenters suggested that the Service should not 
exclude lands owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside 
County MSHCP permittees from the revised Navarretia fossalis critical 
habitat designation. The first commenter opposed to exclusion argued 
that no biological benefits are achieved by excluding habitat within 
HCP Plan areas

[[Page 62230]]

from critical habitat designation because:
    (1) Research demonstrates species with designated critical habitat 
are less likely to be declining, and twice as likely to be recovering, 
than species without critical habitat (cited Taylor et al. 2005);
    (2) The Western Riverside County MSHCP fails to address degradation 
of habitat inside the reserves, especially the ongoing problem of 
manure dumping activities; and
    (3) There are nonsignatory agencies that have jurisdiction within 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan area who conduct activities 
outside of the HCP process that require section 7 consultation.
    The second commenter opposed to exclusion gave the following 
reasons:
    (1) Critical habitat designation provides potential for enhanced 
protection and recovery of this species within the HCP plan area, 
because these areas require ``special management considerations or 
protection,'' and it is not a ``hindrance to the conservation 
process'';
    (2) Habitat continues to be lost due to the common practices of 
disking, soil amendment, and hydrology alteration within the plan area 
because the Western Riverside County MSHCP does not address these 
existing land use practices and did not provide procedures for 
conserving specific populations of Navarretia fossalis;
    (3) The benefits of critical habitat designation are especially 
great along the San Jacinto River, (Upper) Salt Creek, and the Wickerd 
Road and Scott Road vernal pools because threats are high and there is 
a potential Federal nexus in this area; and
    (4) The proposed flood control plan for the San Jacinto River is a 
covered activity under the Western Riverside County MSHCP and the loss 
of infrequent, major flooding events may negatively affect the 
``metapopulation ecology'' (dispersal required to recolonize pools 
where subpopulations have been extirpated) of N. fossalis.
    Our Response: With regard to the commenters' assertions that lands 
owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP 
should not be excluded because the HCP may not adequately provide for 
the survival and recovery of the species, or because is not being fully 
implemented, we agree that the protection afforded Navarretia fossalis 
and its essential habitat under the Western Riverside County MSHCP is a 
relevant consideration in our section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. 
Exclusion is based on our determination that the benefits of exclusion 
outweigh the benefits of inclusion, and that exclusion of an area will 
not result in extinction of a species. We found the benefits of 
exclusion of lands covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be 
greater than the minimal benefits of including these lands in the 
critical habitat designation in areas that are currently receiving 
long-term conservation and management to benefit the species (i.e., 
Subunits 6D and 6E). For more information, see response to Comment 13 
and the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a 
detailed discussion.
    We do not agree with the commenter that Taylor et al.'s (2005, pp. 
360-367) conclusions compel a finding that lands covered by the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP should be included in the revised Navarretia 
fossalis critical habitat designation. The results of Taylor et al. 
(2005, pp. 360-367) do indicate a significant conservation benefit of 
critical habitat designation; however, that study did not analyze or 
discuss the effects of HCP-based exclusions or the above-described 
exclusion determination process for N. fossalis. The benefits of 
excluding lands covered by a particular HCP based on partnerships must 
be analyzed independently and balanced against the benefits of 
inclusion (based on protections provided by critical habitat that are 
not redundant with HCP protections) because HCPs:
    (1) Are variable in scope;
    (2) Contain variable conservation and management planning efforts; 
and
    (3) Use species abundance trends that may not be apparent for many 
years to determine effects of conservation measures.
    Therefore, the general conclusions in the literature cited by the 
commenter do not warrant the specific conclusion that all essential 
habitat covered by HCPs should be included in critical habitat.
    We agree with the commenter that when there are agencies with 
jurisdiction in the HCP plan area that are not HCP signatories who may 
conduct activities requiring section 7 consultation; the regulatory 
benefits of critical habitat designation may be higher in situations 
where the likely protections afforded through the section 7 
consultation are not redundant with, but would go beyond, those 
afforded under the HCP. However the benefits of including or excluding 
particular areas may vary even within a specific HCP, and determining 
those relative benefits requires an evaluation of the circumstances 
affecting each area. The mere fact that a Federal nexus exists does not 
mean that regulatory benefits of designation will outweigh the benefits 
of exclusion.
    Regarding the comment that areas should be included in critical 
habitat designation because they require special management 
considerations or protection, this language refers to the definition of 
critical habitat, not the exclusion process. Section 3(5)(A)(i) of the 
Act defines critical habitat, in part, as areas which may require 
special management considerations or protection. Section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act directs the Secretary to consider the impacts of designating such 
areas as critical habitat and provides the Secretary with discretion to 
exclude particular areas if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 
benefits of inclusion. In this rule, we do not state that areas that 
are being adequately managed and protected do not meet the definition 
of critical habitat under section 3(5)(A) of the Act. Rather, we 
considered the management and protection of particular areas that do 
meet the definition of critical habitat in our exclusion analyses under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Please see Critical Habitat and Application 
of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act sections above for more detailed 
discussions of the definition of critical habitat and exclusion 
analyses.
    Comment 23: One commenter requested that if we designate new 
critical habitat, the revised critical habitat rule should include 
clear guidance to other Federal agencies by stating that proof of 
Western Riverside County MSHCP compliance will allow the agency to make 
a ``no effect'' determination with regard to projects in designated 
critical habitat to ensure that section 7 consultations are consistent 
with the Western Riverside County MSHCP and are completed in a timely 
manner.
    Our Response: A ``no effect'' determination is the appropriate 
determination when the Federal action agency determines its proposed 
action will not affect a listed species or designated critical habitat. 
This requires a project (and species-specific) evaluation and analysis 
of effects to reach a ``no effect'' determination. Therefore, we are 
unable at this time to concur with any ``no effect'' determinations 
made by other Federal agencies for any future projects that may occur 
in Navarretia fossalis critical habitat.
    Comment 24: One commenter requested that we exclude Subunit 4E from 
the revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis based 
on partnership benefits. They stated the Ramona Grasslands Open Space

[[Page 62231]]

Preserve in Subunit 4E is being managed and monitored according to Area 
Specific Management Directives built from the scientific framework laid 
out in the Framework Management and Monitoring Plan for the Ramona 
Grasslands Open Space Preserve: San Diego County. The commenter further 
stated that preserve management goals will be revised and updated to 
comply with the requirements of the North County MSCP once it is 
approved. The commenter provided a list of current management actions 
and specific goals for the conservation of N. fossalis.
    Our Response: As discussed in the responses to Comments 13 and 21, 
exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Act are not based on 
partnership benefits alone, but whether the benefits of exclusion 
outweigh the benefits of inclusion. We reviewed the Area Specific 
Management Directives referenced by the commenter and determined that 
they do describe and provide beneficial conservation measures for 
Navarretia fossalis that are redundant with conservation measures 
provided by critical habitat designation, and therefore would reduce 
the benefits of inclusion in critical habitat if implementation were 
assured into the future. When considering the benefits of exclusion, we 
consider a variety of factors, including but not limited to whether the 
plan is finalized (i.e., approved by all parties) and there is a 
reasonable expectation that conservation management strategies and 
actions will be implemented into the future (see Application of Section 
4(b)(2) of the Act section for further discussion). The HCP under which 
these measures will be assured of future implementation is not yet 
finalized; therefore, we determined the benefits of exclusion do not 
outweigh the benefits of inclusion for lands within the Ramona 
Grasslands Open Space Preserve portion of Subunit 4E from N. fossalis 
critical habitat designation at this time.
    Comment 25: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the 
inclusion or exclusion of lands owned or under the jurisdiction of MSCP 
permittees in the Navarretia fossalis final revised critical habitat 
designation. The first commenter opposed to exclusion argued that no 
biological benefits are achieved by excluding habitat within HCP plan 
areas from critical habitat designation because:
    (1) Research demonstrates species with designated critical habitat 
are less likely to be declining, and twice as likely to be recovering, 
than species without critical habitat (cited Taylor et al. 2005);
    (2) The MSCP fails to address degradation of habitat inside the 
conserved areas, especially where illegal OHV activities have 
``severely'' impacted vernal pools; and
    (3) There are nonsignatory agencies that have jurisdiction within 
the MSCP plan area who conduct activities outside of the HCP process 
that require section 7 consultation.
    The second commenter stated the MSCP provides for the conservation 
of Navarretia fossalis and therefore lands owned by or under the 
jurisdiction of permittees should be excluded from critical habitat 
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    Our Response: A decision to exclude lands from critical habitat is 
based on an evaluation of the benefits of exclusion in comparison to 
the benefits of inclusion. Please see response to Comment 13 above 
regarding arguments for and against exclusion of lands owned by or 
under the jurisdiction of regional HCP permittees. We found the 
benefits of exclusion of lands covered by the County of San Diego 
Subarea Plan under the MSCP outweighed the benefits of inclusion for 
areas that are receiving long-term conservation and management (Subunit 
3A); however, we found that the benefits of inclusion outweighed the 
benefits of exclusion on lands that are currently not conserved and 
being impacted by activities that were not covered by the County of San 
Diego Subarea Plan because there were potential significant benefits to 
the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may come from the 
designation of critical habitat on these lands (Subunits 5B, 5F, and 
5I). See response to Comment 13 and 22 and Application of Section 
4(b)(2) of the Act section for a complete discussion.
    Comment 26: One commenter recommended critical habitat be 
designated on military bases where applicable, and stated it is not 
appropriate to rely on integrated natural resources management plans 
(INRMPs) for protection of Navarretia fossalis.
    Our Response: We do not have discretion to designate critical 
habitat on the military bases within proposed revised critical habitat 
as suggested by the commenter. The National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas 
eligible for designation as critical habitat. Specifically, section 
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: 
``The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any lands or 
other geographical areas owned or controlled by the Department of 
Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject to an integrated 
natural resources management plan (INRMP) prepared under section 670a 
of this title, if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan 
provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is 
proposed for designation.'' (See Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the 
Act section above for further discussion). We determined the INRMPs for 
MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS Miramar (Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 
2007; Gene Stout and Associates et al. 2006) provide benefits to 
Navarretia fossalis; therefore, the Act mandates we exempt these 
military bases from critical habitat designation (see Application of 
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section above for further discussion).
    Comment 27: One commenter stated that no areas should be excluded 
from critical habitat designation based on HCPs that have not been 
finalized and implemented because there is no guarantee that proposed 
HCPs will be finalized.
    Our Response: We did not exclude any habitat from this revised 
critical habitat designation within the plan area of an HCP permit that 
has not yet been issued (see responses to Comments 14 and 24).
    Comment 28: One commenter stated that areas of Unit 6 covered by 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP should be excluded from critical 
habitat designation based on the Service's permitting Biological 
Opinion for the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Service 2004b) for 
several reasons:
    (1) The Service's reasoning in the 2005 rule that excluded the same 
areas in the 2005 designation;
    (2) The proposed designation of these areas covered by the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP is not beneficial to the species;
    (3) The Western Riverside County MSHCP precludes designation of 
critical habitat;
    (4) Several species for which critical habitats were not designated 
occur on Western Riverside County MSHCP covered lands; and
    (5) The idea that designations of critical habitat within the 
Western Riverside County MSHCP ultimately function as disincentives to 
such planning processes.
    Our Response: For lands within the jurisdiction of the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP, this rule excludes a portion (Subunits 6D and 
6E) and includes the remaining covered lands (Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C) 
as designated critical habitat. When we conduct an exclusion analysis 
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, each exclusion is based on weighing 
the benefits of exclusion with

[[Page 62232]]

the benefits of inclusion. We found the benefits of exclusion of lands 
covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the 
minimal benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat 
designation in areas that receive long-term conservation and management 
of the species and its habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). Please see 
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a detailed 
discussion on our exclusion analyses (including why areas covered by 
the Western Riverside County MSHCP that are designated as critical 
habitat are beneficial to the species) for those areas we considered 
for exclusion in the proposed revised critical habitat designation (74 
FR 27588), the associated document announcing the DEA (75 FR 19575), 
and our response to Comment 13.
    With regard to the commenters concern of designating areas in this 
rule that were excluded in the 2005 critical habitat designation, we 
did not designate areas containing essential habitat features if those 
habitat features were already conserved and managed for the benefit of 
Navarretia fossalis because we concluded that the areas did not meet 
the second part of the definition of critical habitat under section 
3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have reconsidered our approach in this rule 
in light of subsequent court decisions and have decided that areas 
containing essential habitat features that ``may require'' special 
management considerations or protection do meet the definition of 
critical habitat irrespective of whether the habitat features are 
currently receiving special management or protection. See the Summary 
of Changes From the 2005 Final Designation of Critical Habitat section 
for further discussion of why some areas were included as critical 
habitat in this rule that were excluded in the 2005 rule.
    With regard to the commenter's belief that critical habitat should 
not be designated in the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area based 
on language in section 6.9 of the HCP and the associated Implementing 
Agreement, section 14.10 of the Implementing Agreement does not 
preclude critical habitat designation within the plan area (Dudek and 
Associates 2003, p. 63). See our response to Comment 20 for a 
discussion of why critical habitat is not precluded under an HCP 
Implementing Agreement.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this 
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this rule under Executive 
Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its determination upon the 
following four criteria:
    (1) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or 
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector, 
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
    (2) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal 
agencies' actions.
    (3) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants, 
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their 
recipients.
    (4) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an agency is required 
to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it 
must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory 
flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small 
entities (small businesses, small organizations, and small government 
jurisdictions), as described below. However, no regulatory flexibility 
analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies the rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The SBREFA amended RFA to require Federal agencies to provide 
a certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. In this final rule, we are certifying that 
the critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The following discussion explains our rationale.
    According to the Small Business Administration, small entities 
include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit 
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school 
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000 
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses 
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500 
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees, 
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual 
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5 
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than 
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with 
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic 
impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the 
types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this 
rule, as well as types of project modifications that may result. In 
general, the term ``significant economic impact'' is meant to apply to 
a typical small business firm's business operations.
    To determine if the revised designation of critical habitat for 
Navarretia fossalis would significantly affect a substantial number of 
small entities, we consider the number of small entities affected 
within particular types of economic activities, such as residential and 
commercial development. We apply the ``substantial number'' test 
individually to each industry to determine if certification is 
appropriate. However, the SBREFA does not explicitly define 
``substantial number'' or ``significant economic impact.'' 
Consequently, to assess whether a ``substantial number'' of small 
entities is affected by this designation, this analysis considers the 
relative number of small entities likely to be impacted in an area. In 
some circumstances, especially with critical habitat designations of 
limited extent, we may aggregate across all industries and consider 
whether the total number of small entities affected is substantial. In 
estimating the number of small entities potentially affected, we also 
consider whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
    Designation of critical habitat only affects activities authorized, 
funded, or carried out by Federal agencies. Some kinds of activities 
are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not be 
affected by critical habitat designation. In areas where the Navarretia 
fossalis is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult 
with us under section 7 of the Act on activities they authorize, fund, 
or carry out that may affect the species. Federal agencies also must 
consult with us if their activities may affect critical habitat. 
Designation of critical habitat, therefore, could result in an 
additional economic impact on small entities due to the requirement to 
reinitiate

[[Page 62233]]

consultation for ongoing Federal activities (see Application of the 
``Adverse Modification'' Standard section).
    In our final economic analysis of the critical habitat designation, 
we evaluated the potential economic effects on small business entities 
resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the 
revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. The 
analysis is based on the estimated impacts associated with the 
rulemaking as described in sections 3 through 9 of the analysis and 
evaluates the potential for economic impacts related to: residential, 
commercial and industrial development; conservation lands management; 
transportation; pipeline projects; flood control; agriculture; and fire 
management (Entrix 2010, p. A-1). The FEA estimates the total 
incremental impacts associated with development as a whole to be 
$112,000 to $431,000 over the 20-year timeframe of the FEA. The FEA 
identifies incremental impacts to small entities to occur only in the 
development sector (Entrix 2010, p. A-2). The other categories of 
projects either will have no impacts (conservation land management, 
pipeline projects, agriculture, or fire management) or are Federal, 
State, or public entities not considered small or exceed the criteria 
for small business status (Entrix 2010, pp. A-1-A-2). Of the 
approximately 3,143 ac (1,272 ha) land considered developable in the 
designation, only 1,130 ac (457 ha) has been forecasted to be developed 
over the next 20-year timeframe (Entrix 2010, p. A-3). The FEA equates 
this acreage to 38 projects, with one developer per project (Entrix 
2010, p. A-3). The FEA summarizes that two developers annually may be 
affected by the designation of critical habitat resulting in total 
annualized incremental impacts to small entities of $10,565 to $40,644 
(Entrix 2010, pp. A-3, A-4). The FEA assumes all developers are 
considered small and states that this estimate may overstate impacts if 
not all of the developers are small (Entrix 2010, p. A-4). The FEA also 
states (Section 3 of the FEA) that where substitute land is readily 
available to developers, costs will be passed on to affected landowners 
in the form of decreased land value and that under such circumstances 
most of the costs will not be borne by developers (Entrix 2010, p. A-
4). Please refer to our final economic analysis of critical habitat 
designation for N. fossalis for a more detailed discussion of potential 
economic impacts.
    In summary, we considered whether this designation would result in 
a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities. The total number of small businesses impacted annually by the 
designation is estimated to be two, with an annualized impact of 
approximately of $10,565 to $40,644. This impact is less than 10 
percent of the total incremental impact identified for development 
activities and may be an overestimate of the impacts considering that 
not all developers will be small and that some of these costs may be 
passed on to landowners. Based on the above reasoning and currently 
available information, we concluded this rule would not result in a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
for transportation, development, and flood control impacts as 
identified in the FEA (Entrix 2010, pp. A-1-A-4). Therefore, we are 
certifying that the designation of critical habitat for Navarretia 
fossalis will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211

    On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 (E.O. 
13211; ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'') on regulations that 
significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. E.O. 13211 
requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when 
undertaking certain actions. OMB has provided guidance for implementing 
this Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute 
``a significant adverse effect'' when compared to not taking the 
regulatory action under consideration. The economic analysis finds that 
none of these criteria are relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on 
information in the economic analysis, energy-related impacts associated 
with Navarretia fossalis conservation activities within critical 
habitat are not expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat 
is not expected to 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, the Service 
makes the following findings:
    (1) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, 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. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal 
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose 
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or [T]ribal 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 
Government's 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 non-Federal 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 not apply, nor would 
critical habitat

[[Page 62234]]

shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above onto 
State governments.
    (2) As discussed in the FEA of the revised designation of critical 
habitat for Navarretia fossalis, we do not believe that this rule would 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it would not 
produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year; that 
is, it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act . The FEA concludes incremental impacts may occur 
due to administrative costs of section 7 consultations for development, 
transportation, and flood control projects activities; however, these 
are not expected to significantly affect small governments. Incremental 
impacts stemming from various species conservation and development 
control activities are expected to be borne by the Federal Government, 
California Department of Transportation, CDFG, Riverside County, 
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and 
City of Perris, which are not considered small governments. 
Consequently, we do not believe that the revised critical habitat 
designation would significantly or uniquely affect small government 
entities. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.

Takings--Executive Order 12630

    In accordance with E.O. 12630 (``Government Actions and 
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property 
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of 
designating critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis in a takings 
implications assessment. Critical habitat designation 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. The takings implications 
assessment concludes that this designation of critical habitat for N. 
fossalis does not pose significant takings implications for lands 
within or affected by the designation.

Federalism--Executive Order 13132

    In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), the rule does not have 
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not 
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior, we requested 
information from, and coordinated development of the proposed critical 
habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies in 
California. The designation may have some benefit to these governments 
because the areas that contain the features essential to the 
conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the primary 
constituent elements of the habitat necessary to the conservation of 
the species are specifically identified. This information does not 
alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However, 
it may assist these local governments in long-range planning (because 
these local governments no longer have to wait for case-by-case section 
7 consultations to occur).
    Where State and local governments require approval or authorization 
from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat, 
consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal 
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.

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

    In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), this rule 
meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in accordance with 
the provisions of the Act. This final rule uses standard property 
descriptions and identifies the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the subspecies within the designated 
areas to assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of 
Navarretia fossalis.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

    This rule does not contain any new collections of information that 
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, 
businesses, or organizations. An agency 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.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

    It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court 
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare 
environmental analyses as defined by NEPA in connection with 
designating critical habitat under the Act. We published a notice 
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was upheld by the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 
F.3d 1495 (9\th\ Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).

Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and the Department of the 
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we have a responsibility to communicate 
meaningfully with recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-
government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 
1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily 
acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with Tribes in 
developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that tribal 
lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to 
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available 
to Tribes.
    We determined that there are no tribal lands occupied at the time 
of listing that contain the features essential for the conservation of 
the species, nor are there any unoccupied tribal lands that are 
essential for the conservation of Navarretia fossalis. Therefore, we 
are not designating critical habitat for N. fossalis on tribal lands.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited in this rulemaking is 
available on http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Field 
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section).

Authors

    The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the 
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.


[[Page 62235]]



Regulation Promulgation

0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

0
2. In Sec.  17.96(a), revise the entry for ``Navarretia fossalis 
(spreading navarretia)'' under family Polemoniaceae to read as follows:


Sec.  17.96  Critical habitat--plants.

    (a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Polemoniaceae: Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia)
    (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Los Angeles, Riverside, 
and San Diego Counties, California, on the maps below.
    (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) for 
Navarretia fossalis consist of three components:
    (i) PCE 1--Ephemeral wetland habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 
ha)) and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that become inundated 
by winter rains and hold water or have saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6 
months during a year with average rainfall (i.e., years where average 
rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the rainy 
season (between October and May)). This period of inundation is long 
enough to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for 
Navarretia fossalis and other native species typical of vernal pool and 
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat, but not so long that 
true wetland species inhabit the areas.
    (ii) PCE 2--Intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the 
local watershed. Areas characterized by mounds, swales, and depressions 
within a matrix of upland habitat that result in intermittently flowing 
surface and subsurface water in swales, drainages, and pools described 
in PCE 1.
    (iii) PCE 3--Soils that support ponding during winter and spring. 
Soils found in areas characterized in PCEs 1 and 2 that have a clay 
component or other property that creates an impermeable surface or 
subsurface layer. These soil types include, but are not limited to: 
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles County; Domino, Traver, 
Waukena, Chino, and Willows soils in Riverside County; and Huerhuero, 
Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and Redding soils in San Diego County.
    (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures existing 
on the effective date of this rule and not containing one of more of 
the primary constituent elements, such as buildings, aqueducts, 
airports, and roads, and the land on which such structures are located.
    (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were 
created using a base of U.S. Geological Survey 7.5' quadrangle maps. 
Critical habitat units were then mapped using Universal Transverse 
Mercator (UTM) zone 11, North American Datum (NAD) 1983 coordinates.
    (5) Note: Index Map of critical habitat units for Navarretia 
fossalis (spreading navarretia) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 62236]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.002

    (6) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area, Los Angeles 
County, CA. Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the 
following Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) North American Datum of 
1983 (NAD83) coordinates (E, N): 367454, 3813696; 367493, 3813876; 
367443, 3813933; 367418, 3814003; 367396, 3814159; 367387, 3814304; 
367454, 3814474; 367517, 3814549; 367580, 3814651; 367676, 3814752; 
367807, 3814866; 367996, 3814923; 368172, 3815075; 368198, 3815107; 
368375, 3815036; 368318, 3814957; 368262, 3814889; 368198, 3814795; 
368181, 3814768; 368108, 3814754; 368073, 3814710; 367963, 3814624; 
367921, 3814549; 367938, 3814421; 368014, 3814343; 368006, 3814230; 
368048, 3814134; 368070, 3814110; 368060, 3814070; 368014, 3814065; 
367972, 3814041; 367955, 3813970; 367935, 3813962; 367866, 3813938; 
367834, 3813913; 367795, 3813849; 367740, 3813818; 367720, 3813762; 
367640, 3813619; 367577, 3813595; 367520, 3813592; 367481, 3813628; 
367454, 3813696; thence returning to 367454, 3813696.
    (ii) Note: Map of Subunit 1A (Cruzan Mesa) is provided at paragraph 
(7)(ii) of this entry.

[[Page 62237]]

    (7) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area, Los Angeles 
County, CA. Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 366405, 3812925; 366364, 
3812918; 366339, 3812957; 366287, 3812974; 366266, 3812973; 366271, 
3813010; 366295, 3813063; 366333, 3813106; 366370, 3813141; 366424, 
3813157; 366448, 3813168; 366505, 3813193; 366585, 3813271; 366601, 
3813269; 366600, 3813233; 366619, 3813163; 366628, 3813088; 366619, 
3813004; 366612, 3812959; 366602, 3812939; 366532, 3812913; 366490, 
3812911; 366441, 3812920; 366405, 3812925; thence returning to 366405, 
3812925.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 1, Subunits 1A (Cruzan Mesa) and 1B (Plum 
Canyon) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.003


[[Page 62238]]


    (8) Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area--
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station, San Diego County, CA.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Encinitas. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 470268, 3663409; 470278, 
3663384; 470281, 3663385; 470287, 3663371; 470291, 3663351; 470291, 
3663350; 470312, 3663306; 470317, 3663288; 470319, 3663280; 470359, 
3663184; 470392, 3663084; 470440, 3662935; 470487, 3662900; 470520, 
3662863; 470515, 3662828; 470501, 3662798; 470529, 3662710; 470522, 
3662706; 470515, 3662703; 470501, 3662700; 470476, 3662766; 470454, 
3662825; 470429, 3662892; 470404, 3662960; 470386, 3663008; 470368, 
3663055; 470361, 3663075; 470296, 3663238; 470184, 3663499; 470163, 
3663558; 470195, 3663563; 470209, 3663563; 470210, 3663559; 470213, 
3663548; 470223, 3663527; 470234, 3663498; 470242, 3663476; 470248, 
3663458; 470251, 3663445; 470251, 3663440; 470260, 3663420; 470264, 
3663415; thence returning to 470268, 3663409.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 (Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station) 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.004


[[Page 62239]]


    (9) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Del Mar. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485008, 3639919; 485017, 
3639943; 485017, 3639943; 485018, 3639947; 485035, 3639991; 485533, 
3639996; 485537, 3639996; 485537, 3639996; 485525, 3639961; 485476, 
3639931; 485440, 3639908; 485440, 3639908; 485338, 3639845; 485223, 
3639815; 485221, 3639814; 485179, 3639804; 485179, 3639803; 485158, 
3639798; 485086, 3639788; 485070, 3639828; 485008, 3639919; thence 
returning to 485008, 3639919.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3B (Carroll Canyon) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.005
    

[[Page 62240]]


    (10) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La Jolla. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481837, 3636331; 481667, 
3636273; 481510, 3636284; 481409, 3636370; 481393, 3636384; 481475, 
3636442; 481708, 3636763; 481796, 3636699; 481797, 3636697; 481797, 
3636697; 481877, 3636570; 481965, 3636407; 481837, 3636331; thence 
returning to 481837, 3636331.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3C (Nobel Drive) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.006
    

[[Page 62241]]


    (11) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La Jolla. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 487573, 3630977; 487591, 
3630964; 487627, 3630940; 487619, 3630908; 487617, 3630896; 487645, 
3630880; 487577, 3630651; 487447, 3630712; 487233, 3630813; 487194, 
3630830; 487232, 3630926; 487248, 3630966; 487260, 3630999; 487281, 
3631001; 487306, 3630997; 487327, 3630977; 487330, 3630975; 487334, 
3630978; 487336, 3630979; 487341, 3630983; 487343, 3630991; 487359, 
3631033; 487363, 3631045; 487361, 3631049; 487357, 3631057; 487377, 
3631099; 487386, 3631117; 487376, 3631131; 487375, 3631131; 487326, 
3631133; 487336, 3631175; 487340, 3631237; 487346, 3631328; 487347, 
3631333; 487384, 3631352; 487437, 3631378; 487571, 3631443; 487594, 
3631446; 487598, 3631422; 487598, 3631310; 487575, 3631296; 487573, 
3630977; thence returning to 487573, 3630977.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3D (Montgomery Field) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.007
    

[[Page 62242]]


    (12) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County, 
CA. Subunit 4C1: San Marcos (Upham).
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481857, 3666532; 481841, 
3666524; 481458, 3666685; 481587, 3666988; 481974, 3666823; 481857, 
3666532; thence returning to 481857, 3666532.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C1 is provided at paragraph 
(14)(ii) of this entry.
    (13) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County, 
CA. Subunit 4C2: San Marcos (Universal Boot).
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481373, 3666492; 481676, 
3666355; 481700, 3666464; 481813, 3666423; 481809, 3666367; 481877, 
3666133; 481805, 3666113; 481825, 3666048; 481669, 3666007; 481641, 
3666000; 481639, 3666000; 481639, 3666002; 481618, 3666066; 481555, 
3666266; 481317, 3666363; 481373, 3666492; thence returning to 481373, 
3666492.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C2 is provided at paragraph 
(14)(ii) of this entry.
    (14) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County, 
CA. Subunit 4D: San Marcos (Bent Avenue).
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 482781, 3666563; 482772, 
3666562; 482716, 3666750; 482842, 3666785; 482865, 3666703; 482781, 
3666563; thence returning to 482781, 3666563.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D (San Marcos) 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.008


[[Page 62243]]


    (15) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County, 
CA. Subunit 4E: Ramona.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Pasqual. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 (E, N): 508768, 3654813; 508597, 3654751; 508493, 
3654857; 508382, 3654971; 508373, 3654977; 508373, 3654977; 508366, 
3654982; 508357, 3654989; 508270, 3655050; 508115, 3655137; 508036, 
3655159; 507889, 3655176; 507807, 3655222; 507750, 3655265; 507772, 
3655380; 507758, 3655500; 507813, 3655500; 507965, 3655470; 508357, 
3655383; 508363, 3655347; 508363, 3655345; 508375, 3655275; 508376, 
3655265; 509073, 3655260; 509073, 3655260; 509073, 3655260; 509180, 
3655257; 509181, 3655234; 509181, 3655233; 509209, 3654862; 509082, 
3654835; 508896, 3654822; 508768, 3654813; thence returning to 508768, 
3654813.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4E (Ramona) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.009
    

[[Page 62244]]


    (16) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by 
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 501084, 3616605; 501096, 
3616520; 501078, 3616418; 501054, 3616382; 501054, 3616382; 501051, 
3616377; 501051, 3616376; 501051, 3616376; 501051, 3616376; 501049, 
3616374; 501052, 3616122; 501052, 3616122; 501052, 3616121; 501053, 
3616099; 501005, 3616101; 501004, 3616101; 501002, 3616102; 500915, 
3616106; 500913, 3616107; 500913, 3616107; 500814, 3616112; 500775, 
3616112; 500775, 3616112; 500775, 3616112; 500769, 3616112; 500562, 
3616233; 500497, 3616288; 500462, 3616334; 500436, 3616380; 500420, 
3616409; 500402, 3616428; 500327, 3616508; 500312, 3616524; 500300, 
3616596; 500356, 3616639; 500425, 3616639; 500468, 3616628; 500511, 
3616617; 500591, 3616596; 500640, 3616597; 500651, 3616619; 500670, 
3616713; 500671, 3616718; 500685, 3616767; 500770, 3616826; 500802, 
3616841; 500872, 3616836; 500903, 3616834; 500952, 3616822; 501051, 
3616760; 501075, 3616669; 501075, 3616667; 501076, 3616663; 501084, 
3616607; 501084, 3616605; 501084, 3616605; thence returning to 501084, 
3616605.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5A (Sweetwater Vernal Pools) 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.010


[[Page 62245]]


    (17) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499953, 
3607783; 499924, 3607743; 499882, 3607749; 499871, 3607775; 499868, 
3607814; 499815, 3607834; 499768, 3607839; 499731, 3607866; 499747, 
3607899; 499762, 3607949; 499818, 3607996; 499843, 3608025; 499843, 
3608079; 499818, 3608100; 499815, 3608107; 499784, 3608170; 499796, 
3608236; 499838, 3608323; 499855, 3608364; 499880, 3608400; 499909, 
3608415; 499921, 3608415; 499944, 3608404; 499957, 3608370; 499997, 
3608238; 499997, 3608196; 499994, 3608161; 499992, 3608144; 499988, 
3608082; 499962, 3608026; 499936, 3607993; 499920, 3607960; 499923, 
3607916; 499939, 3607872; 499957, 3607827; 499953, 3607783; thence 
returning to 499953, 3607783.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5B (Otay River Valley) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.011
    

[[Page 62246]]


    (18) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5C: Otay Mesa.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 506759, 3606253; 506757, 
3606201; 506702, 3606219; 506663, 3606258; 506601, 3606362; 506590, 
3606382; 506575, 3606411; 506575, 3606411; 506535, 3606490; 506509, 
3606580; 506503, 3606601; 506485, 3606661; 506481, 3606693; 506531, 
3606734; 506581, 3606748; 506599, 3606760; 506600, 3606760; 506617, 
3606771; 506634, 3606848; 506641, 3606869; 506642, 3606870; 506660, 
3606918; 506706, 3606936; 506750, 3606885; 506777, 3606855; 506777, 
3606854; 506792, 3606837; 506829, 3606785; 506880, 3606730; 506913, 
3606679; 506915, 3606602; 506915, 3606597; 506918, 3606535; 506901, 
3606523; 506901, 3606523; 506885, 3606512; 506841, 3606510; 506807, 
3606502; 506776, 3606485; 506776, 3606485; 506768, 3606480; 506768, 
3606473; 506768, 3606473; 506759, 3606253; 506759, 3606253; thence 
returning to 506759, 3606253.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5C (Otay Mesa) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.012
    

[[Page 62247]]


    (19) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by 
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 507676, 3615007; 507616, 
3614943; 507548, 3614930; 507458, 3614918; 507386, 3614907; 507320, 
3614907; 507247, 3614939; 507190, 3614947; 507173, 3614947; 507188, 
3615018; 507239, 3615163; 507269, 3615226; 507269, 3615275; 507213, 
3615335; 507188, 3615393; 507188, 3615433; 507194, 3615465; 507194, 
3615465; 507194, 3615465; 507196, 3615476; 507211, 3615508; 507298, 
3615529; 507316, 3615587; 507301, 3615676; 507301, 3615723; 507301, 
3615800; 507362, 3615808; 507402, 3615865; 507403, 3615866; 507448, 
3615906; 507488, 3615906; 507526, 3615872; 507556, 3615806; 507605, 
3615706; 507590, 3615601; 507537, 3615580; 507514, 3615518; 507556, 
3615510; 507654, 3615493; 507669, 3615405; 507661, 3615318; 507661, 
3615220; 507674, 3615164; 507678, 3615148; 507680, 3615073; 507679, 
3615062; 507679, 3615062; 507679, 3615062; 507676, 3615007; thence 
returning to 507676, 3615007.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5F (Proctor Valley) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.013
    

[[Page 62248]]


    (20) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Jamul Mountains and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 508045, 
3609784; 508120, 3609675; 508188, 3609745; 508194, 3609751; 508316, 
3609736; 508337, 3609733; 508400, 3609730; 508423, 3609791; 508450, 
3609898; 508460, 3609936; 508570, 3609926; 508651, 3609926; 508671, 
3609898; 508672, 3609897; 508707, 3609847; 508714, 3609756; 508646, 
3609718; 508323, 3609536; 508199, 3609465; 508094, 3609406; 508033, 
3609385; 507917, 3609374; 507800, 3609334; 507695, 3609287; 507595, 
3609248; 507467, 3609283; 507394, 3609229; 507308, 3609250; 507303, 
3609341; 507359, 3609406; 507392, 3609455; 507371, 3609565; 507383, 
3609658; 507366, 3609763; 507387, 3609868; 507392, 3609895; 507404, 
3609959; 507455, 3609968; 507572, 3609922; 507715, 3609896; 507742, 
3609891; 507912, 3609880; 508045, 3609784; thence returning to 508045, 
3609784.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5G (Otay Lakes) follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.014
    
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 62249]]

    (21) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 498398, 
3601961; 498398, 3601927; 498482, 3601937; 498514, 3601914; 498495, 
3601822; 498463, 3601742; 498434, 3601651; 498324, 3601579; 498154, 
3601581; 498025, 3601666; 498008, 3601765; 498093, 3601864; 498185, 
3601904; 498223, 3601940; 498240, 3602001; 498268, 3602119; 498268, 
3602251; 498375, 3602256; 498461, 3602258; 498495, 3602211; 498468, 
3602159; 498468, 3602158; 498463, 3602148; 498450, 3602119; 498450, 
3602119; 498436, 3602087; 498407, 3602039; 498398, 3601961; thence 
returning to 498398, 3601961.
    (ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 497444, 
3602605; 497382, 3602601; 497311, 3602614; 497263, 3602633; 497255, 
3602688; 497270, 3602708; 497270, 3602708; 497287, 3602732; 497379, 
3602732; 497424, 3602725; 497443, 3602708; 497443, 3602707; 497447, 
3602704; 497529, 3602702; 497546, 3602702; 497545, 3602698; 497545, 
3602698; 497529, 3602651; 497518, 3602636; 497515, 3602631; 497455, 
3602606; 497444, 3602605; 497444, 3602605; thence returning to 497444, 
3602605.
    (iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 498002, 
3602859; 497981, 3602853; 497930, 3602857; 497929, 3602859; 497911, 
3602885; 497934, 3602916; 497946, 3602955; 497985, 3602951; 497981, 
3602939; 497985, 3602920; 498000, 3602888; 498012, 3602861; 498002, 
3602859; thence returning to 498002, 3602859.
    (iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499680, 
3603156; 499688, 3603148; 499683, 3603090; 499717, 3603078; 499739, 
3603039; 499829, 3603005; 499812, 3602945; 499754, 3602867; 499676, 
3602836; 499584, 3602794; 499553, 3602833; 499536, 3602889; 499519, 
3602920; 499485, 3602983; 499483, 3603035; 499478, 3603172; 499490, 
3603173; 499497, 3603173; 499577, 3603174; 499584, 3603178; 499607, 
3603175; 499624, 3603162; 499680, 3603156; thence returning to 499680, 
3603156.
    (v) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499158, 
3603493; 499170, 3603456; 499130, 3603457; 499083, 3603458; 499083, 
3603495; 499075, 3603541; 499070, 3603572; 499121, 3603582; 499130, 
3603565; 499141, 3603546; 499158, 3603493; thence returning to 499158, 
3603493.
    (vi) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499007, 
3603851; 499012, 3603773; 499051, 3603691; 499044, 3603640; 498993, 
3603609; 498983, 3603633; 498993, 3603652; 498993, 3603655; 498986, 
3603722; 498984, 3603778; 498983, 3603805; 498979, 3603807; 498953, 
3603817; 498947, 3603819; 498903, 3603790; 498852, 3603749; 498857, 
3603715; 498823, 3603688; 498741, 3603676; 498702, 3603688; 498719, 
3603715; 498763, 3603742; 498826, 3603776; 498874, 3603817; 498930, 
3603831; 498957, 3603847; 499000, 3603873; 499007, 3603851; thence 
returning to 499007, 3603851.
    (vii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499259, 
3603894; 499303, 3603885; 499344, 3603890; 499383, 3603892; 499384, 
3603882; 499390, 3603749; 499393, 3603531; 499431, 3603514; 499458, 
3603487; 499461, 3603449; 499189, 3603449; 499221, 3603587; 499233, 
3603618; 499247, 3603633; 499267, 3603642; 499269, 3603664; 499267, 
3603679; 499209, 3603701; 499182, 3603768; 499184, 3603807; 499177, 
3603877; 499186, 3603886; 499206, 3603907; 499259, 3603894; thence 
returning to 499259, 3603894.
    (viii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499359, 
3604115; 499359, 3604025; 499350, 3604018; 499347, 3604016; 499320, 
3604033; 499314, 3604043; 499286, 3604091; 499257, 3604115; 499221, 
3604110; 499177, 3604098; 499160, 3604125; 499160, 3604197; 499148, 
3604270; 499143, 3604287; 499153, 3604292; 499223, 3604309; 499293, 
3604299; 499330, 3604270; 499361, 3604239; 499387, 3604214; 499398, 
3604205; 499383, 3604178; 499359, 3604159; 499359, 3604122; 499359, 
3604115; thence returning to 499359, 3604115.
    (ix) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499618, 
3604583; 499662, 3604524; 499662, 3604352; 499620, 3604367; 499541, 
3604418; 499504, 3604459; 499475, 3604484; 499446, 3604510; 499436, 
3604546; 499451, 3604575; 499475, 3604575; 499475, 3604575; 499528, 
3604566; 499562, 3604568; 499618, 3604583; thence returning to 499618, 
3604583.
    (x) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. 
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 500083, 
3603092; 500026, 3603130; 499985, 3603143; 499944, 3603149; 499903, 
3603164; 499898, 3603164; 499885, 3603170; 499886, 3603218; 499880, 
3603221; 499880, 3603325; 499949, 3603340; 499967, 3603344; 499969, 
3603407; 500093, 3603400; 500083, 3603092; 500083, 3603092; thence 
returning to 500083, 3603092.
    (xi) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5H (Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool 
Complexes) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 62250]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.015

    (22) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 505882, 3604195; 505900, 
3603953; 505859, 3603974; 505832, 3603989; 505798, 3604009; 505753, 
3604040; 505721, 3604065; 505690, 3604091; 505662, 3604118; 505633, 
3604147; 505608, 3604176; 505569, 3604222; 505539, 3604260; 505527, 
3604287; 505547, 3604326; 505587, 3604372; 505626, 3604399; 505733, 
3604393; 505828, 3604330; 505863, 3604289; 505865, 3604259; 505882, 
3604195; thence returning to 505882, 3604195.

[[Page 62251]]

    (ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 503223, 3605127; 503429, 
3604767; 503325, 3604734; 503153, 3604635; 503028, 3604559; 502978, 
3604516; 502955, 3604458; 502942, 3604387; 502909, 3604331; 502856, 
3604268; 502838, 3604202; 502733, 3604206; 502719, 3604815; 502735, 
3605001; 502742, 3605091; 502788, 3605114; 502833, 3605086; 502840, 
3605001; 502847, 3604914; 502930, 3604871; 502988, 3604876; 503021, 
3604924; 503050, 3605001; 503061, 3605030; 503092, 3605139; 503130, 
3605145; 503160, 3605149; 503223, 3605127; thence returning to 503223, 
3605127.
    (iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):504614, 3605172; 504617, 
3605127; 504583, 3605128; 504550, 3605129; 504519, 3605130; 504519, 
3605122; 504540, 3604842; 503733, 3604867; 503681, 3604857; 503658, 
3604846; 503624, 3604830; 503406, 3605134; 503467, 3605162; 503530, 
3605134; 503588, 3605119; 503598, 3605139; 503598, 3605200; 503672, 
3605223; 503753, 3605309; 503847, 3605347; 503912, 3605382; 503925, 
3605389; 504011, 3605433; 504067, 3605433; 504096, 3605387; 504102, 
3605377; 504186, 3605344; 504240, 3605309; 504283, 3605282; 504358, 
3605268; 504475, 3605246; 504552, 3605221; 504561, 3605218; 504587, 
3605196; 504614, 3605172; thence returning to 504614, 3605172.
    (iv) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5I (Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool 
Complexes) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.016

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 62252]]

    (23) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside 
County, CA. Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land 
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 480115, 3736015; 
480123, 3736089; 480006, 3736246; 479961, 3736644; 479978, 3736737; 
480068, 3736890; 481015, 3736904; 481258, 3737111; 481423, 3736990; 
481474, 3736952; 481500, 3736933; 481500, 3736933; 481545, 3736899; 
481546, 3736899; 481550, 3736896; 481717, 3736773; 481889, 3736646; 
481884, 3736589; 481807, 3736439; 481388, 3735908; 481199, 3735637; 
481101, 3735567; 480929, 3735516; 480866, 3735513; 480742, 3735505; 
480700, 3735490; 480699, 3735490; 480658, 3735471; 480615, 3735434; 
480604, 3735421; 480565, 3735397; 480520, 3735296; 480463, 3735138; 
480410, 3735025; 480359, 3734946; 480274, 3734884; 480175, 3734856; 
480102, 3734839; 480006, 3734830; 479843, 3734847; 479783, 3734918; 
479733, 3735028; 479744, 3735177; 479783, 3735259; 479899, 3735327; 
479936, 3735397; 479969, 3735510; 480020, 3735584; 480071, 3735637; 
480106, 3735671; 480115, 3736015; thence returning to 480115, 3736015.
    (ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land 
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):482086, 3737103; 
481896, 3737158; 481736, 3737152; 481607, 3737005; 481565, 3737040; 
481565, 3737040; 481499, 3737095; 481495, 3737098; 481495, 3737098; 
481460, 3737128; 481498, 3737171; 481607, 3737294; 481659, 3737308; 
481659, 3737308; 481675, 3737312; 481806, 3737364; 481806, 3737365; 
481828, 3737373; 481884, 3737410; 482049, 3737423; 482228, 3737521; 
482293, 3737565; 482301, 3737570; 482305, 3737714; 482307, 3737840; 
482332, 3738252; 482381, 3738399; 482400, 3738519; 482406, 3738559; 
482498, 3738780; 482590, 3738989; 482670, 3739143; 482799, 3739259; 
483002, 3739302; 483057, 3739329; 483058, 3739329; 483102, 3739351; 
483154, 3739376; 483180, 3739388; 483352, 3739505; 483481, 3739579; 
483555, 3739659; 483622, 3739714; 483733, 3739714; 483849, 3739726; 
483914, 3739777; 483935, 3739794; 483942, 3739923; 483946, 3739994; 
483948, 3740021; 483997, 3740083; 484071, 3740101; 484109, 3740101; 
484175, 3740101; 484286, 3740101; 484409, 3740101; 484491, 3740101; 
484556, 3740101; 484562, 3740101; 484660, 3740101; 484724, 3740101; 
484808, 3740101; 484740, 3740015; 484724, 3740003; 484593, 3739911; 
484558, 3739876; 484507, 3739825; 484310, 3739634; 484095, 3739438; 
484078, 3739426; 483978, 3739358; 483961, 3739335; 483914, 3739275; 
483904, 3739263; 483910, 3738133; 483780, 3737932; 483550, 3737726; 
483330, 3737413; 483310, 3737372; 483104, 3737308; 483107, 3736913; 
482312, 3736913; 482230, 3736937; 482203, 3736962; 482172, 3737005; 
482086, 3737103; thence returning to 482086, 3737103.
    (iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land 
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485275, 3740138; 
484724, 3740131; 484574, 3740129; 484505, 3740129; 484256, 3740126; 
484305, 3740158; 484305, 3740158; 484397, 3740217; 484483, 3740273; 
484649, 3740476; 484723, 3740618; 484725, 3740623; 484725, 3740623; 
484760, 3740691; 484853, 3740957; 484956, 3741250; 485150, 3741749; 
485159, 3741772; 485184, 3741895; 485202, 3742006; 485218, 3742268; 
485221, 3742307; 485244, 3742361; 485288, 3742466; 485368, 3742554; 
485531, 3742733; 485534, 3742737; 485537, 3742748; 485537, 3742748; 
485552, 3742804; 485575, 3743092; 485589, 3743271; 485662, 3743360; 
485679, 3743380; 485711, 3743419; 485761, 3743480; 485917, 3743485; 
485964, 3743486; 486099, 3743615; 486204, 3743695; 486326, 3743781; 
486336, 3743800; 486369, 3743867; 486376, 3743928; 486369, 3743936; 
486336, 3743974; 486296, 3744021; 486336, 3744125; 486339, 3744131; 
486366, 3744163; 486366, 3744163; 486492, 3744315; 486519, 3744332; 
486551, 3744352; 486640, 3744408; 486787, 3744549; 486855, 3744586; 
487051, 3744586; 487135, 3744567; 487242, 3744543; 487425, 3744461; 
487477, 3744437; 487488, 3744432; 487690, 3744377; 487905, 3744309; 
487899, 3744260; 487824, 3744168; 487824, 3744168; 487795, 3744131; 
487690, 3744039; 487631, 3743972; 487543, 3743873; 487346, 3743928; 
487236, 3743799; 487150, 3743627; 487133, 3743609; 487027, 3743486; 
486935, 3743418; 486907, 3743363; 486867, 3743283; 486818, 3743136; 
486763, 3743062; 486707, 3742964; 486535, 3742804; 486366, 3742612; 
486356, 3742601; 486351, 3742595; 486348, 3742590; 486334, 3742565; 
486330, 3742557; 486111, 3742165; 486057, 3742013; 486019, 3741907; 
486012, 3741890; 486090, 3741855; 485750, 3741117; 486062, 3740960; 
485546, 3740143; 485276, 3740138; 485275, 3740138; thence returning to 
485275, 3740138.
    (iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land 
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 488922, 3746032; 
488976, 3746028; 489134, 3746103; 489376, 3746196; 489562, 3746326; 
489603, 3746429; 489618, 3746466; 489662, 3746610; 489663, 3746613; 
489672, 3746642; 489684, 3746680; 489690, 3746700; 489701, 3746735; 
489768, 3746809; 489887, 3746940; 490083, 3747089; 490231, 3747126; 
490425, 3747178; 490511, 3747200; 490519, 3747205; 490546, 3747218; 
490585, 3747238; 490687, 3747247; 490836, 3747135; 490966, 3746959; 
491124, 3746819; 491199, 3746726; 491199, 3746680; 491199, 3746678; 
491199, 3746661; 491152, 3746652; 491125, 3746646; 491106, 3746642; 
491056, 3746617; 491047, 3746613; 491045, 3746612; 490864, 3746522; 
490864, 3746522; 490827, 3746503; 490652, 3746443; 490404, 3746359; 
490390, 3746354; 490083, 3746252; 489983, 3746182; 489983, 3746182; 
489979, 3746179; 489897, 3746121; 489785, 3745870; 489785, 3745793; 
489785, 3745582; 489785, 3745424; 489601, 3745328; 489571, 3745312; 
489292, 3745284; 489059, 3745266; 488827, 3745117; 488810, 3745111; 
488810, 3745111; 488806, 3745110; 488787, 3745103; 488557, 3745024; 
488514, 3745000; 488514, 3745000; 488493, 3744988; 488464, 3744972; 
488408, 3744940; 488338, 3744897; 488306, 3744877; 488290, 3744867; 
488287, 3744866; 488287, 3744689; 488272, 3744656; 488222, 3744549; 
488212, 3744537; 488205, 3744528; 488205, 3744528; 488101, 3744401; 
488027, 3744317; 487969, 3744341; 487537, 3744523; 487537, 3744523; 
487500, 3744539; 487497, 3744540; 487476, 3744546; 487427, 3744559; 
487255, 3744605; 487148, 3744610; 487135, 3744611; 487125, 3744611; 
487059, 3744615; 487056, 3744615; 487023, 3744616; 486974, 3744619; 
486934, 3744621; 486934, 3744621; 486864, 3744624; 486911, 3744726; 
486945, 3744784; 486975, 3744834; 487054, 3744967; 487060, 3744979; 
487067, 3744989; 487148, 3745127; 487357, 3745480; 487712, 3746290; 
487720, 3746307; 487739, 3746356; 487857, 3746655; 488073, 3747200; 
488202, 3747526; 488288, 3747745; 488297, 3747768; 488361, 3747950; 
488408, 3748084; 488539, 3748177; 488574, 3748178; 488582, 3748178; 
488595, 3748178; 488800, 3748180; 488805, 3748180; 489137, 3748184; 
489217, 3748185; 489329, 3748186; 489346, 3748182; 489436, 3748160; 
489441, 3748159; 489498, 3748067; 489520, 3748032; 489520, 3748032; 
489534, 3748010; 489605, 3747930; 489701, 3747824; 489701, 3747749; 
489690,

[[Page 62253]]

3747746; 489608, 3747724; 489608, 3747724; 489605, 3747723; 489497, 
3747693; 489391, 3747693; 489293, 3747693; 489279, 3747693; 489255, 
3747693; 489240, 3747677; 489217, 3747653; 489134, 3747563; 489133, 
3747561; 489067, 3747400; 489032, 3747312; 488911, 3747005; 488873, 
3746800; 488881, 3746769; 488887, 3746746; 488901, 3746689; 488994, 
3746568; 488966, 3746456; 488920, 3746317; 488855, 3746187; 488845, 
3746066; 488845, 3746038; 488922, 3746032; thence returning to 488922, 
3746032.
    (v) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6A (San Jacinto River) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.017


[[Page 62254]]


    (24) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside 
County, CA. Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Lakeview and Winchester. Land 
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 496999, 3734333; 
496995, 3733632; 496993, 3733374; 496993, 3733353; 496992, 3733079; 
496991, 3733046; 496991, 3732939; 496990, 3732731; 497270, 3732723; 
497270, 3732391; 496987, 3732276; 496986, 3732133; 496979, 3732133; 
496441, 3732133; 495871, 3732118; 495855, 3732117; 495791, 3731864; 
495754, 3731720; 496288, 3731734; 496176, 3731442; 496130, 3731321; 
496119, 3731293; 496110, 3731269; 496105, 3731257; 496098, 3731238; 
495840, 3731139; 495783, 3731117; 495764, 3731110; 495673, 3731075; 
495539, 3731023; 495370, 3730958; 495370, 3730958; 495344, 3730948; 
495344, 3731276; 495344, 3731308; 495344, 3731312; 495203, 3731319; 
495197, 3731308; 495182, 3731281; 495169, 3731258; 495144, 3731229; 
495122, 3731204; 495028, 3731204; 494990, 3731228; 494954, 3731251; 
494929, 3731288; 494917, 3731307; 494913, 3731312; 494806, 3731312; 
494766, 3731420; 494693, 3731621; 494724, 3731768; 494749, 3731819; 
494811, 3731848; 494835, 3731935; 494886, 3732013; 494875, 3732052; 
494962, 3732078; 495080, 3732115; 495080, 3732115; 495095, 3732120; 
495368, 3732124; 495546, 3732126; 495551, 3732348; 495558, 3732640; 
495560, 3732698; 495566, 3732880; 495578, 3732932; 495579, 3732936; 
495783, 3732925; 496065, 3733488; 496058, 3733755; 496057, 3733807; 
496043, 3734174; 496173, 3734170; 496461, 3734174; 496505, 3734333; 
thence returning to 496999, 3734333.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6B (Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 
Alkali Plain) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.018


[[Page 62255]]


    (25) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside 
County, CA. Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road Pools.
    (i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Romoland. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485930, 3722429; 485737, 
3722429; 485737, 3722611; 485930, 3722611; 485930, 3722429; thence 
returning to 485930, 3722429.
    (ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Romoland. Land bounded by the 
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485922, 3723029; 485730, 
3723232; 485911, 3723435; 485930, 3724021; 486317, 3724020; 486317, 
3723305; 486412, 3723293; 486417, 3723421; 486512, 3723424; 486506, 
3723229; 486714, 3723225; 486716, 3723220; 486716, 3723210; 486716, 
3723200; 486716, 3723196; 486716, 3723094; 486716, 3723072; 486716, 
3723031; 486716, 3722986; 486716, 3722964; 486716, 3722954; 486716, 
3722915; 486716, 3722899; 486716, 3722885; 486716, 3722830; 486699, 
3722435; 486116, 3722429; 486118, 3722817; 486016, 3722821; 486016, 
3722931; 485922, 3723029; thence returning to 485922, 3723029.
    (iii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6C (Wickerd and Scott Road 
Pools) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.019

* * * * *

    Dated: September 23, 2010
Eileen Sobeck,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-24763 Filed 10-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C