[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45078-45128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18428]



[[Page 45077]]

Vol. 76

Wednesday,

No. 144

July 27, 2011

Part IV





Department of the Interior





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





Fish and Wildlife Service





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





50 CFR Part 17





Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical 
Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon debilis 
(Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia); 
Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 45078]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AX75


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of 
Critical Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon 
debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque 
phacelia)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
designate critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), 
Penstemon debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica 
(DeBeque phacelia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(Act). Approximately 9,894 acres (4,004 hectares) are being proposed 
for designation as critical habitat for I. polyantha. Approximately 
19,155 acres (7,752 hectares) are being proposed for designation as 
critical habitat for P. debilis. Approximately 24,987 acres (10,112 
hectares) are being proposed for designation as critical habitat for P. 
submutica. In total, approximately 54,036 acres (21,868 hectares) are 
being proposed for designation as critical habitat for the three 
species. The proposed critical habitat is located in Archuleta, 
Garfield, and Mesa Counties, Colorado.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
September 26, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in 
writing, at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by September 12, 
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Keyword or ID box, enter Docket No. 
FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. 
Then, in the Search panel at the top of the screen, under the Document 
Type heading, check the box next to Proposed Rules to locate this 
document. You may submit a comment by clicking on ``Submit a Comment.''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; Division of Policy and 
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
    We will not accept e-mail or faxed comments. We will post all 
comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we 
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public 
Comments section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allan Pfister, Western Colorado 
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological 
Services Office, 764 Horizon Drive, Suite B, Grand Junction, CO 81506-
3946; telephone 970-243-2778; facsimile 970-245-6933. If you use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Comments

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule 
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and 
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request 
comments or information from other concerned government agencies, the 
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party 
concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments 
concerning:
    (1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as 
``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.) including whether there are threats to the species from human 
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the 
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit 
of designation such that the designations of critical habitat may not 
be prudent;
    (2) Specific information on:
    (a) The amount and distribution of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon 
debilis, and Phacelia submutica habitat;
    (b) What areas, that are occupied and that contain features 
essential to the conservation of these species, should be included in 
the designation and why;
    (c) Special management considerations or protection that may be 
needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing 
for the potential effects of climate change;
    (d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential 
for the conservation of the species and why; and
    (e) Means to quantify the amount of natural and human-caused 
disturbance these species prefer or can tolerate.
    (3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the 
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
    (4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of 
climate change on Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica and proposed critical habitat.
    (5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant 
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final 
designation; in particular, any impacts on small entities or families, 
and the benefits of including or excluding areas that exhibit these 
impacts.
    (6) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical 
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section 
4(b)(2) of the Act, especially the Mount Callahan and Mount Callahan 
Saddle Natural Areas for Penstemon debilis, and whether the benefits of 
potentially excluding any specific area outweigh the benefits of 
including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    (7) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating 
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation 
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and 
comments.
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not 
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in 
the ADDRESSES section. We will post your entire comment--including your 
personal identifying information--on http://www.regulations.gov. You 
may request at the top of your document that we withhold personal 
information such as your street address, phone number, or e-mail 
address from public review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will 
be able to do so.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by 
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological Services Office (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to 
the designation of critical habitat in this proposed rule. For more 
information on Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica, refer to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register 
on June 23, 2010 (75

[[Page 45079]]

FR 35721) or the final listing rule that is published in the Rules and 
Regulations section of today's Federal Register. See also the 
discussion of habitat in the ``Physical and Biological Features'' 
section below. Please note that we have used scientific names for rare 
species, because oftentimes these names are better known than the 
common names; and, we have used common names for species that are 
better known and where the common name may be easier for the reader to 
understand. In this rule we used scientific names for rare species, 
because where a common name is less standardized, the scientific name 
avoids confusion.
    Ipomopsis polyantha is a biennial (living only 2 years) or short-
lived perennial (living for more than 2 years) herb in the 
Polemoniaceae (phlox) family that has white flowers flecked with purple 
dots; it flowers only once before dying. Penstemon debilis is a long-
lived perennial herb in the Plantaginaceae (plantain) family that grows 
along the ground and has purple flowers. Phacelia submutica is a very 
small annual (living only one season) herb in the Hydrophyllaceae 
(waterleaf) family with small white flowers that are hidden within the 
leaves of the plant.

Geographic Range, Habitat, and Threats

    Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations in Archuleta 
County, Colorado. A minimum convex polygon (enclosing all the points to 
create a convex polygon with no concave areas) around both populations 
encloses an area of 13,825 acres (ac) (5,595 hectares (ha)) and 
measures 13 miles (mi) (21 kilometers km)) in length and 3 mi (5 km) in 
width. The total footprint of area actually occupied by plants is 388.4 
ac (157.1 ha), of which 86.4 percent is on private lands, 9.1 percent 
is on highway right-of-ways (ROWs), 1.9 percent is on lands managed by 
the Town of Pagosa Springs, and 2.5 percent is on lands managed by the 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Service 2011a, p. 2). Between the 
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so 
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is 
larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate there are 
roughly 340,000 I. polyantha individuals (Service 2011b, p. 1). The 
plant is specific to Mancos shale soils at elevations of 6,725 to 7,776 
feet (ft) (2,050 to 2,370 meters (m)) () (Service 2011c, p. 1). Plants 
are found in sparsely vegetated areas along the margins of Pinus 
ponderosa (Ponderosa pine) forests and extending into the adjacent 
grassland or shrublands. The species' highly restricted soil 
requirements and geographic range make it particularly susceptible to 
extinction at any time due to commercial, municipal, and residential 
development; associated road and utility improvements and maintenance; 
heavy livestock use; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; 
fragmented habitat; and prolonged drought. Eighty-six percent of the 
species' occupied habitat is on private land with no limits on 
development.
    Penstemon debilis is known from only six populations on the Roan 
Plateau escarpment in Garfield County, Colorado. A minimum convex 
polygon around all six populations encloses an area of 7,161 ac (2,898 
ha) and measures 18 mi (29 km) in length and 1 mi (2 km) in width. The 
total footprint of area actually occupied by the plants is 91.8 ac 
(37.2 ha), of which 66.6 percent is on private lands, and 33.3 percent 
is on lands managed by the BLM (Service 2011a, p. 3). Between the 
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so 
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is 
quite a bit larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate 
there are 4,100 P. debilis individuals (Service 2011b, p. 2). The plant 
is specific to oil shale cliffs of the Parachute Creek Member and the 
Lower Part of the Green River Formation at elevations of 5,600 to 9,229 
ft (1,707 to 2,813 m) (Service 2011c, p. 2; Tweto 1979). Plants are 
found on unstable shale soils with little other vegetation. The other 
vegetation comprises primarily other plant species endemic (known only) 
to the oil shale. Extremely low numbers and a highly restricted 
geographic range make the species particularly susceptible to becoming 
endangered in the forseeable future. Threats to the species and its 
habitat include energy development, road maintenance, inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms, and stochastic events.
    Phacelia submutica is known from 9 populations (and 22 occurrences) 
centered on the town of DeBeque in Mesa and Garfield Counties, 
Colorado. A minimum convex polygon around all nine populations encloses 
an area of 82,231 ac (34,896 ha) and measures 19 mi (30 km) in length 
and 11 mi (17 km) in width. The total footprint of area actually 
occupied by the plants is 625.9 ac (253.3 ha), of which 80.9 percent is 
on lands managed by the BLM, 11.9 percent is on private lands, 6.4 
percent is on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and 0.7 
percent is on lands managed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) 
(Service 2011a, pp. 6-7). Between the actual occupied areas there are 
interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so the acreage occupied by the 
species including these interspaces is quite a bit larger than the 
acres listed above. We estimate there may be as many as 68,000 P. 
submutica individuals in years when climatic conditions are favorable 
(Service 2011b, p. 4). The plant is known only from clay soils on the 
Atwell and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation at elevations of 
5,080 to 7,100 ft (1,548 to 2,157 m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). The plants 
are found on clay barrens with little other vegetation. Surrounding 
these barren areas is a landscape of Juniperus spp. (juniper), 
Artemisia spp. (sagebrush), Atriplex spp. (saltbush), and nonnative 
invasive Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). The current range of P. 
submutica is subject to human-caused modifications from natural gas 
exploration and production with associated expansion of pipelines, 
roads, and utilities; development within the Westwide Energy Corridor; 
increased access to the habitat by off-highway vehicles (OHVs); soil 
and seed disturbance by livestock and other disturbances; and the 
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Previous Federal Actions
    A complete description of previous Federal actions for Ipomopsis 
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica is included in the 
final listing rule published concurrently with this proposal to 
designate critical habitat. On June 23, 2010, we proposed to list I. 
polyantha as an endangered species and we proposed to list P. debilis 
and P. submutica as threatened species under the Act (75 FR 35721).

Critical Habitat

Background
    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
    (1) 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.
    (a) Essential to the conservation of the species and
    (b) Which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and
    (2) 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.

[[Page 45080]]

    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use 
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring 
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures 
provided pursuant to 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, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where 
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise 
relieved, may include regulated taking.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the requirement that Federal agencies insure, in consultation 
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is 
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of 
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 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) would apply, but even in the event of a destruction or adverse 
modification finding, the obligation of the Federal action agency and 
the landowner 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 physical and biological features which are essential to 
the conservation of the species and which may require special 
management considerations or protection. Critical habitat designations 
identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial 
data available, those physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food, 
cover, and protected habitat), focusing on the principal biological or 
physical constituent elements (primary constituent elements) within an 
area that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as 
roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide, 
soil type). Primary constituent elements are the elements of physical 
and biological features that, when laid out in the appropriate quantity 
and spatial arrangement to provide for a species' life-history 
processes, are essential to the conservation of the species.
    Under the Act, we can designate critical habitat in 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. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation limited 
to its current range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of 
the species. When the best available scientific data do not demonstrate 
that the conservation needs of the species require such additional 
areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by the species. An area currently occupied 
by the species but that was not occupied at the time of listing may, 
however, be essential to the conservation of the species and may be 
included in the critical habitat designation.
    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 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 we are 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 evaluations or National Environmental Policy Act 
documents, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or 
personal knowledge. In this case, we do not yet have recovery plans for 
these species.
    Habitat is 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). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was 
established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the 
United Nations Environment Program in response to growing concerns 
about climate change and, in particular, the effects of global warming. 
The IPCC has concluded that the warming of the climate system is 
unequivocal, as evidenced from observations of increases in global 
average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, 
and rising global average sea level (IPCC 2007, pp. 6, 30; Karl et al. 
2009, p. 17). Changes in the global climate system during the 21st 
century are likely to be larger than those observed during the 20th 
century (IPCC 2007, p. 19). Several scenarios are virtually certain or 
very likely to occur in the 21st century including: (1) Over most land, 
there will be warmer and fewer cold days and nights, and warmer and 
more frequent hot days and nights; (2) areas affected by drought will 
increase; and (3) the frequency of warm spells and heat waves over most 
land areas will likely increase (IPCC 2007, pp. 13, 53).
    The IPCC predicts that the resiliency of many ecosystems is likely 
to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate 
change, associated disturbances (e.g., flooding, drought, wildfire, and 
insects), and other global drivers (IPCC 2007, pp. 31-33). With medium 
confidence, IPCC predicts that approximately 20 to 30 percent of plant 
and animal species assessed by the IPCC so far are likely to be at an 
increased risk of extinction if increases in global average temperature 
exceed 3 to 5 [deg]Fahrenheit (F) (1.5 to 2.5 [ordm]Celsius (C)) (IPCC 
2007, p. 48). Plant species with restricted ranges that also are 
climatically limited may experience population declines as a result of 
climate change (Schwartz and Brigham 2003, p. 11).
    Regional projections indicate the Southwest, including western 
Colorado,

[[Page 45081]]

may experience the greatest temperature increase of any area in the 
lower 48 States (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Drought probability is predicted to 
increase in the Southwest (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-134), with summers 
warming more than winters, and annual temperature increasing 
approximately 4 [deg]F (2.2 [deg]C) by 2050 (Ray et al. 2008, p. 29). 
Additionally, the number of days over 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) could 
double by the end of the century (Karl et al. 2009, p. 34). Projections 
also show declines in snowpack across the West with the most dramatic 
declines at lower elevations (below 8,200 ft (2,500 m)) (Ray et al. 
2008, p. 29). A 10 to 30 percent decrease in precipitation in mid-
latitude western North America is projected by the year 2050, based on 
an ensemble of 12 climate models (Milly et al. 2005, p. 1). Overall, 
future projections for the Southwest include increased temperatures; 
more intense and longer-lasting heat waves; and increased probability 
of drought exacerbated by higher temperatures, heavier downpours, 
increased flooding, and increased erosion (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-
134).
    To obtain climate projections specific to the range of the three 
plant species of interest, we used a statistically downscaled model 
from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) for a region 
covering western Colorado. The resulting projections indicate that 
temperature could increase an average of 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) by 
2050 with the following seasonal increases: Summer (July to September) 
+ 5.0 [deg]F (2.8 [deg]C); fall (October to December) + 4.0 [deg]F (2.2 
[deg]C); winter (January to March) + 4.1 [deg]F (2.3 [deg]C); and 
spring (April to June) + 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) (University 
Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) 2009, pp. 1-14). In western 
Colorado, multi-model averages show a shift toward increased winter 
precipitation and decreased spring and summer precipitation by the end 
of the century (Ray et al. 2008, p. 34; Karl et al. 2009, p. 30). 
Similarly, the NCAR results show the highest probability of a 7.5 
percent increase in average winter precipitation; an 11.4 percent 
decrease in average spring precipitation; a 2.1 percent decrease in 
average summer precipitation; and a 1.3 percent increase in average 
fall precipitation with an overall very slight decrease in 2050 (UCAR 
2009, pp. 1-14).
    Over the past 30 years, annual average temperature in west-central 
Colorado has increased by 0.9 [deg]C (1.6 [deg]F) and in the greater 
Pagosa Springs area temperature has increased 1.1 [deg]C (1.9 [deg]F) 
(Ray et al. 2008, p. 10). In Colorado, high variability in annual 
precipitation (because of the extreme changes in elevation) precludes 
detection of long-term trends at the local levels (Ray et al. 2008, p. 
5). Only general assumptions and predictions can be made from these 
data. To examine local climate trends, we gathered temperature and 
precipitation data from the last 100 years at five weather stations 
(High Plains Regional Climate Center 2011, pp. 1-34; Service 2011d, pp. 
1-72) in the vicinity of the three plant species (table 1). These data 
appear to be consistent with local trends in temperature discussed in 
the models above. Change in temperature averaged across the weather 
stations is approximately 1.68 [deg]F (0.93 [deg]C); change in 
temperature per century averaged across the weather stations is 
approximately 2.06 [deg]F (1.14 [deg]C). As noted previously, 
precipitation is variable across these weather stations and trend 
cannot be reasonably determined.

                               Table 1--Climate Trends at Select Weather Stations
                                                  [1890s-2010].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Parachute (Grand                   Pagosa
                                           Altenbern     Collbran         Valley)         Palisade     springs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species in Vicinity.....................   Penstemon     Phacelia   Penstemon debilis;   Penstemon    Ipomopsis
                                            debilis;    submutica   Phacelia submutica    debilis;    polyantha
                                            Phacelia                                      Phacelia
                                           submutica                                     submutica
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              TEMPERATURE ([deg]F)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\.......................    1958-2010   1900-1966;    1904-1914; 1965-    1911-2010   1906-1917;
                                                        1970-1976;                1981                1928-1932;
                                                         1978-1999                                     1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Temperature            +1.79        +1.45                +.76         +2.9        +1.48
 ([deg]F)...............................
Approximate Change in Temperature per           +3.37        +1.46                +.97         +2.9        +1.59
 Century ([deg]F).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             PRECIPITATION (inches)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\.......................    1947-2010   1893-1966;    1904-1914; 1965-   1911-1919;   1906-1917;
                                                        1970-1976;                1981    1922-2010   1928-1932;
                                                         1978-1999                                     1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Precipitation          +1.76        +1.49               -4.06        +1.77        -2.59
 (inches)...............................
Approximate Change in Precipitation per         +2.84        +1.41                -5.2        +1.77        -2.79
 Century (inches).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As indicated by time periods, data gaps exist for some weather stations.
\2\ Data for some years is partial (less than 12 months of data); e.g., data collection may have begun in
  September, or weather station was nonfunctioning for a period of time.

    Recent analyses of long-term data sets show accelerating rates of 
climate change over the past 2 or 3 decades, indicating that the 
extension of plant and animal species' geographic range boundaries 
towards the poles or to higher elevations by progressive establishment 
of new local occurrences will become increasingly apparent in the short 
term (Hughes 2000, p. 60). Climate change may exacerbate the frequency 
and intensity of droughts in this area and result in reduced species' 
viability as the dry years become more common. Under drought 
conditions, plants generally are less vigorous and less successful in 
reproduction and may require several years to recover following drought 
(Weltzin et al. 2003, p. 946). With small populations and their 
inherent risk of genetic

[[Page 45082]]

complications, lowered reproduction could result in reduced population 
viability (Newman and Pilson 1997, pp. 354-362).
    Climate modeling at this time has not been refined to a level that 
we can predict the amount of temperature and precipitation change 
locally within the limited range of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon 
debilis, or Phacelia submutica. Therefore, we generally address what 
could happen based on current climate predictions for the region.
    The limited geographic range of the Mancos shale substrate that 
underlies the entire Ipomopsis polyantha habitat likely limits the 
ability of the species to adapt by shifting its range in response to 
climatic conditions. I. polyantha is sensitive to the timing and amount 
of moisture due to its biennial life history. Thus, if climate change 
results in local drying, the species could experience a reduction in 
its reproductive output. In the ``Physical and Biological Features'' 
section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations 
occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an 
attempt to account for climate change.
    It is unknown how Penstemon debilis responds to drought; however, 
for most plant species that grow in arid regions, plant numbers 
decrease during drought years, but recover in subsequent seasons that 
are less dry (Lauenroth et al. 1987, pp. 117-124; McDowell et al. 2008, 
pp. 719-739). Drought years could result in a loss of plants. The 
limited geographic range of the oil shale substrate that makes up the 
entire P. debilis habitat could limit the ability of the species to 
adapt to changes in climatic conditions by progressive establishment of 
new populations. In the ``Physical and Biological Features'' section 
below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations occupied by 
the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an attempt to account 
for climate change.
    Climate change is likely to affect Phacelia submutica because seed 
germination, seed dormancy, and persistence of the seed bank are all 
directly dependent on precipitation and temperature patterns (Levine et 
al. 2008, p. 805). Future changes in the timing of the first major 
spring rains each year, and temperatures associated with these rains, 
may more strongly affect germination and persistence of ephemeral 
annual plants than changes in season-long rainfall (barring severe 
droughts) (Levine et al. 2008, p. 805). Increasing environmental 
variance might decrease extinction risk for rare desert ephemeral 
plants, because these plants typically rely on extremely good years to 
restock the persistent seed bank while extremely bad years have little 
impact (Meyer et al. 2006, p. 901). A persistent seed bank enables the 
species to survive drought. However, extremely long droughts resulting 
from climate change, with no good years for replenishing the seed bank, 
would likely cause P. submutica to become endangered.
    Because the soil can remain bare of Phacelia submutica plants for 
several years, it is difficult to identify and protect the seemingly 
unoccupied habitat that occurs in small, isolated patches that are 
easily destroyed by small-scale disturbances, and can be overlooked 
during habitat assessments. The longer the species remains dormant, the 
less likely it is that we will know if an area is occupied, reducing 
our ability to avoid impacts to the species and protect it from 
becoming endangered. While current climate change predictions are not 
reliable enough at the local level for us to draw conclusions about its 
effects on P. submutica, it is likely that there will be drying trends 
in the future and the seeds will remain dormant for long periods. This 
would make it increasingly difficult to detect occupied habitat and 
avoid destruction of habitat. In the ``Physical and Biological 
Features'' section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known 
elevations occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) 
in an attempt to account for climate change.
    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 these three species. Areas that are important to the 
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical 
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation 
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory 
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act 
for Federal agencies to insure their actions are not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened 
species, and (3) the penalties and enforcement provisions of section 11 
of the Act if the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act have been 
violated. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed 
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still 
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and 
conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this 
species. 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, habitat 
conservation 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 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;
    (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 historical, geographical, and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    We derive the specific physical and biological features required 
for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica from 
studies of these species' habitat, ecology, and life history as 
described below. Additional information on these species' habitats, 
ecology, and life histories can be found in the final listing rule 
published in today's Federal Register.

Ipomopsis polyantha

    We have determined that Ipomopsis polyantha requires the following 
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

    Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Ipomopsis polyantha is 
found on barren shales, or in the open montane grassland (primarily 
Festuca arizonica (Arizona fescue)) understory at the edges of open 
Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa pine), Pinus ponderosa and Juniperus 
scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper), or J. osteosperma (Utah

[[Page 45083]]

juniper) and Quercus gambellii (oak) plant communities (Anderson 2004, 
p. 20). Within these plant communities, the plant is found in open or 
more sparsely vegetated areas where plant cover is less than 5 or 10 
percent, although these interspaces can be small within the greater 
plant community (less than 100 ft\2\ (10 m\2\)). Because the plant is 
found in these open areas it is thought to be a poor competitor. Dense 
stands of nonnative invasive grasses such as Bromus inermis (smooth 
brome) appear to almost totally exclude the species (Anderson 2004, p. 
36).
    Complexity in I. polyantha plant communities is important because 
pollinator diversity at I. polyantha sites is higher at more 
vegetatively diverse sites (Collins 1995, p. 107). The importance of 
pollinators for I. polyantha is further discussed under 
``Reproduction'' below. Therefore, based on the information above, we 
identify sparsely vegetated, barren shales, Ponderosa pine margins, 
Ponderosa pine and juniper, or juniper and oak plant communities to be 
a physical or biological feature for this plant. Given that much of the 
area where I. polyantha currently exists has already been altered to 
some degree, these plant communities may be historical. For example, 
the adjacent forest that would have naturally occurred in I. polyantha 
habitat may have been thinned or removed. In another example, forage 
species may have been planted in habitat that was once more suitable 
for I. polyantha.
    Elevation--Known populations of Ipomopsis polyantha are found from 
6,750 to 7,775 ft (2,050 to 2,370 m) (Service 2011c, p. 1). Because 
plants have not been identified outside of this elevation band and 
because growing conditions frequently change across elevation 
gradients, we have identified elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950 
to 2,475 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We 
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in 
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given 
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al. 
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a 
conservative allowance since studies elsewhere on climate change 
elevational shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last 
century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-
1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s 
(Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information 
specific to I. polyantha elevational shifts. The above studies were 
done in different areas, western Europe and California, and looking at 
different species. Mancos shale habitats extend into these higher and 
lower elevations.

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or 
Physiological Requirements

    Soils--Ipomopsis polyantha is found on Mancos shale soils from the 
Upper Cretaceous period. These shales comprise a heavy gray clay loam 
alluvium (loose, unconsolidated) derived from shale, sandstone, clay, 
and residuum that is unconsolidated, weathered mineral material that 
has accumulated as consolidated rock and disintegrated in place 
(Collins 1995, pp. 2-4). These shale soils do not retain soil moisture 
and are difficult for plant survival. I. polyantha seeds grow best when 
germinated in these Mancos shale soils (Collins 1995, p. 87). We assume 
the soils where I. polyantha are found are among the harshest local 
sites for plant growth because of the lack of vegetation at occupied 
sites, and because the soils are heavy, droughty, and deficient in 
nutrients. Species that occupy such sites have been called ``stress-
tolerators'' (Grime 1977, p. 1196). Because I. polyantha plants are 
found only on Mancos shale soils, and because greenhouse trials have 
found that seedlings grow best in Mancos shale soils, we have 
identified these Mancos shale soils as a physical or biological feature 
for this plant.
    Climate--Average annual rainfall in Pagosa Springs is 20 inches 
(in.) (51 centimeters (cm)) (Anderson 2004, p. 21). Winters are cold 
with snow cover commonly present throughout the winter months. Winter 
snow is important for preventing severe frost damage to some plants 
during the winter months (Bannister et al. 2005, pp. 250-251) and may 
be important for Ipomopsis polyantha. Freezing temperatures can occur 
into June and even July, indicating that I. polyantha can tolerate 
frost because it grows and blooms during this time (Anderson 2004, p. 
21). May and June, when I. polyantha blooms, are on average the driest 
months of the year (Anderson 2004, p. 21; Service 2011d, p. 52). 
Because I. polyantha has evolved in these climatic conditions, we have 
roughly identified suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and 
winter snow as physical or biological features for this plant. These 
climatic conditions are influenced, in part, by elevation.

Cover or Shelter

    While Ipomopsis polyantha seeds and seedlings certainly require 
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these 
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a 
physical or biological feature for this plant. Safe sites are those 
where the appropriate conditions for seedling germination and growth 
exist. We believe these features are encompassed in the ``Plant 
Community and Competitive Ability'' and ``Soils'' sections discussed 
above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of 
Offspring

    Reproduction--Ipomopsis polyantha sets far less fruit when self-
pollinated (2 to 9 percent fruit set [self-pollinated] versus 47 
percent fruit set in the presence of pollinator[s]) (Collins 1995, p. 
36). Also, male and female reproductive parts are separated both 
spatially and temporally (Collins 1995, pp. 34-35). Therefore, we 
conclude that pollinators are necessary for the long-term successful 
reproduction and conservation of the plant. Over 30 different insects 
have been collected visiting I. polyantha flowers (Collins 1995, pp. 
47-74). The primary pollinators are all bee species; these include the 
nonnative honeybee (Apis mellifera) and native bees that nest in the 
ground or twigs including species of Augochlorella (a type of Halictid 
or sweat bee), Anthophora (digger bees), Bombus (bumblebee), Dialictus 
(another type of Halictid or sweat bee), Megachile (leafcutter bees), 
and Lasioglossum (another type of Halictid or sweat bee) (Collins 1995, 
p. 71). Most of these pollinators are solitary and do not live 
communally, with the exception of the honeybee. Pollinator diversity 
was higher at I. polyantha sites with more complex plant communities 
(Collins 1995, p. 107). Because the evidence presented above 
demonstrates that pollinators are necessary for pollination of I. 
polyantha, we have identified pollinators and their associated habitats 
as an essential biological feature for this plant.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the 
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

    Disturbance Regime--The native habitat of Ipomopsis polyantha has 
been extensively modified (Anderson 2004, p. 28). The species is 
considered a ruderal species, which means it is one of the first plant 
species to colonize disturbed lands. Seeds are not thought to disperse 
far. Plants are able to colonize nearby disturbed areas quickly. The 
species is found in light to moderately disturbed areas, such as rills 
(small, narrow, shallow incisions in

[[Page 45084]]

topsoil layers caused by erosion by overland flow or surface runoffs), 
areas that are only occasionally disturbed, or areas with previous 
disturbances that have been colonized and not subsequently disturbed 
(i.e., previously cleared areas that have had some time to recover) 
(Anderson 2004, p. 23; 75 FR 35724-35726). Some of these disturbances 
are now maintained or created by human activities (such as light 
grazing or the recolonization of Mancos shale substrate roads that are 
no longer used) that mimic the constant erosion that occurs on the 
highly erosive Mancos shale soils and seem to maintain I. polyantha at 
a site. I. polyantha sites with constant or repetitive disturbance, 
especially sites with constant heavy grazing or repeated mowing, have 
been lost (Mayo 2008, pp. 1-2). Fire also may have played a role in 
maintaining open habitats and disturbances for I. polyantha in the past 
(Anderson 2004, p. 22), as it historically did in all Ponderosa pine 
forests across the West (USFS 2000, p. 97).
    Interestingly, Ipomopsis polyantha individuals at newly disturbed 
sites were slightly more likely to self-pollinate than were plants in 
later successional areas (Collins 1995, p. 99), demonstrating that 
disturbance is important enough to I. polyantha that it may influence 
reproductive success (self-pollinated individuals are less 
reproductively successful) and possibly genetic diversity (self-
pollination leads to lowered genetic diversity). Managing for an 
appropriate disturbance type and/or level can be difficult since we 
lack research to better quantify these measures. In this document we 
use qualitative terms, but specifically solicit further input on 
methods or mechanisms that can better quantify or describe these 
measures. Because I. polyantha is found only within areas with light to 
moderate or discontinuous disturbances, we have identified the 
disturbance regime to be a physical or biological feature for this 
plant.

Penstemon debilis

    We have determined that Penstemon debilis requires the following 
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

    Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Penstemon debilis is found 
on steep, constantly shifting shale cliffs with little vegetation. The 
decline or loss of several populations has been attributed to 
encroaching vegetation; therefore, it is assumed that P. debilis is a 
poor competitor (McMullen 1998, p. 72). The areas where P. debilis are 
found are characterized as ``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon'' 
(Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project 2004). The plant community 
where P. debilis is found is unique, because instead of being dominated 
by one or two common species as most plant communities are, it has a 
high diversity of uncommon species that also are oil shale endemics 
(McMullen 1998, p. 5). These uncommon species include Mentzelia 
rhizomata (Roan Cliffs blazingstar), Thalictrum heliophilum (sun-loving 
meadowrue), Astragalus lutosus (dragon milkvetch), and the somewhat 
more common Lesquerella parviflora (Piceance bladderpod), Penstemon 
osterhoutii (Osterhout's beardtongue), and Festuca dasyclada (Utah or 
oil shale fescue) (McMullen 1998, p. 5). More common species include 
Holodiscus discolor (oceanspray), Penstemon caespitosus (Mat 
penstemon), Cercocarpus montanus (Mountain mahogany), and Chrysothamnus 
viscidiflorus (Yellow rabbitbrush) (O'Kane & Anderson 1987, p. 415; 
McMullen 1998, p. 5). We consider sparse vegetation (with less than 10 
percent plant cover), assembled of other oil shale specific plants and 
not dominated by any one species, to be a physical or biological 
feature for this plant.
    Elevation--Known populations of Penstemon debilis are found from 
5,600 to 9,250 ft (1,700 to 2,820 m) in elevation (Service 2011c, p. 
3). Because plants have not been identified outside of this elevation 
band and because growing conditions frequently change across elevation 
gradients, we have identified elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft (1,600 
to 2,920 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We 
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in 
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given 
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al. 
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a 
conservative allowance since studies on climate change elevational 
shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last century: 95 ft 
(29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an 
average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al. 
2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information specific to P. debilis 
elevational shifts. The above studies were done in different areas, 
western Europe and California, and looking at different species. Oil 
shale habitats extend into these higher and lower elevations.
    Slope--Penstemon debilis is generally found only on steep slopes 
(mean of 37 percent slope) and between cliff bands where the oil shale 
is constantly shifting and moving downhill (Service 2011c, p. 2). The 
plant also can be found on relatively flat sites, although nearby 
habitats are often steep. In general, the plant is found on steep, 
constantly eroding slopes; therefore, we identify moderate to steep 
slopes, generally over 15 percent slope, to be a physical or biological 
feature for this plant.

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or 
Physiological Requirements

    Soils--Penstemon debilis is known only from oil shale cliffs on the 
Roan Plateau escarpment and was previously described as occurring only 
on the Parachute Creek Member of the Green River Formation (McMullen 
1998, p. 57). Our mapping exercises have found that the plant also is 
found on the Lower Part of the Green River Formation (Tweto 1979, pp. 
1, 4). Populations are generally located either directly above or below 
the geologic feature known as the Mahogany Ledge (McMullen 1998, p. 
63). All occupied sites are similar in soil morphology (form and 
structure) and are characterized by a surface layer of small to 
moderate shale channers (small flagstones) that shift continually due 
to the steep slopes (McMullen 1998, p. 64). Below the channers is a 
weakly developed calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent 
coarse material.
    Toxic elements in the soil such as arsenic and selenium accumulate 
in the tissues of P. debilis (McMullen 1998, p. 65) and may allow P. 
debilis to grow in areas that are more toxic to other species thereby 
reducing plant competition. Toxic elements in the soil vary between 
populations. In a greenhouse setting, P. debilis plants were grown 
easily in potting soil. Soil may not directly influence P. debilis' 
distribution, but may instead have an indirect effect on the plant's 
distribution by limiting the establishment of other vegetation 
(McMullen 1998, p. 67). Soil morphology, rather than soil chemistry, 
appears to better explain the plant's distribution (McMullen 1998, p. 
74). Because the plant is only found on the Parachute Creek Member and 
Lower Part of the Green River Formation and because of the consistent 
soil morphology between sites, we are identifying these geologic 
formations as a physical or biological feature for the plant. We also 
looked at soil type as discussed below in ``Criteria Used to Identify 
Critical Habitat'' but do not include it here as a physical or 
biological feature because it is a

[[Page 45085]]

component of the soil characteristics already described.
    Climate--The average annual precipitation in the area where 
Penstemon debilis is found ranges from 12 to 18 in. (30 to 46 cm) 
(McMullen 1998, p. 63). Winters are cold (averaging roughly 30 [deg]F 
(-1 [deg]C) with snow staying on the ground in flatter areas, and 
summers are warmer (averaging roughly 65 [deg]F (18 [deg]C). Because P. 
debilis has evolved under these climatic conditions, we have identified 
suitable precipitation and suitable temperatures as physical or 
biological features for this plant. These climatic conditions are 
likely influenced, in part, by elevation.

Cover or Shelter

    While Penstemon debilis seed and seedlings certainly require ``safe 
sites'' for their germination and establishment, these microclimates 
are too small to be considered or managed here as a physical or 
biological feature for this plant. We believe these features are 
encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive ability'' and 
``soils'' sections discussed above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of 
Offspring

    Reproduction--Penstemon debilis requires insect pollinators for 
reproduction and is twice as reproductively successful if pollen comes 
from another plant (McMullen 1998, pp. 25, 43). Over 40 species of 
pollinators have been collected from P. debilis; the primary 
pollinators include four Osmia (mason bee) species, Atoposmia elongata 
(a close relative of Osmia), several Bombus (bumblebee) species, and a 
native wasp Pseudomasaris vespoides. All of these pollinators are 
ground or twig nesting. None of these pollinators are rare, nor are 
they specialists on P. debilis, although some of these pollinators, 
such as Osmia, are specialists within the genus Penstemon (McMullen 
1998, p. 11). The number and type of pollinators differ between P. 
debilis sites (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Fruit set is not limited by 
inadequate numbers of pollinators (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Because the 
evidence presented above demonstrates that pollinators are necessary 
for pollination of P. debilis, we have identified pollinators and their 
associated habitats as a physical or biological feature for this plant.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the 
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

    Disturbance Regime--Penstemon debilis is found on steep oil shale 
slopes that are constantly shifting. The plant has underground stems 
(rhizomes) that are an adaptation to this constant shifting (McMullen 
1998, p. 58). As the shale shifts downward, the underground stems and 
clusters of leaves emerge downhill. A single plant may actually appear 
as many different plants that are connected by these underground stems 
(McMullen 1998, p. 58). In sites where the soils have stabilized and 
vegetation has encroached, P. debilis has been extirpated (lost) 
(McMullen 1998, p. 72). Managing for an appropriate disturbance type 
and/or level can be difficult since we lack research to better quantify 
these measures. In this document we use qualitative terms, but 
specifically solicit further input on methods or mechanisms that can 
better quantify or describe these measures. For these reasons, we 
consider these unstable and slow to moderate levels of constantly 
shifting shale slopes to be a physical or biological feature for the 
species.

Phacelia submutica

    We have determined that Phacelia submutica requires the following 
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

    Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Predominant vegetation 
classifications within the occupied range of Phacelia submutica include 
clay badlands, mixed salt desert scrub, and Artemisia tridentata (big 
sagebrush) shrubland, within the greater Pinus edulis (pinyon)-
Juniperus spp. (juniper) woodlands type (O'Kane 1987, pp. 14-15; 
Ladyman 2003, pp. 14-16). Within these vegetated areas, P. submutica is 
found on sparsely vegetated barren areas with total plant cover 
generally less than 10 percent (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 20). On 
these barren areas, P. submutica can be found alone or in association 
with other species. Associated plant species at sites occupied by P. 
submutica include: the nonnative Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and 
native species Grindelia fastigiata (pointed gumweed), Eriogonum 
gordonii (Gordon's buckwheat), Monolepis nuttalliana (Nuttall's 
povertyweed), and Oenothera caespitosa (tufted evening primrose) (Burt 
and Spackman 1995, p. 20; Ladyman 2003, pp. 15-16). Many of these 
associated species also are annuals (growing for only 1 year). Because 
of the harshness and sometimes the steepness of occupied sites, these 
areas are maintained in an early successional state (Ladyman, 2003, p. 
18). Therefore, the species found in these habitats are regarded as 
pioneers that are continually colonizing these bare areas and then 
dying (O'Kane 1987, p. 15). Pioneer species are often assumed to be 
poor competitors (Grime 1977, p. 1169). For the reasons discussed 
above, we identify barren clay badlands with less than 20 percent cover 
of other plant species to be a physical or biological feature for this 
plant. We have adjusted the relative plant cover upwards to capture the 
potential plant cover in moist years when other species may be somewhat 
more abundant.
    Elevation--Known populations of Phacelia submutica occur within a 
narrow range of elevations from about 5,000 to 7,150 ft (1,500 to 2,175 
m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). Elevation is a key factor in determining the 
temperature and moisture microclimate of this species. Because plants 
have not been identified outside of this elevation band and because 
growing conditions frequently change across elevation gradients, we 
have identified elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m) to 
be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We have extended 
the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in an attempt to 
provide areas where the plant could migrate, given shifting climates 
(Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-
327). We consider this 100 meters to be a conservative allowance since 
studies on climate change elevational shifts have found more dramatic 
changes even in the last century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade 
(Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m) 
downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not 
have information specific to P. submutica elevational shifts. The above 
studies were done in different areas, western Europe and California, 
and looking at different species. Suitable habitats extend into these 
higher and lower elevations.
    Topography (surface shape)--Phacelia submutica is found on slopes 
ranging from almost flat to 42 degrees, with the average around 14 
degrees (Service 2011c, p. 3). Plants are generally found on moderately 
steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent to valley floors 
(Ladyman 2003, p. 15). The relative position of P. submutica is 
consistent from site to site; therefore, we recognize appropriate 
topography (suitable slopes, benches and ridge tops, or moderately 
steep slopes adjacent to valley floors) as a physical or biological 
feature for the plant.

[[Page 45086]]

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or 
Physiological Requirements

    Soils--Phacelia submutica grows only on barren clay soils derived 
from the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Eocene and Paleocene 
Wasatch geological formation (Donnell 1969, pp. M13-M14; O'Kane 1987, 
p. 10). The Atwell Gulch member is found below the bluish gray Molina 
member, and the Shire member is found above the Molina member (Decker 
et al. 2005, p. 3). The plant is found in unique, very small areas 
(from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) on colorful exposures of 
chocolate to purplish brown, dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils 
(Burt and Spackman 1995, pp. 15, 20; Ladyman 2003, p. 15; Grauch 2011, 
pers. comm.). We do not fully understand why P. submutica is limited to 
the small areas where it is found, but the plant usually grows on the 
one unique small spot of shrink-swell clay that shows a slightly 
different texture and color than the similar surrounding soils (Burt 
and Spackman 1995, p. 15). Ongoing species-specific soil analyses have 
found that the alkaline soils (with specific pH ranging from 7 to 8.9) 
where P. submutica are found have higher clay content than nearby 
unoccupied soils, although there is some overlap (Grauch 2011, pers. 
comm.). The shrink-swell action of these clay soils and the cracks that 
are formed upon drying appear essential to maintenance of the species' 
seed bank since the cracks capture the seeds and maintain the seed bank 
on site (O'Kane 1988, p. 462; Ladyman 2003, pp 16-17). Based on the 
information above, we consider the small soil inclusions where P. 
submutica is found that are characterized by shrink-swell alkaline clay 
soils within the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch 
Formation to represent a physical or biological feature for P. 
submutica.
    Climate--Phacelia submutica abundance varies considerably from year 
to year. In 1 year almost no plants may emerge at a site, and in 
another year at the same site, hundreds or even thousands of 
individuals may grow (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 24). We do not 
understand what environmental factors (temperature, rainfall, or 
snowfall) affect these dramatic changes in abundance from 1 year to the 
next, but it is assumed they are climatic in nature (Burt and Spackman 
1885, p. 24). Wetter years seem to produce more individuals (O'Kane 
1987, p. 16). However, without the right combination of precipitation 
and temperature within a short window of time in the spring, the 
species may produce very few seedlings or mature plants, sometimes for 
several consecutive years. We believe it is necessary to conserve 
habitat across the entire range of the species to account for the 
variation in local weather events, to allow for plants to grow at some 
sites and not others on an annual basis. Because climatic factors 
dramatically influence the number of P. submutica individuals that are 
produced in a given year, we identify climate as a physical or 
biological feature for the plant; however, we recognize that we are 
unable to identify exactly what these climatic factors encompass except 
that the amount of moisture and its timing is critical. Climatic data 
from four weather stations (Table 1) indicate that average annual 
precipitation is between 10 to 16 in. (25 and 41 cm), with less 
precipitation generally falling in June (as well as December-February) 
than other months, and with cold winters (sometimes with snow cover) 
and warmer summers.

Cover or Shelter

    While Phacelia submutica seed and seedlings certainly require 
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these 
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a 
physical or biological feature for this plant. We believe these 
features are encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive 
ability'' and ``soils'' sections discussed above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of 
Offspring

    Reproduction and Seed Banks--We do not yet understand the 
pollination and seed dispersal mechanisms of Phacelia submutica. 
Pollinators have not been observed visiting the flowers of P. 
submutica. Currently it is believed that pollinators may not be 
required for reproduction because of the minute flower size, a lack of 
obvious pollinators, and because the reproductive parts are hidden 
within the petals. We also do not understand how seeds are dispersed. 
Seed banks are established where seeds fall into the cracks of shrink-
swell clay (O'Kane 1988, p. 462). We recognize that habitat conducive 
for successful reproduction is a physical or biological feature for P. 
submutica but do not understand more specifically what features are 
important for this reproduction. In addition, seed banks are especially 
important for annual species that may not emerge when climatic 
conditions are unfavorable (Levine et al. 2008, pp. 795-806; Meyer et 
al. 2005, pp. 15-16, 21). For this reason, we identify boom years at 
regular intervals such that the seed bank is maintained as a physical 
or biological feature for P. submutica. We lack further information on 
how long-lived seeds are in the seed bank and at what intervals the 
seed bank needs to be replenished to provide specifics but are hopeful 
that ongoing research will assist in answering some of these questions.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the 
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

    Disturbance Regime--The steeper clay barrens where Phacelia 
submutica is sometimes found experience some erosion, and the shrinking 
and swelling of clay soils creates a continuous disturbance (Ladyman 
2003, p. 16). Phacelia submutica has adapted to these light to moderate 
disturbances, although occasionally plants are pushed out of the 
shrinking or swelling soils and die (O'Kane 1987, p. 20). Clay soils 
are relatively stable when dry but are extremely vulnerable to 
disturbances when wet (Rengasmy et al. 1984, p. 63). P. submutica has 
evolved with some light natural disturbances, mostly in the form of 
erosion and shrink-swell process. Heavy disturbances, and even light 
disturbances when soils are wet, could impact the species and its seed 
bank. These disturbances can include OHV use, livestock and wild 
ungulate grazing, and activities associated with oil and gas 
development. Managing for an appropriate disturbance type and/or level 
can be difficult since we lack research to better quantify these 
measures. In this document we use qualitative terms, but specifically 
solicit further input on methods or mechanisms that can better quantify 
or describe these measures. For the reasons discussed above, we 
identify an environment free from moderate to heavy disturbances when 
soils are dry and free from all disturbances when soils are wet to be a 
physical or biological feature for P. submutica.

Primary Constituent Elements for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon 
debilis, and Phacelia submutica

    Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to 
identify the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica in geographic areas occupied at the time of listing, focusing 
on the features' primary constituent elements. We consider primary 
constituent elements to be the elements of physical and biological 
features that provide for a species' life-

[[Page 45087]]

history processes and are essential to the conservation of the species.

Ipomopsis polyantha

    Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological 
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species' 
life-history processes, we determine that the primary constituent 
elements specific to Ipomopsis polyantha are:
    (i) Mancos shale soils.
    (ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft 
(1,950 to 2,475m) and current climatic conditions similar to those that 
historically occurred around Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Climatic 
conditions include suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and 
winter snow.
    (iii) Plant Community.
    a. Suitable native plant communities (as described in b. below) 
with small (less than 100 ft \2\ (10 m \2\) or larger (several hectares 
or acres) barren areas with less than 20 percent plant cover in the 
actual barren areas.
    b. Appropriate native plant communities, although these communities 
may not be like they were historically because they have already been 
altered. Therefore, the species can be found in areas where only the 
potential for the appropriate native plant community exists. For 
example, Ponderosa pine forests may have been cut or areas that had 
native vegetation may have been scraped. Native habitats and plants are 
desirable; however, because of the state of the habitat, altered 
habitats including some nonnative invasive species should not be 
discounted. These plant communities include:
    i. Barren shales,
    ii. Open montane grassland (primarily Arizona fescue) understory at 
the edges of open Ponderosa pine, or
    iii. Clearings within the ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain juniper 
and Utah juniper and oak communities.
    (iv) Habitat for pollinators. Please see ``Special Management 
Considerations'' for further discussions of habitat fragmentation and 
pollinator habitats and foraging ranges.
    a. Pollinator ground and twig nesting areas. Habitats suitable for 
a wide array of pollinators and their life history and nesting 
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would 
provide for this diversity.
    b. Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from one 
site to the next within each population.
    c. Availability of other floral resources; this would include other 
flowering plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. 
Grass species do not provide resources for pollinators.
    d. To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we 
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area beyond occupied habitat to 
conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
    (v) Appropriate disturbance regime. Please see ``Physical and 
Biological Features'' above for a further discussion of the qualitative 
terms discussed below.
    a. Appropriate disturbance levels--Light to moderate, or 
intermittent or discontinuous.
    b. Naturally maintained disturbances through soil erosion or human 
maintained disturbances that can include light grazing, occasional 
ground clearing, and other disturbances that are not severe or 
continual.
    With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to 
identify the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species through the identification of the primary 
constituent elements sufficient to support the life-history processes 
of the species. Two units proposed to be designated as critical habitat 
are currently occupied by Ipomopsis polyantha and contain the primary 
constituent elements to support the life-history needs of the species.
    Because two populations do not offer adequate redundancy for the 
survival and recovery of Ipomopsis polyantha, we have determined that 
unoccupied areas are essential for the conservation of the species. Two 
additional units proposed to be designated as critical habitat are 
currently unoccupied by I. polyantha. We consider these units essential 
for the conservation of the species, as discussed below under ``Special 
Management Considerations.'' In addition, we believe the unoccupied 
units contain the primary constituent elements in the appropriate 
quantity and spatial arrangement sufficient to support the life-history 
needs of the species.

Penstemon debilis

    Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological 
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species' 
life-history processes, we determine that the primary constituent 
elements specific to Penstemon debilis are:
    (i) Suitable Soils and Geology.
    a. Parachute Member and the Lower part of the Green River 
Formation, although soils outside these formations would be suitable 
for pollinators (see High levels of natural disturbance below).
    b. Appropriate soil morphology characterized by a surface layer of 
small to moderate shale channers (small flagstones) that shift 
continually due to the steep slopes and below a weakly developed 
calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent coarse material.
    (ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft 
(1,600 to 2,920 m). Climatic conditions similar to those of the 
Mahogany Bench, including suitable precipitation and temperatures.
    (iii) Plant Community.
    a. Barren areas with less than 10 percent plant cover.
    b. Presence of other oil shale endemics, including Mentzelia 
rhizomata, Thalictrum heliophilum, Astragalus lutosus, Lesquerella 
parviflora, Penstemon osterhoutii, and Festuca dasyclada.
    (iv) Habitat for pollinators. Please see ``Special Management 
Considerations'' for further discussions of habitat fragmentation and 
pollinator habitats and foraging ranges.
    a. Pollinator ground and twig nesting habitats. Habitats suitable 
for a wide array of pollinators and their life history and nesting 
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would 
provide for this diversity (see Plant Community above). These habitats 
can include areas outside of the soils identified in Suitable Soils and 
Geology.
    b. Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from one 
population to the next within units.
    c. Availability of other floral resources. This would include other 
flowering plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. 
Grass species do not provide resources for pollinators.
    d. To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we 
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area beyond occupied habitat to 
conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
    (v) High levels of natural disturbance. Please see ``Physical and 
Biological Features'' above for a further discussion of the qualitative 
terms discussed below.
    a. Very little or no soil formation.
    b. Slow to moderate, but constant, downward motion of the oil shale 
that maintains the habitat in an early successional state.
    With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to 
identify the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species through the identification of the primary 
constituent elements sufficient to support the life-history processes 
of the species. Two units proposed to be designated as critical habitat 
are

[[Page 45088]]

currently occupied by Penstemon debilis and contain the primary 
constituent elements to support the life-history needs of the species. 
Two additional units proposed to be designated as critical habitat are 
currently unoccupied by P. debilis. Currently occupied areas do not 
adequately provide for the conservation of the species, because of a 
lack of redundancy. We consider these units essential for the 
conservation of the species, as discussed below under ``Special 
Management Considerations.'' In addition, we believe the unoccupied 
units contain the primary constituent elements to support the life-
history needs of the species.

Phacelia submutica

    Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological 
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species' 
life-history processes, we determine that the primary constituent 
elements specific to Phacelia submutica are:
    (i) Suitable Soils and Geology.
    a. Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch formation.
    b. Within these larger formations, small areas (from 10 to 1,000 ft 
\2\ (1 to 100 m \2\)) on colorful exposures of chocolate to purplish 
brown, light to dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils are especially 
important. These small areas are slightly different in texture and 
color than the similar surrounding soils. Occupied sites are 
characterized by alkaline (pH range from 7 to 8.9) soils with higher 
clay content than similar nearby unoccupied soils.
    c. Clay soils that shrink and swell dramatically upon drying and 
wetting and are likely important in the maintenance of the seed bank.
    (ii) Topography. Moderately steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops 
adjacent to valley floors. Occupied slopes range from 2 to 42 degrees 
with an average of 14 degrees.
    (iii) Elevation and climate.
    a. Elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m).
    b. Climatic conditions similar to those around DeBeque, Colorado, 
including suitable precipitation and temperatures. Annual fluctuations 
in moisture (and probably temperature) greatly influences the number of 
Phacelia submutica individuals that grow in a given year and are thus 
able to set seed and replenish the seed bank.
    (iv) Plant Community.
    a. Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) barren areas with 
less than 20 percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
    b. Presence of appropriate associated species that can include (but 
are not limited to) the natives Grindelia fastigiata, Eriogonum 
gordonii, Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera caespitosa. If sites 
become dominated by Bromus tectorum or other invasive nonnative 
species, they should not be discounted because Phacelia submutica may 
still be found there.
    c. Appropriate plant communities within the greater pinyon-juniper 
woodlands that include:
    (i) Clay badlands within the mixed salt desert scrub, or
    (ii) Clay badlands within big sagebrush shrublands.
    (v) Maintenance of the Seed Bank and Appropriate Disturbance 
Levels. Please see ``Physical and Biological Features'' above for a 
further discussion of the qualitative terms discussed below.
    a. Within suitable soil and geologies (see Suitable Soils and 
Geology above), undisturbed areas where seed banks are left undamaged.
    b. Areas with light disturbance when dry and no disturbance when 
wet. Clay soils are relatively stable when dry but are extremely 
vulnerable to disturbances when wet.
    Phacelia submutica has evolved with some light natural 
disturbances, including erosional and shrink-swell processes. However, 
human disturbances that are either heavy or light when soils are wet 
could impact the species and its seed bank. Because we do not 
understand how the seed bank may respond to disturbances, more heavily 
disturbed areas should be evaluated, over the course of several years, 
for the species' presence.
    With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to 
identify the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species through the identification of the primary 
constituent elements sufficient to support the life-history processes 
of the species. All units and subunits proposed to be designated as 
critical habitat are currently occupied by Phacelia submutica and 
contain the primary constituent elements sufficient to support the 
life-history needs of the species.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
    When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the physical 
and biological features within the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time of listing contain features which are essential to 
the conservation of the species and which may require special 
management considerations or protection. All areas proposed for 
designation as critical habitat will require some level of management 
to address the current and future threats to the physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of the three plants. 
In all units, special management will be required to ensure that the 
habitat is able to provide for the growth and reproduction of the 
species.
    A detailed discussion of threats to Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon 
debilis, and Phacelia submutica and their habitat can be found in the 
final listing rule elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The primary 
threats impacting the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica that may 
require special management considerations or protection within the 
proposed critical habitat include, but are not limited to, the 
following:
Ipomopsis polyantha
    The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant 
community and competitive ability, elevation, soils, climate, 
reproduction, and disturbance regime) may require special management 
considerations or protection to reduce threats. Ipomopsis polyantha's 
highly restricted soil requirements and geographic range make it 
particularly susceptible to extinction at any time from commercial, 
municipal, and residential development; associated road and utility 
improvements and maintenance; heavy livestock use; inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; fragmented habitat; and prolonged 
drought. Over 86 percent of the species' occupied habitat is on private 
land with no limits on development (75 FR 35740; June 23, 2010).
    Special management considerations or protections are required 
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management 
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not 
limited to): Introducing new Ipomopsis polyantha populations; 
establishing permanent conservation easements or land acquisition to 
protect the species on private lands; developing zoning regulations 
that could serve to protect the species; establishing conservation 
agreements on private and Federal lands to identify and reduce threats 
to the species and its features; eliminating the use of smooth brome 
and other competitive species in areas occupied by the species; 
promoting/encouraging habitat restoration; developing other regulatory 
mechanisms to further protect the species; placing roads and utility 
lines away from the species; minimizing

[[Page 45089]]

heavy use of habitat by livestock; and minimizing habitat 
fragmentation.
    These management activities would protect the primary constituent 
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and 
individuals, maintaining or restoring plant communities and natural 
levels of competition, protecting the plant's reproduction by 
protecting its pollinators, and managing for appropriate levels of 
disturbance.

Penstemon debilis

    The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant 
community and competitive ability, elevation, slope, soils, climate, 
reproduction, and disturbance regime) may require special management 
considerations or protection to reduce threats. Extremely low numbers 
and a highly restricted geographic range make Penstemon debilis 
particularly susceptible to becoming endangered in the foreseeable 
future. Threats to the species and its habitat include energy 
development, road maintenance, and inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms (75 FR 35740; June 23, 2010).
    Special management considerations or protections are required 
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management 
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not 
limited to): the introduction of new Penstemon debilis populations; the 
establishment of permanent conservation easements or land acquisition 
to protect the species on private lands; regulations and/or agreements 
that balance conservation with energy development in areas that would 
affect the species and its pollinators; the designation of protected 
areas with specific provisions and protections for the plant; the 
elimination or avoidance of activities that alter the morphology and 
status of the shale slopes; and avoidance of placing roads in habitats 
that would affect the plant or its pollinators.
    These management activities would protect the primary constituent 
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and 
individuals, maintaining or restoring plant communities and natural 
levels of competition, protecting the plant's reproduction by 
protecting its pollinators, and managing for appropriate levels and 
types of disturbance.

Phacelia submutica

    The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant 
community and competitive ability, elevation, topography, soils, 
climate, reproduction and seed bank, and disturbance regime) may 
require special management considerations or protection to reduce 
threats. The current range of Phacelia submutica is subject to human-
caused modifications from natural gas exploration and production with 
associated expansion of pipelines, roads, and utilities; development 
within the Westwide Energy Corridor; increased access to the habitat by 
OHVs; soil and seed disturbance by livestock and other human-caused 
disturbances; nonnative invasive species including Bromus tectorum and 
Halogeton glomeratus (halogeton); and inadequate regulations (75 FR 
35741; June 23, 2010).
    Special management considerations or protections are required 
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management 
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not 
limited to): Development of regulations and/or agreements to balance 
conservation with energy development and minimize its effects in areas 
where the species resides; minimization of OHV use; placement of roads 
and utility lines away from the species and its habitat; minimization 
of livestock use or other human-caused disturbances that disturb the 
soil or seeds; and the minimization of habitat fragmentation.
    These management activities would protect the primary constituent 
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and 
individuals, protecting the plant's habitat and soils, and managing for 
appropriate levels of disturbance.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
    As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we use the best 
scientific and commercial data available to designate critical habitat. 
We review all available information pertaining to the habitat 
requirements of the species.
    When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries, we made 
every effort to avoid including developed areas such as lands covered 
by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such lands lack 
physical and biological features essential for the conservation of 
Penstemon debilis and Phacelia submutica. 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 
lands. In the case of Ipomopsis polyantha, because the plant is often 
found growing on partially developed sites, around buildings, or 
immediately adjacent to roads, we did not attempt to exclude buildings, 
pavement, and other structures. For all three species, any developed 
lands left inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this 
proposed rule are not proposed for designation as critical habitat as 
per regulation. Therefore, if the critical habitat is finalized as 
proposed, a Federal action involving these lands would not trigger 
section 7 consultations with respect to critical habitat and the 
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action would 
affect the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species within adjacent critical habitat.
    All units are proposed for designation based on sufficient elements 
of physical and biological features being present to support Ipomopsis 
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica life-history 
processes. Some units contain all of the identified elements of 
physical and biological features and supported multiple life-history 
processes. Unoccupied units contain only the elements of the physical 
and biological features necessary to support the species' particular 
use of that habitat but not the multiple life-history processes since 
they are unoccupied.
    Small populations and plant species with limited distributions, 
like those of Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis, are vulnerable 
to relatively minor environmental disturbances (Given 1994, pp. 66-67; 
Frankham 2005, pp. 135-136), and are subject to the loss of genetic 
diversity from genetic drift, the random loss of genes, and inbreeding 
(Ellstrand and Elam 1993, pp. 217-237; Leimu et al. 2006, pp. 942-952). 
Plant populations with lowered genetic diversity are more prone to 
local extinction (Barrett and Kohn 1991, pp. 4, 28). Smaller plant 
populations generally have lower genetic diversity, and lower genetic 
diversity may in turn lead to even smaller populations by decreasing 
the species' ability to adapt, thereby increasing the probability of 
population extinction (Newman and Pilson 1997, p. 360; Palstra and 
Ruzzante 2008, pp. 3428-3447). Because of the dangers associated with 
small populations or limited distributions, the recovery of many rare 
plant species includes the creation of new sites or reintroductions to 
ameliorate these effects.
    Genetic analysis of Ipomopsis polyantha has not been conducted; 
therefore, we do not understand the genetic diversity of this species. 
Given the species' limited extent and presence

[[Page 45090]]

in only two populations, we expect the species may be suffering from 
low genetic diversity or could in the future.
    Genetic research on Penstemon debilis has found that there is more 
genetic diversity in larger populations than smaller populations, that 
the northeastern populations are more closely related to one another 
than to the southwestern populations, that inbreeding is common within 
each population, and that genetic diversity for the species is low when 
compared with other species of plants with similar life history traits 
(Wolfe 2010, p. 1). Small population sizes with few individuals are a 
problem for this species, as supported by this research.
    When designating critical habitat for a species, we attempt to 
consider the species' survival and recoverability, as outlined in the 
destruction or adverse modification standard. Realizing that the 
current occupied habitat is not enough for the survival and recovery of 
Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis, we worked with species' 
experts to identify unoccupied habitat essential for the conservation 
of these two species. The justification for why unoccupied habitat is 
essential to the conservation of these species and methodology used to 
identify the best unoccupied areas for consideration for inclusion is 
described under ``Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat'' section 
below.
    Habitat fragmentation can have negative effects on biological 
populations, especially rare plants, and affect survival and recovery 
(Aguilar et al. 2008, pp. 5177-5188). Fragments are often not of 
sufficient size to support the natural diversity prevalent in an area 
and thus exhibit a decline in biodiversity (Noss and Cooperrider 1994, 
pp. 50-54). Habitat fragments are often functionally smaller than they 
appear because edge effects (such as increased nonnative invasive 
species or wind speeds) impact the available habitat within the 
fragment (Lienert and Fischer 2003, p. 597). Habitat fragmentation has 
been shown to disrupt plant-pollinator interactions and predator-prey 
interactions (Steffan-Dewenter and Tscharntke 1999, pp. 432-440), alter 
seed germination percentages (Menges 1991, pp. 158-164), and result in 
low fruit set (Cunningham 2000, pp. 1149-1152). Extensive habitat 
fragmentation can result in dramatic fluxes in available solar 
radiation, water, and nutrients (Saunders et al. 1991, pp. 18-32).
    Shaffer and Stein (2000) identify a methodology for conserving 
imperiled species known as the three Rs: Representation, resiliency, 
and redundancy. Representation, or preserving some of everything, means 
conserving not just a species but its associated plant communities, 
pollinators, and pollinator habitats. Resiliency and redundancy ensure 
there is enough of a species so it can survive into the future. 
Resiliency means ensuring that the habitat is adequate for a species 
and its representative components. Redundancy ensures an adequate 
number of sites and individuals. This methodology has been widely 
accepted as a reasonable conservation methodology (Tear et al. 2005, p. 
841).
    We have addressed representation through our primary constituent 
elements for each species (as discussed above) and by providing habitat 
for pollinators of Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis (as 
discussed further under ``Ipomopsis polyantha'' below). For Phacelia 
submutica, we believe that the occupied habitat provides for both 
resiliency and redundancy and that with conservation of these areas, 
the species should be conserved and sustained into the future. For I. 
polyantha, there are only two known populations, both with few or no 
protections in place (low resiliency). For adequate resiliency, we 
believe it is necessary for the survival and recovery of I. polyantha 
that additional populations with further protections be established. 
Therefore, we have identified two unoccupied areas as proposed critical 
habitat units (CHUs) for I. polyantha. For P. debilis, there are only 
approximately 4,000 known individuals (low redundancy) and all within 
two concentrated areas (low resiliency). For adequate redundancy and 
resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that 
additional populations of P. debilis be established. Therefore, we have 
identified two unoccupied areas as proposed CHUs for P. debilis.

Ipomopsis polyantha

    In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50 
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time 
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. 
For Ipomopsis polyantha, we are proposing to designate critical habitat 
in areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the 
time of listing in 2011. We also are proposing to designate specific 
areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time 
of listing, because such areas are essential for the conservation of 
the species.
    Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known 
sites within a population (Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) 
2010b, p. 1), placing a minimum convex polygon around the perimeter of 
all sites, and then adding an additional 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area for 
pollinator habitat. The distance that pollinators can travel is 
significant to plants including Ipomopsis polyantha because pollen 
transfer and seed dispersal are the only mechanisms for genetic 
exchange. Both pollen and seed dispersal can vary widely by plant 
species (Ellstrand 2003, p. 1164). In general, pollinators will focus 
on small areas where floral resources are abundant; however, occasional 
longer distance pollination will occur, albeit infrequently. No 
research has been conducted on flight distances of I. polyantha's 
pollinators. Therefore, we rely on general pollinator travel distances 
described in the literature.
    Typically, pollinators fly distances that are in relation to their 
body sizes, with smaller pollinators flying shorter distances than 
larger pollinators (Greenleaf et al. 2007, pp. 589-596). If a 
pollinator can fly long distances, pollen transfer is also possible 
across these distances. The largest pollinators of Ipomopsis polyantha 
are bumblebee species (Bombus spp.). In one study, the buff-tailed 
bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) flew a maximum distance of 2,037 ft (621 
m) (Osborne et al. 1999, pp. 524-526). The bumblebee-pollinated plant 
species, Scabiosa columbaria (dove pincushions), experienced decreased 
pollen flow at a patch isolation distance of 82 ft (25 m), and little 
to no pollen transfer when patches were isolated by 656 ft (200 m) 
(Velterop 2000, p. 65).
    In contrast, another study found that displaced buff-tailed 
bumblebee individuals were able to return to their nests from distances 
over 5.6 mi (9 km) (Goulson and Stout 2001, p. 108). Another study 
found that buff-tailed bumblebee workers (resource collectors) were 
recaptured while foraging on super-abundant resources at distances of 
1.1 mi (1.75 km) from the nest (Walther-Hellwig and Frankl 2000, p. 
303). These studies suggest variability in the distances over which 
pollen transfer may occur and over which bumblebee species can travel. 
Ipomopsis polyantha sites within populations can be separated by more 
than 3,280 ft (1000 m) making conservation of these large pollinators 
especially important for genetic exchange between sites. In the 
interest of protecting Ipomopsis polyantha's pollinators, we have 
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) wide

[[Page 45091]]

pollinator area. This area has the added benefit of providing more 
habitat for I. polyantha to potentially expand into, in the future.
    A recovery plan has not yet been written for Ipomopsis polyantha. 
However, as described above, with only two known populations of I. 
polyantha, both of which are located largely on private lands with few 
protections, we expect that future recovery efforts will include 
efforts to improve resiliency by increasing the number of populations; 
therefore, we also are proposing to designate unoccupied habitat. We 
determined that not all potential habitat (Mancos shale soil layer near 
the town of Pagosa Springs) for I. polyantha was essential to the 
conservation of the species, and in keeping with section 3(5)(C) of the 
Act, which states that critical habitat may not include the entire 
geographical area which can be occupied by the species, we carefully 
refined the area proposed for designation.
    To assist us in determining which specific areas may be essential 
to the conservation of the species and considered for inclusion in this 
proposal, we not only evaluated the biological contribution of an area, 
but also evaluated the conservation potential of the area through the 
overlay of a designation of critical habitat. While we recognize that 
there is an education value to designating an area as critical habitat, 
the more prevailing benefit is consultation under section 7 of the Act 
on activities that may affect critical habitat on Federal lands or 
where a Federal action may exist. Thus, in evaluating the potential 
conservation value of an unoccupied area for inclusion in critical 
habitat, we first focused on lands that are biologically important to 
the species and then considered which of those lands were under Federal 
ownership or likely to have a Federal action occur on them. If the 
inclusion of areas that met those criteria were not sufficient to 
conserve the species, we then evaluated other specific areas on private 
lands that were not likely to have a Federal action on them. Unoccupied 
critical habitat was identified by overlaying the Mancos shale soil 
layer around Pagosa Springs with Federal ownership (Service 2011e, p. 
1). As little overlap occurred where Mancos shale soils and Federal 
lands intersected with habitat supporting the appropriate plant 
communities for future I. polyantha introductions, habitat is somewhat 
limited in suitable areas. Upon discussions with local species and area 
experts as well as land managers, we identified two areas on USFS lands 
as potential recovery or introduction areas for I. polyantha. These two 
areas include the O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area and Eight Mile 
Mesa, both managed by USFS. These areas contain the primary constituent 
elements sufficient to support the life-history needs of the species, 
including Mancos shale soils and appropriate plant communities, and 
when added to the proposed occupied areas would provide sufficient 
resiliency, redundancy, and representation for the conservation of the 
species.
    We delineated the critical habitat unit (CHU) boundaries for 
Ipomopsis polyantha using the following steps:
    (1) In determining what areas were occupied by Ipomopsis polyantha, 
we used data collected by the CNHP (O'Kane 1985, maps; Lyon 2002, p. 3; 
Lyon and Mayo 2005, pp. 2-7; CNHP 2008; 2010a, pp. 1-8), BLM (Brinton 
2010, pers. comm.), USFS (Brinton 2010, pers. comm.), the Service (Mayo 
2005, pp. 1-35; Glenne and Mayo 2009, spatial data; Langton and Mayo 
2010, spatial data), research efforts (Collins 1995, maps), and 
consulting firms (JGB Consulting 2005, pp. 2-7) to map specific 
locations of I. polyantha. These data were input into ArcMap 9.3.1. 
Based on criteria developed by the CNHP, sites were classified into 
discrete populations if they were within 2 mi (3 km) of each other and 
were not separated by unsuitable habitat (CNHP 2010b, p. 1).
    (2) For currently occupied CHUs, we delineated proposed critical 
habitat areas by creating minimum convex polygons around each 
population and adding a 3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide area for pollinator 
habitat as previously described.
    (3) For currently unoccupied CHUs, we identified two areas where 
the Mancos shale (Tweto 1979, spatial data) was intersected with 
Federal ownership (COMaP version 8--Theobald et al. 2010, spatial 
data). COMaP version 8 is the most updated geospatial data layer 
available for land ownership in Colorado. We delineated these areas by 
following the Federal land management boundary, and identifying 
suitable habitats based on species and area experts' input and aerial 
imagery. Our reasoning for identifying unoccupied units is further 
described above.
    We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we 
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain 
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support 
life-history processes essential for the conservation of the species, 
as well as lands outside of the geographical area occupied at the time 
of listing that we have determined are essential for the conservation 
of Ipomopsis polyantha.

Penstemon debilis

    In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50 
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time 
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. We 
are proposing to designate critical habitat in areas within the 
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing in 
2011. We also are proposing to designate specific areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing, 
because such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
    Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known 
sites within a population (CNHP 2010b, p. 6), placing a minimum convex 
polygon around the perimeter of all these sites, and then adding a 
3,280-ft (1,000-m) area for pollinator habitat as previously described. 
Like Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis' largest pollinators are 
the bumblebee species (Bombus sp.) (discussed above under I. 
polyantha).
    A recovery plan has not yet been written for Penstemon debilis. 
With only 4,100 known individuals of P. debilis concentrated in two 
areas, we conclude that future recovery efforts will necessitate 
actions to improve redundancy by increasing the number of individuals 
and sites. Therefore, we also are proposing to designate unoccupied 
habitat as critical habitat. Unoccupied critical habitat was delineated 
by identifying potential habitat on large contiguous areas of Federal 
ownership (see Number 3 below) (Service 2011e, p. 2). Occupied areas 
were expanded into adjacent areas containing this same potential 
habitat, as delineated and described below. This roughly doubled the 
size of these occupied units, providing more potential habitat for 
future recovery and introduction efforts. We determined that not all 
potential habitat (as defined below) for P. debilis was essential to 
the conservation of the species, and in keeping with section 3(5)(C) of 
the Act, which states that critical habitat may not include the entire 
geographical area which can be occupied by the species, we carefully 
refined the area proposed for designation.
    To assist us in determining which specific areas may be essential 
to the conservation of the species and considered for inclusion in this 
proposal, we not only evaluated the biological contribution of an area, 
but also evaluated the conservation

[[Page 45092]]

potential of the area through the overlay of a designation of critical 
habitat. While we recognize that there is an education value to 
designating an area as critical habitat, the more prevailing benefit is 
consultation under section 7 of the Act on activities that may affect 
critical habitat on Federal lands or where a Federal action may exist. 
Thus, in evaluating the potential conservation value of an unoccupied 
area for inclusion in critical habitat, we first focused on lands that 
are biologically important to the species and then considered which of 
those lands were under Federal ownership or likely to have a Federal 
action occur on them. If the inclusion of areas that met those criteria 
were not sufficient to conserve the species, we then evaluated other 
specific areas on private lands that were not likely to have a Federal 
action on them. Upon discussions with local species and area experts, 
as well as land managers, we identified two areas on BLM lands as 
potential recovery or introduction areas for P. debilis. These two 
areas include Brush Mountain and Cow Ridge, both managed by BLM. These 
areas contain the primary constituent elements sufficient to support 
the life-history needs of the species, including oil shale soils and 
appropriate plant communities.
    We delineated the CHU boundaries for Penstemon debilis using the 
following steps:
    (1) In determining what areas were occupied by Penstemon debilis, 
we used data collected by the CNHP (O'Kane and Anderson 1986, p. 1; 
Spackman et al. 1996, p. 7; CNHP 2010a, spatial data), the BLM (Scheck 
and Kohls 1997, p. 3; DeYoung et al. 2010, p. 1; DeYoung 2011, pers. 
comm.), CNAP (CNAP 2006, maps, pp. 4-7), the Service (Ewing 2009, 
spatial data and map), and a consulting firm (Graham 2009, spatial 
data) to map populations using ArcMap 9.3.1. These locations were 
classified into discrete element occurrences (populations) by CNHP 
(2010b, p. 6).
    (2) We delineated preliminary units by creating minimum convex 
polygons around each population and adding a 3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide 
area for pollinator habitat as described above.
    (3) We then identified potential habitat (Service 2011e, p. 2) in 
ArcMap 9.3.1 by intersecting the following criteria: The Parachute 
Creek Member and the Lower part of the Green River Formation geological 
formations (Tweto 1979), with elevations between 6,561 to 9,350 ft 
(2,000 and 2,850 m), with suitable soil types that included five soil 
series (Irigul-Starman channery loams, Happle-Rock outcrop association, 
Rock outcrop-Torriorthents complec,Torriorthents-Camborthids-Rock 
outcrop complex, and Tosca channery loam) which represented 89 percent 
of all known Penstemon debilis sites (Service 2011c, p. 2; NRCS 2010, 
spatial data), and with the ``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon'' 
landcover classification SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data). We chose the 
``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon'' landcover classification because 75 
percent of all the known P. debilis locations fall within this mapping 
unit (and all sites outside are either on artificially created habitats 
or are directly below this classification where both oil shale 
substrate and P. debilis seed dispersal down drainage constantly 
occurs. We did not include the lower elevations currently occupied by 
Penstemon debilis in our minimum convex polygon edges that we used for 
delineating pollinator habitat (step 2) or in our potential habitat 
analysis (step 3), because there are few plants in these more ephemeral 
wash-out habitat types and because these unusual habitat types do not 
seem to represent the species' typical habitat requirements. However, 
it should be noted that these unusual sites are still included within 
the boundaries of Unit 3 (as delineated by step 2).
    (4) From this potential habitat analysis (as delineated in step 3), 
we took the two continuous bands of potential habitat that include the 
areas where Penstemon debilis is currently found and added them to our 
existing polygons, including pollinator habitat (as delineated in step 
2). We did this by again creating a minimum convex polygon. This 
condensed all known populations into two currently occupied CHUs (Units 
3 and 4).
    (5) For currently unoccupied CHUs, we identified two areas where 
our potential habitat was intersected with Federal ownership (COMaP 
version 8--Theobald et al. 2010, spatial data). COMaP version 8 is the 
most updated geospatial data layer available for land ownership in 
Colorado. The boundaries are clipped to our potential habitat layer and 
the Federal ownership layer. Our reasoning for identifying unoccupied 
units is further described above.
    We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we 
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain 
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support 
life-history processes essential for the conservation of the species, 
and lands outside of the geographical area occupied at the time of 
listing that we have determined are essential for the conservation of 
Penstemon debilis.

Phacelia submutica

    In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50 
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time 
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. We 
are not currently proposing to designate any areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by the species because occupied areas are 
sufficient for the conservation of the species if the threats are 
addressed with appropriate management.
    Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known 
sites within a population (CNHP 2010b, p. 11), and placing a minimum 
convex polygon around the perimeter of all these sites. We then added a 
328-ft- (100-m)-wide area to account for indirect effects from factors 
such as edge effects from roads, nonnative species, dust impacts, and 
others (as discussed above).
    Phacelia submutica has a large enough range (sufficient 
representation and resiliency), enough populations (sufficient 
redundancy), and enough individuals (sufficient redundancy) that we 
felt that the occupied habitat alone, if protected from threats, would 
be adequate for the future survival and recovery of the species. 
Therefore, no unoccupied habitat was included in this critical habitat 
designation.
    We delineated the CHU boundaries for Phacelia submutica using the 
following steps:
    (1) In determining what areas were occupied by Phacelia submutica, 
we used data collected by CNHP (CNHP 1982, pp. 1-17; Burt and Spackman 
1995, pp. 10-14; Burt and Carston 1995, p. 3; Spackman and Fayette 
1996, p. 5; Lyon 2008, spatial data; 2009, spatial data; Lyon and 
Huggins 2009a, p. 3; Lyon and Huggins 2009b, p. 3; Lyon 2010, pers. 
comm.; CNHP 2010a, spatial data), the Colorado Native Plant Society 
(Colorado Native Plant Society [CNPS] 1982, pp. 1-9), the BLM (BLM 
pers. comm. 2010, spatial data; DeYoung 2009, pers. comm.), USFS 
(Johnston 2010, pers. comm.; Kirkpatrick 2011, pers. comm.; Potter 
2010, spatial data; Proctor 2010, pers. comm.), CNAP (Wenger 2008; 
2009; 2010, spatial data), the Service (Ewing and Glenne 2009, spatial 
data; Langton 2010, spatial data), and consulting firms (Ellis and 
Hackney 1982, pp. 7-8; WestWater Engineering [WWE] 2007a, spatial data; 
2007b, spatial data; 2010, pp. 17-19, maps and spatial data) to map 
specific locations of P. submutica using ArcMap 9.3.1. These locations 
were classified into discrete

[[Page 45093]]

element occurrences or populations if they were within 1.2 mi (2 km) 
and were not separated by unsuitable habitat, based on criteria 
developed by CNHP (CNHP 2010b, p. 11). Then, we used 2009 aerial 
imagery (NAIP 2009, spatial data) to look at all sites that were 
considered historically occupied because they had not been revisited in 
the last 20 years. Based on our analysis, we determined all 
historically occupied sites were suitable habitat and considered these 
sites still in existence and occupied at the time of listing.
    (2) We delineated proposed critical habitat areas by creating 
minimum convex polygons around each population and buffering the 
polygons by 328 ft (100 m) to account for indirect effects as described 
immediately above.
    (3) We then modified these proposed critical habitat polygon 
boundaries to exclude unsuitable habitat as defined by a potential 
habitat model (Decker et al. 2005, p. 9). From this modeling exercise, 
we chose the more restrictive of the two habitat models (the envelope 
model) to further refine our critical habitat polygons. This model was 
developed by comparing occupied areas with environmental variables, 
such as elevation, slope, precipitation, temperature, geology, soil 
type, and vegetation type. The environmental variables with the highest 
predictive abilities influence the potential habitat the model then 
identifies.
    We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we 
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain 
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support 
life-history processes essential for the conservation of Phacelia 
submutica.

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

Ipomopsis polyantha
    We are proposing four units as critical habitat for Ipomopsis 
polyantha. The CHUs we describe below meet the definition of critical 
habitat for I. polyantha. The four units we propose as critical habitat 
are: (1) Dyke, (2) O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area, (3) Pagosa 
Springs, and (4) Eight Mile Mesa. Table 2 shows the proposed units.

 Table 2--Occupancy of Ipomopsis polyantha by proposed critical habitat
                                  units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Unit                          Currently occupied?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Dyke...................................  Yes.
2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area.....  No.
3. Pagosa Springs.........................  Yes.
4. Eight Mile Mesa........................  No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The approximate area of each proposed CHU is shown in table 3.

                     Table 3--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Ipomopsis polyantha
                             [Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Critical habitat unit                  Land ownership                        Size of unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Dyke...............................  BLM...........................  42 ac (17 ha).
                                        Private.......................  1,415 ac (573 ha).
                                        Archuleta County (County Road   5 ac (2 ha).
                                         ROWs).
                                        Colorado Department of          13 ac (5 ha).
                                         Transportation (CDOT).
                                        Total for Dyke Unit...........  1,475 ac (597 ha).
2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area.  USFS-San Juan National Forest.  784 ac (317 ha).
3. Pagosa Springs.....................  Town of Pagosa Springs........  599 ac (242 ha).
                                        CDOW..........................  28 ac (11 ha).
                                        Private.......................  5,652 ac (2,288 ha).
                                        State Land Board..............  110 ac (44 ha).
                                        Archuleta County (County Road   18 ac (7 ha).
                                         ROWs).
                                        CDOT (Highway ROWs)...........  50 ac (20 ha).
                                        Total for Pagosa Spring Unit..  6,456 ac (2,613 ha).
4. Eight Mile Mesa....................  USFS-San Juan National Forest.  1,180 ac (478 ha).
                                                                       -----------------------------------------
    Total.............................  ..............................  9,894 ac (4,004 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note:  Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

    We present brief descriptions of all units included in this 
proposed critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the 
definition of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha. The units are 
listed in order geographically west to east.
Unit 1. Dyke
    Unit 1, the Dyke Unit, consists of 1,475 ac (597 ha) of Federal and 
private lands. The Unit is located at the junction of U.S. Hwy 160 and 
Cat Creek Road (County Road 700) near the historic town of Dyke in 
Archuleta County, Colorado. Ninety-seven percent of this Unit is on 
private lands; of these private lands, 1 percent is within highway 
ROWs. Three percent is on Federal land managed by the BLM, through the 
Pagosa Springs Field Office of the San Juan Public Lands Center. This 
Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of 
all three communities (barren shales, open montane grassland (primarily 
Arizona fescue) understory at the edges of open Ponderosa pine, or 
clearings within the ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain juniper and Utah 
juniper and oak communities), pockets of shale with little to no 
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 6,720 
to 7,285 ft (2,048 to 2,220 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate, 
pollinators and habitat for these pollinators, and areas where the 
correct disturbance regime is present. Lands within this Unit are 
largely agricultural although some housing is present within the Unit. 
A large hunting ranch also falls within this Unit. While these lands 
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections, special management will be required to 
maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include highway 
maintenance and disturbance (several hundred plants

[[Page 45094]]

have been documented along Highway 160 (CNHP 2010a, p. 5)), grazing, 
agricultural use, Bromus inermis encroachment, potential development, 
and a new road that was constructed through the I. polyantha 
population. These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the 
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area
    Unit 2, the O'Neal Hill Botanical Area consists of 784 ac (317 ha) 
of USFS land that is managed by the San Juan Public Lands Center. The 
Unit is north of Pagosa Springs, roughly 13 mi (21 km) north along 
Piedra Road. Roughly half the acreage of this Unit (308 ac (125 ha)) 
falls within the O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area that was designated 
to protect another Mancos shale endemic, Lesquerella pruinosa (Pagosa 
bladderpod). Because L. pruinosa is sometimes found growing with I. 
polyantha, we believe the site has high potential for introduction of 
I. polyantha. This Unit is not currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of 
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no 
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 7,640 
to 8,360 ft (2,330 to 2,550 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate, 
habitat for pollinators (although we do not know if Ipomopsis polyantha 
pollinators are found here), and areas where the correct disturbance 
regime is present. Because of the presence of these features, we 
believe this may make a good introduction area for Ipomopsis polyantha 
in the future and is needed to ensure conservation of the species.
    Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include road 
maintenance and disturbance, low levels of recreation, some hunting, 
deer and elk use, and a utility corridor and related maintenance 
(Brinton 2011, pers. comm). The threats should be addressed as detailed 
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' 
section.
    Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations, both with 
few or no protections (little resilience). For adequate resiliency and 
protection we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that 
additional populations with further protections be established. Because 
this area receives low levels of use and because it is already 
partially protected through the special botanical area, the area would 
make an ideal site for future introductions of I. polyantha. Therefore, 
we have identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for I. polyantha.
Unit 3. Pagosa Springs
    Unit 3, the Pagosa Springs Unit, is the largest of the four 
Ipomopsis polyantha CHUs and consists of 6,456 ac (2,613 ha) of 
municipal, State, and private lands. The Unit is located at the 
junction of Highways 160 and 84, south along Highway 84, west along 
County Road 19, and east along Mill Creek Road. Ownership of the land 
in Unit 3 is divided as follows: 87.7 percent is under private 
ownership, 9.2 percent is owned by the Town of Pagosa Springs, 1.7 
percent is owned and operated by the Colorado State Land Board, 0.8 
percent falls within the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) 
ROWs, 0.4 percent is found on CDOW lands, and 0.3 percent is located on 
Archuleta County ROWs. This Unit is currently occupied and contains the 
majority of I. polyantha individuals.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species, including a collection of 
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no 
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 6,960 
to 7,724 ft (2,120 to 2,350 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate, 
pollinators and habitat for these pollinators, and areas where the 
correct disturbance regime is present. Lands within this Unit fall into 
a wide array of land management scenarios, including agricultural use, 
junkyards, urban areas, small residential lots, and large 30- to 40-ac 
(12- to 16-ha) residential parcels. While these lands currently have 
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
Ipomopsis polyantha, because of a lack of cohesive management and 
protections, special management will be required to maintain these 
features in this Unit.
    Since almost 88 percent of this Unit is under private ownership, 
the primary threat to the species in this Unit is agricultural or urban 
development. Other threats include highway ROW disturbances, Bromus 
inermis and other nonnative invasive species, excessive livestock 
grazing, and mowing. These threats should be addressed as detailed 
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' 
section.
Unit 4: Eight Mile Mesa
    Unit 4, Eight Mile Mesa, consists of 1,180 ac (478 ha) of USFS 
lands that are managed by the Pagosa Springs Field Office of the San 
Juan Public Lands Center. This Unit is located roughly 6.5 mi (10.5 km) 
south of the intersections of Highways 160 and 84 in Pagosa Springs, 
Colorado, and on the western side of Highway 84. This Unit is not 
currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of 
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no 
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 7,320 
to 7,858 ft (2,230 to 2,395 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate, 
habitat for pollinators, and areas where the correct disturbance regime 
is present. Because there are so few Mancos shale sites on Federal 
lands, and because this site has an array of habitat types, it provides 
the best potential area for introduction of I. polyantha in the future.
    Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include a road running 
through the site, recreational use, horseback riding, dispersed camping 
and hunting, and firewood gathering. The Unit has some dense Ponderosa 
pine stands, and several small wildfires, that are actively suppressed, 
occur every year. There is a vacant grazing allotment at this Unit, and 
noxious weeds are being actively controlled (Brinton 2011, pers. 
comm.). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the 
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
    Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations, both with 
few or no protections (little resilience). For adequate resiliency and 
protection we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that 
additional populations with further protections be established. 
Therefore, we have identified this Unit and one other unoccupied area 
as proposed CHUs for I. polyantha.

Penstemon debilis

    We are proposing four units as critical habitat for Penstemon 
debilis. The CHUs we describe below constitute our current best 
assessment of locations that meet the definition of critical habitat 
for P. debilis. The four units we propose as critical habitat are: (1) 
Brush Mountain, (2) Cow Ridge, (3) Mount Callahan, and (4) Anvil 
Points. Table 4 shows the occupancy of the units.

  Table 4--Occupancy of Penstemon debilis by Proposed Critical Habitat
                                  Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Currently
                            Unit                              occupied?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Brush Mountain..........................................          No.
2. Cow Ridge...............................................          No.
3. Mount Callahan..........................................         Yes.

[[Page 45095]]

 
4. Anvil Points............................................         Yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The approximate area of each proposed CHU is shown in table 5.

                      Table 5--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Penstemon debilis
                            [Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Land ownership by type
        Critical habitat unit        --------------------------------------------------       Size of unit
                                              Federal                  Private
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Brush Mountain...................  1,437 ac (582 ha)......  .......................  1,437 ac (582 ha).
2. Cow Ridge........................  4,819 ac (1,950 ha)....  .......................  4,819 ac (1,950 ha).
3. Mount Callahan...................  4,338 ac (1,756 ha)....  3,675 ac (1,487 ha)....  8,013 ac (3,243 ha).
4. Anvil Points.....................  3,424 ac (1,386 ha)....  1,461 ac (591 ha)......  4,885 ac (1,977 ha).
    Total...........................  13,888 ac (5,621 ha)...  4,824 ac (1,952 ha)....  19,155 ac (7,752 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note:  Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

    We present brief descriptions of all units included in the proposed 
critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the definition 
of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis. The units are listed in 
order geographically west to east, and north to south.
Unit 1. Brush Mountain
    Unit 1, the Brush Mountain Unit, consists of 1,437 ac (582 ha) of 
federally owned lands, managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field 
Office. It is located approximately 16 mi (26 km) northwest of the town 
of DeBeque in Garfield County, Colorado. It is northwest of the 
intersection of Roan Creek Road (County Road 204) and Brush Creek Road 
(County Road 209). This Unit is not currently occupied.
    This Unit has all the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of the species, including the Rocky Mountain Cliff and 
Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) with less than 10 
percent plant cover, suitable elevational ranges of 6,234 to 8,222 ft 
(1,900 to 2,506 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member of the Green 
River Formation, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the 
appropriate disturbance levels, pollinator habitat, and a climate with 
between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow. 
Because of the presence of these features, we believe this may make a 
good introduction area for Penstemon debilis in the future and is 
needed to ensure conservation of the species.
    The primary threat to Penstemon debilis in this Unit is energy 
development. This threat should be addressed as detailed above in the 
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section. P. debilis 
consists of only 4,100 known individuals (little redundancy), and all 
occur within two concentrated areas (little resilience). For adequate 
redundancy and resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and 
recovery that additional populations be established. Therefore, we have 
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for P. debilis.
Unit 2. Cow Ridge
    Unit 2, the Cow Ridge Unit, is 4,819 ac (1,950 ha) of federally 
owned lands managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. It 
is located approximately 8 mi (13 km) northwest of the town of DeBeque 
in Garfield County, Colorado, and north of Dry Fork Road. This Unit is 
not currently occupied.
    This Unit has all the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of the species, including the Rocky Mountain Cliff and 
Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) with less than 10 
percent cover, suitable elevational ranges of 6,273 to 8,284 ft (1,912 
to 2,525 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member of the Green River 
Formation, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the 
appropriate disturbance levels, habitat for pollinators, and a climate 
with between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter 
snow. Because of the presence of these features, we believe this may 
make a good introduction area for Penstemon debilis in the future and 
is needed to ensure conservation of the species.
    The primary threat to Penstemon debilis in this Unit is energy 
development. This threat should be addressed as detailed above in the 
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section. P. debilis 
consists of only 4,100 known individuals (little redundancy) and all 
within 2 concentrated areas (low resilience). For adequate redundancy 
and resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery 
that additional populations be established. Therefore, we have 
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for P. debilis.
Unit 3. Mount Callahan
    Unit 3, the Mount Callahan Unit, consists of 8,013 ac (3,243 ha) of 
Federal and private land. It is located approximately 2 mi (3 km) west 
of the town of Parachute on the south-facing slopes of Mount Callahan 
and westward along the cliffs of the Roan Plateau. Fifty-four percent 
of Unit 3 is managed by the BLM under the management of two field 
offices: 80 percent of these Federal lands are managed by the Colorado 
River Valley Field Office and 20 percent are managed by the Grand 
Junction Field Office. Eight percent of this Unit (674 ac (273 ha)) has 
been designated as two Colorado Natural Areas (Mount Callahan and Mount

[[Page 45096]]

Callahan Saddle). These privately owned lands are currently protected 
from energy development, but are in close proximity to oil wells and 
associated infrastructure. We are considering these two Natural Areas 
for exclusion from this CHU. These exclusions are discussed in further 
detail below under ``Exclusions--Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act.'' Thirty-five percent of this Unit falls on private lands with no 
protections. This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky 
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) 
with less than 10 percent cover, suitable elevational ranges of 5,413 
to 8,809 ft (1,650 to 2,685 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member 
of the Green River Formation, suitable pollinators and habitat for 
these pollinators, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the 
appropriate disturbance levels, and a climate with between 12 to 18 in. 
(30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
    The primary threat to Penstemon debilis and its habitat in this 
Unit is energy development. This threat should be addressed as detailed 
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' 
section.
Unit 4. Anvil Points
    Unit 4, the Anvil Points Unit, consists of 4,885 ac (1,977 ha) of 
Federal and private land. It is located approximately 1 mi (2 km) north 
of the town of Rulison in Garfield County, Colorado. Seventy percent of 
this Unit is managed by the BLM, Colorado River Valley Field Office. 
Twenty-three percent of the Unit (1,102 ac (446 ha)) is within several 
potential BLM Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). If these 
become ACECs, they would have several stipulations to protect Penstemon 
debilis, particularly from oil and gas development. These areas are 
discussed further in the proposed (75 FR 35732; June 23, 2010) and 
final listing rules (in today's Rules and Regulations section of the 
Federal Register). Thirty percent of this Unit is on private lands. 
This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky 
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) 
with less than 10 percent plant cover, suitable elevational ranges of 
6,318 to 9,288 ft (1,926 to 2,831 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek 
Member of the Green River Formation, suitable pollinators and habitat 
for these pollinators, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to 
the appropriate disturbance levels, and a climate with between 12 to 18 
in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
    Threats to Penstemon debilis and its habitat in this Unit is 
primarily energy development. This threat should be addressed as 
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or 
Protection'' section.

Phacelia submutica

    We are proposing nine units as critical habitat for Phacelia 
submutica. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our 
current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical 
habitat for P. submutica. The nine units we propose as critical habitat 
are: (1) Sulphur Gulch, (2) Pyramid Rock, (3) Roan Creek, (4) DeBeque, 
(5) Mount Logan, (6) Ashmead Draw, (7) Baugh Reservoir, (8) Horsethief 
Mountain, and (9) Anderson Gulch. Table 6 shows the proposed critical 
habitat units.

                                         Table 6--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Phacelia submutica
                                                [Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Land ownership by type
     Unit /Unit name      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------              Size of unit
                                              Federal                   State                   Private
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sulphur Gulch..................  1,046 ac (423 ha).........  .....................  .........................  1,046 ac (423 ha).
2. Pyramid Rock...................  15,429 ac (6,244 ha)......  .....................  1,892 ac (766 ha)........  17,321 ac (7,010 ha).
3. Roan Creek.....................  2 ac (1 ha)...............  .....................  52 ac (21 ha)............  54 ac (22 ha).
4. DeBeque........................  401 ac (162 ha)...........  .....................  129 ac (52 ha)...........  530 ac (215 ha).
5. Mount Logan....................  242 ac (98 ha)............  .....................  35 ac (14 ha)............  277 ac (112 ha).
6. Ashmead Draw...................  1,046 ac (423 ha).........  .....................  174 ac (71 ha)...........  1,220 ac (494 ha).
7. Baugh Reservoir................  19 ac (8 ha)..............  .....................  10 ac (4 ha).............  28 ac (12 ha).
8. Horsethief Mountain............  3,614 ac (1,463 ha).......  .....................  594 ac (240 ha)..........  4,209 ac (1,703 ha).
9. Anderson Gulch.................  ..........................  173 ac (70 ha).......  128 ac (52 ha)...........  301 ac (122 ha).
    Total.........................  21,800 ac (8,822 ha)......  173 ac (70 ha).......  3,014 ac (1,220 ha)......  24,987 ac (10,112 ha).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

    We present brief descriptions of all units included in the proposed 
critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the definition 
of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica. The units are listed in 
order geographically west to east.
Unit 1. Sulphur Gulch
    Unit 1, the Sulphur Gulch Unit, consists of 1,046 ac (423 ha) of 
federally owned land. The Unit is located approximately 7.7 mi (12.5 
km) southwest of the town of DeBeque in Mesa County, Colorado. This 
Unit is managed by BLM, through the Grand Junction Field Office. This 
Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable 
elevational ranges of 5,480 to 6,320 ft (1,670 to 1,926 m), appropriate 
topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the Atwell 
Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. All lands within this 
Unit are leased as grazing allotments, and less than 1 percent is 
managed as an active pipeline ROW by the BLM. While these lands 
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections, special management will be required to 
maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially OHVs), domestic and wild 
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, such as 
Bromus tectorum. These threats should be addressed as

[[Page 45097]]

detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or 
Protection'' section.
Unit 2. Pyramid Rock
    Unit 2, the Pyramid Rock Unit, is the largest Unit we are proposing 
and consists of 17,321 ac (7,010 ha) of federally and privately owned 
lands in Mesa and Garfield Counties, Colorado. This Unit is 
approximately 1.6 mi (2.6 km) west of the town of DeBeque. The eastern 
boundary borders Roan Creek, and Dry Fork Creek runs through the 
northern quarter of the Unit. Eighty-nine percent is managed by BLM 
through the Grand Junction Field Office, and 11 percent is under 
private ownership. Three percent of this Unit is within the Pyramid 
Rock Natural Area and Pyramid Rock ACEC that was designated, in part, 
to protect the species as discussed in the proposed (75 FR 35739; June 
23, 2010) and final listing rules (in the Rules and Regulations section 
of today's Federal Register). This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable 
elevational ranges of 4,960 to 6,840 ft (1,512 to 2,085 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Ninety-four 
percent of this Unit is managed as a grazing allotment by the BLM. 
Additionally, 11 percent of this Unit is managed as an active pipeline 
ROW. While these lands currently have the physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because 
of a lack of cohesive management and protections, special management 
will be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild 
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species including 
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor 
runs through this Unit. The corridor covers almost 10 percent of this 
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as 
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or 
Protection'' section.
Unit 3. Roan Creek
    Unit 3, the Roan Creek Unit, consists of 54 ac (22 ha) of Federal 
and privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. The Unit is 
located 3.3 mi (5.4 km) north of the town of DeBeque and for 1.7 mi 
(2.7 km) along both sides of County Road 299. Ninety-seven percent of 
this Unit is privately owned. Three percent of this Unit is managed by 
BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. This Unit is currently 
occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent cover, suitable elevational ranges 
of 5,320 to 5,420 ft (1,622 to 1,652 m), the appropriate topography, 
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the Atwell Gulch and Shire 
members of the Wasatch Formation. The entire Unit is within a grazing 
allotment. While these lands currently have the physical and biological 
features essential to the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because 
of a lack of cohesive management and protections, special management 
will be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate grazing 
and use, invasion by nonnative invasive species including Bromus 
tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus, and a lack of protections on private 
lands. These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the 
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 4. DeBeque
    Unit 4, the DeBeque Unit, consists of 530 ac (215 ha) of Federal 
and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. This Unit is located 0.25 
mile north of DeBeque between Roan Creek Road and Cemetery Road. 
Seventy-six percent of this Unit is managed by BLM through the Grand 
Junction Field Office. This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable 
elevational ranges of 5,180 to 5,400 ft (1,579 to 1,646 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. While these 
lands currently have the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections, special management will be required to 
maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, residential development, recreation (especially OHV 
use), livestock and wild ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative 
invasive species including Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. 
Since 24 percent of the Unit is privately owned and borders the north 
of the town of DeBeque, this Unit is threatened by potential urban or 
agricultural development. The Westwide Energy corridor runs through 
this Unit. The corridor covers almost 66 percent of this Unit (Service 
2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in 
the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 5. Mount Logan
    Unit 5, the Mount Logan Unit, consists of 277 ac (112 ha) of 
Federal and private lands in Garfield County, Colorado. The Unit is 
located 2.7 mi (4.4 km) north, northeast of the town of DeBeque, 
Colorado, and 0.5 mi (0.8 km) west of Interstate 70. Eighty-eight 
percent of this Unit is managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field 
Office. The remainder of this Unit is privately owned. This Unit is 
currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable 
elevational ranges of 4,960 to 5,575 ft (1,512 to 1,699 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Eighty-eight 
percent of this Unit is managed as a grazing allotment by BLM, and 53 
percent is managed as an active pipeline ROW. An access road runs 
through the Unit connecting several oil wells and associated 
infrastructure. While these lands currently have the physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of Phacelia 
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive management and protections, 
special management will be required to maintain these features in this 
Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild 
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including 
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats should be 
addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations 
or Protection'' section.
Unit 6. Ashmead Draw
    Unit 6, the Ashmead Draw Unit, consists of 1,220 ac (494 ha) of 
both Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. The Unit is 
located

[[Page 45098]]

1.5 mi (2.5 km) southeast of the town of DeBeque, Colorado, and east of 
45.5 Road (DeBeque Cut-off Road). Eighty-six percent of this Unit is 
managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. This Unit is 
currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable 
elevational ranges of 4,940 to 5,808 ft (1,506 to 1,770 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. A network of 
access roads runs through the Unit. Eighty eight percent of this Unit 
is within a BLM grazing allotment, and 84 percent is within the Grand 
Junction Field Office's designated energy corridor. Thirty percent of 
the Unit is managed as an active pipeline ROW. While these lands 
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections, special management will be required to 
maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild 
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including 
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor 
runs through this Unit. The corridor covers almost 84 percent of this 
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as 
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or 
Protection'' section.
Unit 7. Baugh Reservoir
    Unit 7, the Baugh Reservoir Unit, consists of 29 ac (12 ha) of 
Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. The Unit is located 
6 mi (10 km) south of DeBeque, Colorado, near Kimball Mesa and Horse 
Canyon Road. Sixty-six percent is managed by BLM through the Grand 
Junction Field Office, and the remaining 34 percent is on private 
lands. This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable 
elevational range of 5,400 to 5,700 ft (1,646 to 1,737 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. An access road 
runs through the Unit, close to the occurrence of Phacelia submutica. 
While these lands currently have the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of P. submutica, because of a lack of 
cohesive management and protections, special management will be 
required to maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation, livestock and wild ungulate grazing and 
use, and nonnative invasive species including Bromus tectorum and 
Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor runs through this 
Unit. The corridor covers almost 66 percent of this Unit (Service 
2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in 
the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 8. Horsethief Mountain
    Unit 8, the Horsethief Mountain Unit, consists of 4,209 ac (1,703 
ha) of Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. It is 
located approximately 3.5 mi (5.6 km) southeast of DeBeque, Colorado, 
and along the eastern side of Sunnyside Road (V Road). Thirty-four 
percent is managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office, 29 
percent by the White River National Forest, 23 percent by the Grand 
Mesa Uncompahgre National Forest, and 14 percent is on private lands. 
This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable 
elevational range of 5,320 to 6,720 ft (1,622 to 2,048 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. While these 
lands currently have the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections, special management will be required to 
maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild 
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including 
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats should be 
addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations 
or Protection'' section.
Unit 9. Anderson Gulch
    Unit 9, the Anderson Gulch Unit, consists of 301 ac (122 ha) of 
State and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. It is located 11 mi 
(17 km) southeast of DeBeque, Colorado, and 3.5 mi (5.5 km) north of 
the town of Molina, Colorado. Within the Unit, 57 percent of the lands 
are managed by CDOW, within the Plateau Creek State Wildlife Area, and 
43 percent is private. This Unit is currently occupied.
    This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay 
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable 
elevational range of 5,860 to 6,040 ft (1,786 to 1,841 m), the 
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the 
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Forty-two 
percent of the Unit is a pending pipeline ROW. While these lands 
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive 
management and protections on State and private land, special 
management may be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
    Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include 
energy development, recreation (especially from OHVs), livestock and 
wild ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, 
including Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats 
should be addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management 
Considerations or Protection'' section.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the 
Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out 
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered 
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In 
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to 
confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed 
under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of 
proposed critical habitat.
    Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals have 
invalidated our regulatory 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 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra 
Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F. 3d 434, 442 (5th 
Cir. 2001)), and we

[[Page 45099]]

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 
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species.
    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. Examples of actions that are subject to the 
section 7 consultation process are actions on State, tribal, local, or 
private lands that require a Federal permit (such as a permit from the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act 
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10 
of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding 
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation 
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal 
actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat, and actions 
on State, tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally funded 
or authorized, do not require section 7 consultation.
    As a result of section 7 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 critical habitat; 
or
    (2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and 
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
    When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or 
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and 
prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that 
would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat. 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 the likelihood of 
jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or avoid 
the likelihood of 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 sometimes 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.
Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard
    As we described above, we do not currently have a valid regulation 
that defines adverse modification. The key factor related to the 
adverse modification determination is whether, with implementation of 
the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would 
continue 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 essential to the 
conservation of these species to an extent that appreciably reduces the 
conservation value of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha, 
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica. As discussed above, the role 
of critical habitat is to support life-history needs of the species and 
provide for the conservation of the species.
    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 may affect critical habitat, when carried out, 
funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, should result in 
consultation for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica.
    For Ipomopsis polyantha these activities include, but are not 
limited to:
    (1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the 
plants or their habitat; or actions that would result in continual or 
excessive disturbance or prohibit overland soil erosion on Mancos shale 
soils. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, removing 
soils to a depth that the seed bank has been removed, repeatedly 
scraping areas, repeated mowing, excessive grazing, continually driving 
vehicles across areas, permanent developments, the construction or 
maintenance of utility or road corridors, and ditching. These 
activities could remove the seed bank, reduce plant numbers by 
prohibiting reproduction, impede or accelerate beyond historical levels 
the natural or artificial erosion processes on which the plant relies 
(as described above in ``Physical and Biological Features''), or lead 
to the total loss of a site.
    (2) Actions that would result in the loss of pollinators or their 
habitat, such that reproduction could be diminished. Such activities 
could include, but are not limited to, destroying ground or twig 
nesting habitat, habitat fragmentation that prohibits pollinator 
movements from one area to the next, spraying pesticides that will kill 
pollinators, and eliminating other plant species on which pollinators 
are reliant for floral resources (this could include replacing native 
species that provide floral resources with grasses, which do not 
provide floral resources for pollinators). These activities could 
result in reduced fruit production for Ipomopsis polyantha, or increase 
the incidence of self-pollination, thereby reducing genetic diversity 
and seed production.
    (3) Actions that would result in excessive plant competition at 
Ipomopsis polyantha sites. Such activities could include, but are not 
limited to, revegetation efforts that include competitive nonnative 
invasive species such as Bromus inermis, Medicago sativa (alfalfa), 
Meliotus spp. (sweetclover); planting native species, such as Pinus 
ponderosa, into open areas where the plant is found; and creating 
disturbances that allow nonnative invasive species to invade. These 
activities could cause I. polyantha to be outcompeted and subsequently 
either lost at sites, or reduced in numbers of individuals.
    For Penstemon debilis these activities include, but are not limited 
to:
    (1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the 
plants or

[[Page 45100]]

their habitat. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, 
activities associated with oil shale mining, including the mines 
themselves, pipelines, roads, and associated infrastructure; activities 
associated with oil and gas development, including pipelines, roads, 
well pads, and associated infrastructure; activities associated with 
reclamation activities, utility corridors, or infrastructure; and road 
construction and maintenance. These activities could lead to the loss 
of individuals, fragment the habitat, impact pollinators, cause 
increased dust deposition, introduce nonnative invasive species, and 
alter the habitat such that important downhill movement or the shale 
erosion no longer occurs.
    (2) Actions that would alter the highly mobile nature of the sites. 
Such activities could include, but are not limited to, activities 
associated with oil shale mining, including pipelines, roads, and 
associated infrastructure; activities associated with oil and gas 
development, including pipelines, roads, well pads, and associated 
infrastructure; activities associated with reclamation activities, 
utility corridors, or infrastructure; and road construction and 
maintenance. These activities could lead to increased soil formation 
and a subsequent increase in vegetation, alterations to the soil 
morphology, the loss of Penstemon debilis plants and habitat.
    (3) Actions that would result in the loss of pollinators or their 
habitat, such that reproduction could be diminished. Such activities 
could include, but are not limited to, destroying ground or twig 
nesting habitat; habitat fragmentation that prohibits pollinator 
movements from one area to the next; spraying pesticides that will kill 
pollinators; and eliminating other plant species on which pollinators 
are reliant for floral resources. These activities could result in 
reduced fruit production for Penstemon debilis, or increase the 
incidence of self-pollination, thereby further reducing genetic 
diversity and reproductive potential.
    For Phacelia submutica these activities include, but are not 
limited to:
    (1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the 
plants, their seed bank, or their habitat, or actions that would 
destroy the fragile clay soils where Phacelia submutica is found. Such 
activities could include, but are not limited to, activities associated 
with oil and gas development, including pipelines, roads, well pads, 
and associated infrastructure; utility corridors or infrastructure; 
road construction and maintenance; excessive OHV use; and excessive 
livestock grazing. Clay soils are most fragile when wet, so activities 
that occur when soils are wet are especially harmful. These activities 
could lead to the loss of individuals, fragment the habitat, impact 
pollinators, cause increased dust deposition, and alter the habitat 
such that important erosional processes no longer occur.
    (2) Actions that would result in excessive plant competition at 
Phacelia submutica sites. Such activities could include, but are not 
limited to, using highly competitive species in restoration efforts, or 
creating disturbances that allow nonnative invasive species, such as 
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus, to invade. These activities 
could cause P. submutica to be outcompeted and subsequently either lost 
or reduced in numbers of individuals.

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 
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.''
    No Department of Defense lands occur within any of the proposed 
critical habitat designations.

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/she determines that the benefits of 
such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of 
the critical habitat, unless he/she 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 statute on its face, as well as the 
legislative history are clear that the Secretary has broad discretion 
regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give to any 
factor.
    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from 
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, impacts on 
national security, 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 identifying 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 action; 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.

[[Page 45101]]

    When identifying the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among 
other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result 
in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of 
partnerships; or implementation of a management plan that provides 
equal to or more conservation than a critical habitat designation would 
provide.
    In the case of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica, the benefits of critical habitat include public awareness of 
their presence and the importance of habitat protection, and in cases 
where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for I. 
polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica due to the protection from 
adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat. We are not 
currently proposing or considering any exclusions from critical habitat 
for I. polyantha or P. submutica, but we are considering two exclusions 
on private lands for P. debilis and are requesting public input on 
whether these areas should be excluded. For these three species, all of 
which are plants that do not receive protection from take under the 
Act, the primary impact and benefit of designating critical habitat 
will be on Federal lands or in instances where there is a Federal nexus 
for projects on private lands.
    When we evaluate the existence of a conservation plan when 
considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider a variety of 
factors, including but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized; 
how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical and 
biological features; whether there is a reasonable expectation that the 
conservation management strategies and actions contained in a 
management plan 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 identifying 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.
    Based on the information provided by entities seeking exclusion, as 
well as any additional public comments received, we will evaluate 
whether certain lands in the proposed Penstemon debilis CHU 3 (Mount 
Callahan) are appropriate for exclusion from the final designation 
pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If our analysis results in a 
determination that the benefits of excluding lands from the final 
designation outweigh the benefits of designating those lands as 
critical habitat, then we will exclude the lands from the final 
designation, provided we find that the failure to designate such areas 
as critical habitat will not result in the extinction of the species.
    The only exclusions we are considering are for the two Natural 
Areas that fall within Penstemon debilis Unit 3, Mount Callahan (see 
Map 7). These two areas are designated as the Mount Callahan Natural 
Area and the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area (CNAP 2010a, pp. 1-11). 
These two State Natural Areas were designated specifically to allow the 
CNAP to assist the landowner in protecting P. debilis. The Natural 
Areas have a long list of activities that can and cannot take place and 
best management practices also have been developed for these areas (see 
``Mount Callahan Natural Area and Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area 
Articles of Designation and accompanying Best Management Practices'' 
below) designed to conserve the species and protect the essential 
physical and biological features (CNAP 2010a, pp. 4-6 and Exhibit B; 
CNAP 2010b, pp. 1-4). Although these agreements can be terminated at 
any time, we do not believe they will be, since the Mount Callahan 
Natural Area has been in existence since 1987, and was recently 
expanded to include the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area. Extensive 
time and care has been taken to protect P. debilis in these areas. 
Providing incentives to private landowners for voluntary conservation 
actions is one of the factors we are considering for these exclusions. 
This issue is discussed in further detail under ``Exclusions Based on 
Other Relevant Impacts'' below. We are seeking public input on the 
inclusion or exclusion of these Natural Areas in our critical habitat 
designation.
    After considering the following areas under section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act, we are considering excluding them from the critical habitat 
designation for Penstemon debilis:

The Mount Callahan Natural Area

The Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area

    We are considering excluding the areas described above because we 
believe that:
    (1) Their value for 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.
    However, we specifically solicit comments on the inclusion or 
exclusion of such areas. In the paragraphs below, we provide a detailed 
analysis of our exclusion of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the 
Act.

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts

    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts 
of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to 
consider economic impacts, we are preparing an analysis of the economic 
impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related 
factors. Many of the CHUs, as proposed, include private lands. Federal 
lands with oil and gas leases, grazing permits, and recreational uses 
also are included. Several State parcels are included where hunting or 
recreational activities occur.
    We will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis as 
soon as it is completed, at which time we will seek public review and 
comment. At that time, copies of the draft economic analysis will be 
available for downloading from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov, or by contacting the Western Colorado Ecological 
Services Office directly (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). 
During the development of a final designation, we will consider 
economic impacts, public comments, and other new information, and areas 
may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 
424.19.

Exclusions Based on National Security Impacts

    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are 
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense (DOD) where a 
national security impact might exist. In preparing this proposal, we 
have determined that the lands within the designation of critical 
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica are not owned or managed by the Department of Defense, and, 
therefore, we anticipate no impact on national security. Consequently, 
the Secretary does not propose to exert his discretion to exclude any 
areas from the proposed designation based on impacts on national 
security.

[[Page 45102]]

Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts

    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant 
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national 
security. We consider a number of factors including whether the 
landowners have developed any HCPs or other management plans for the 
area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be 
encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In 
addition, we look at any tribal issues, and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United States with tribal entities (none 
of the proposed critical habitat units contain any tribal lands). We 
also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the 
designation.

Land and Resource Management Plans, Conservation Plans, or Agreements 
Based on Conservation Partnerships

    We consider a current land management or conservation plan (HCPs as 
well as other types) to provide adequate management or protection if it 
meets the following criteria:
    (1) The plan is complete and provides the same or better level of 
protection from adverse modification or destruction than that provided 
through a consultation under section 7 of the Act;
    (2) There is a reasonable expectation that the conservation 
management strategies and actions will be implemented for the 
foreseeable future, based on past practices, written guidance, or 
regulations; and
    (3) The plan provides conservation strategies and measures 
consistent with currently accepted principles of conservation biology.
    We believe that the Mount Callahan Natural Area and the Mount 
Callahan Saddle Natural Area fulfill the above criteria, and we are 
considering the exclusion of the non-Federal lands covered by this plan 
that provide for the conservation of Penstemon debilis. We are 
requesting comments on the benefits to P. debilis from the Mount 
Callahan Natural Area and the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area and 
their potential exclusion from critical habitat.
Mount Callahan Natural Area and Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area 
Articles of Designation and Accompanying Best Management Practices
    The Mount Callahan Natural Area was designated in 1987, shortly 
after the discovery of Penstemon debilis (CNAP 1987, pp. 1-7). The 
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area was designated in 2008 (CNAP 2008, 
pp. 1-11). Both Natural Areas were designated primarily to protect P. 
debilis. The agreement (both areas are in the same agreement) is 
between the CNAP and OXY USA. The articles of designation (for both 
areas) identify the following conservation measures: Camping is 
prohibited, noxious weed management is conducted to minimize damage to 
P. debilis, grazing is limited to preserve natural qualities, and 
motorized vehicle use is prohibited. The best management practices that 
apply within 328 ft (100 m) of occupied habitat provide guidelines for 
surveys, limit surface disturbance, address the protection of 
pollinators, limit projects that will affect storm water flows, limit 
undercutting, provide fencing stipulations for disturbances within 328 
ft (100 m), address dust abatement activities, and address monitoring 
(CNAP 2008a, pp. 8-11). Ongoing management of the Mount Callahan 
Natural Area since 1987, consistent with the conservation measures and 
best management practices, demonstrates a long-term commitment by both 
parties. Furthermore, the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area was added 
in 2008, demonstrating an expansion of and commitment to conservation 
efforts.
    Table 7 provides approximate areas of lands that meet the 
definition of critical habitat or are under our consideration for 
possible exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from the final 
critical habitat rule. Table 7 also provides our reasons for proposed 
exclusions.

                          Table 7--Exemptions and Areas Considered for Exclusion by Critical Habitat Unit for Penstemon debilis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Basis for exclusion/      Areas meeting definition    Areas considered for possible
                Unit                        Specific area                 exemption             of critical habitat                 exclusion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3..................................  Mount Callahan Natural      4(b)(2)--Natural Area       7,571 ac (3,064 ha)......  357 ac (144 ha).
                                      Area.                       Designation.
                                     Mount Callahan Saddle       4(b)(2)--Natural Area       .........................  317 ac (128 ha).
                                      Natural Area.               Designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peer Review

    In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert 
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists 
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure 
that our critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound 
data, assumptions, and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers 
to comment during this public comment period on our specific 
assumptions and conclusions in this proposed designation of critical 
habitat.
    We will consider all comments and information we receive during 
this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a 
final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from 
this proposal.

Public Hearings

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings 
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal 
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in the 
ADDRESSES section. We will schedule public hearings on this proposal, 
if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and places of 
those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in 
the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the 
hearing.

Required Determinations

    Our draft economic analysis will be completed after this proposed 
rule is published. Therefore, we will defer our Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--
Executive Order 13211, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 
seq.), and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), 
findings until after this analysis is done.
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 proposed rule under 
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review). The OMB bases 
its

[[Page 45103]]

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 publishes 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 effects of the rule on small entities (small 
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended 
the 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.
    At this time, we lack the available economic information necessary 
to provide an adequate factual basis for the required RFA finding. 
Therefore, we defer the RFA finding until completion of the draft 
economic analysis prepared under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and 
Executive Order 12866. This draft economic analysis will provide the 
required factual basis for the RFA finding. Upon completion of the 
draft economic analysis, we will announce its availability in the 
Federal Register and reopen the public comment period for the proposed 
designation. We will include with this announcement, as appropriate, an 
initial regulatory flexibility analysis or a certification that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities accompanied by the factual basis for that 
determination.
    Land use sectors that could be affected by this proposed rule 
include: Federal land managers, private landowners with lands that have 
a Federal nexus within proposed CHUs, commercial or residential 
developers with lands or activities that have a Federal nexus within 
proposed CHUs, oil and gas or oil shale companies with Federal leases 
that fall within proposed CHUs, livestock owners with permits that fall 
within proposed CHUs, and OHV users that may or are utilizing proposed 
CHUs.
    We have concluded that deferring the RFA finding until completion 
of the draft economic analysis is necessary to meet the purposes and 
requirements of the RFA. Deferring the RFA finding in this manner will 
ensure that we make a sufficiently informed determination based on 
adequate economic information and provide the necessary opportunity for 
public comment.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211
    Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires 
agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking 
certain actions. Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica all occur in areas where utility corridors are or may affect 
populations. In addition, both P. debilis and P. submutica are in areas 
with extensive oil and gas activity. Well pads and their existing 
infrastructure are within proposed CHUs. On Federal lands, entities 
conducting oil and gas related activities as well as power companies 
will need to consult within areas designated as critical habitat. 
Although we do not believe these impacts will rise to the level of 
significant, we are deferring our finding until the draft economic 
analysis has been completed. We will further evaluate this issue as we 
conduct our economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as 
warranted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
    In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
et seq.), we make the following 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 tribal governments'' with two 
exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It also 
excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal 
program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing Federal 
program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State, 
local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' if the 
provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of assistance'' 
or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal 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 shift the costs of the large entitlement programs 
listed above onto State governments.
    (2) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments because only a small percentage of the total 
land ownership fall on small government lands such as the Town of 
Pagosa Springs, Archuleta

[[Page 45104]]

County, and lands owned and operated by the State of Colorado. 
Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required. We do not 
believe that this rule would significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments because it will 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. However, we 
will further evaluate this issue as we conduct our economic analysis, 
and review and revise this assessment if appropriate.
Takings--Executive Order 12630
    In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (Government Actions and 
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights), 
we have analyzed the potential takings implications of designating 
critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and 
Phacelia submutica 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 I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P. 
submutica does not pose significant takings implications for lands 
within or affected by the designation.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
    In accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this 
proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A 
Federalism assessment is not required. In keeping with Department of 
the Interior and Department of Commerce policy, we requested 
information from, and coordinated development of, this proposed 
critical habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies 
in Colorado. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently 
occupied by the Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia 
submutica may impose nominal additional regulatory restrictions to 
those currently in place and, therefore, has little incremental impact 
on State and local governments and their activities. The designation 
may have some benefit to these governments because the areas that 
contain the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the elements 
of the features 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 local governments in long-range planning (rather than having 
them 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 Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), 
the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not 
unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of 
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We have proposed designating 
critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This 
proposed rule uses standard property descriptions and identifies the 
elements of physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and 
Phacelia submutica within the designated areas to assist the public in 
understanding the habitat needs of the species.
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 (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 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 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 
(9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when the 
range of the species includes States within the Tenth Circuit, such as 
that of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica, 
under the Tenth Circuit ruling in Catron County Board of Commissioners 
v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), we 
will undertake NEPA analysis for critical habitat designation and 
notify the public of the availability of the draft environmental 
assessment for this proposal when it is finished.
Clarity of the Rule
    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as 
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections 
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences 
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be 
useful, etc.
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), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and 
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the 
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 
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

[[Page 45105]]

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 that were occupied by 
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica at the 
time of listing that contain the features essential for conservation of 
the species, and no tribal lands unoccupied by the I. polyantha, P. 
debilis, and P. submutica that are essential for the conservation of 
the species. Therefore, we are not proposing to designate critical 
habitat for I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica on tribal lands.

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at 
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Western Colorado 
Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the 
Western Colorado Ecological Services Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

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

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

    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; Public Law 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise 
noted.

    2. In Sec.  17.12(h), revise the entry for ``Ipomopsis polyantha,'' 
``Penstemon debilis,'' and ``Phacelia submutica'' under ``Flowering 
Plants'' in the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants to read as 
follows:


Sec.  17.12  Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Species
--------------------------------------------------   Historic range          Family         Status       When listed      Critical habitat     Special
        Scientific name            Common name                                                                                                  rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants:
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
    Ipomopsis polyantha.......  Pagosa skyrocket.  U.S.A. (CO)         Polemoniaceae....  E           792..............  17.96(a).........  NA
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
    Penstemon debilis.........  Parachute          U.S.A. (CO)         Plantaginaceae...  T           792..............  17.96(a).........  NA
                                 beardtongue.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
    Phacelia submutica........  DeBeque phacelia.  U.S.A. (CO)         Hydrophyllaceae..  T           792..............  17.96(a).........  NA
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In Sec.  17.96, amend paragraph (a) by adding entries for 
``Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia)'' in alphabetical order under 
Family Hydrophyllaceae, ``Penstemon debilis (Parachute penstemon)'' in 
alphabetical order under Family Plantaginaceae, and ``Ipomopsis 
polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket)'' in alphabetical order under Family 
Polemoniaceae to read as follows:


Sec.  17.96  Critical habitat--plants.

    (a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Hydrophyllaceae: Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia)

    (1) Critical habitat units are designated for Garfield and Mesa 
Counties, Colorado.
    (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of 
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
Phacelia submutica consist of five components:
    (i) Suitable soils and geology.
    (A) Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch formation.
    (B) Within these larger formations, small areas (from 10 to 1,000 
ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) on colorful exposures of chocolate to purplish 
brown, light to dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils. These small 
areas are slightly different in texture and color than the similar 
surrounding soils. Occupied sites are characterized by alkaline (pH 
range from 7 to 8.9) soils with higher clay content than similar nearby 
unoccupied soils.
    (C) Clay soils that shrink and swell dramatically upon drying and 
wetting and are likely important in the maintenance of the seed bank.
    (ii) Topography. Moderately steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops 
adjacent to valley floors. Occupied slopes range from 2 to 42 degrees 
with an average of 14 degrees.
    (iii) Elevation and climate.
    (A) Elevations from 4,600 ft (1,400 m) to 7,450 ft (2,275 m).
    (B) Climatic conditions similar to those around DeBeque, Colorado, 
including suitable precipitation and temperatures. Annual fluctuations 
in moisture (and probably temperature) greatly influences the number of 
Phacelia submutica individuals that grow in a given year and are thus 
able to set seed and replenish the seed bank.
    (iv) Plant community.
    (A) Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) barren areas 
with less than 20 percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
    (B) Presence of appropriate associated species that can include 
(but are not limited to) the natives Grindelia fastigiata, Eriogonum 
gordonii, Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera caespitosa. If sites 
become dominated by Bromus tectorum or other invasive nonnative 
species, they should not be discounted because Phacelia submutica may 
still be found there.
    (C) Appropriate plant communities within the greater pinyon-juniper 
woodlands that include:
    (1) Clay badlands within the mixed salt desert scrub; or
    (2) Clay badlands within big sagebrush shrublands.

[[Page 45106]]

    (v) Maintenance of the seed bank and appropriate disturbance 
levels.
    (A) Within suitable soil and geologies (see paragraph (2)(i) of 
this entry), undisturbed areas where seed banks are left undamaged.
    (B) Areas with light disturbance when dry and no disturbance when 
wet. Clay soils are relatively stable when dry but are extremely 
vulnerable to disturbances when wet. While Phacelia submutica has 
evolved with some light natural disturbances including erosional and 
shrink-swell processes, human disturbances that are either heavy or 
light when soils are wet could impact the species and its seed bank. 
More heavily disturbed areas should be evaluated over the course of 
several years for the species' presence.
    (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as 
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the 
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on 
the effective date of this rule.
    (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were 
created on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS 
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal 
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information 
came from a wide array of sources. A habitat model prepared by the 
Colorado Natural Heritage Program also was utilized.
    (5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45107]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.006

    (6) Unit 1: Mesa County, Colorado.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 N coordinates 
(E,N): 206056.41, 4354673.68; 206059.46, 4354708.47; 206068.50, 
4354742.21; 206083.26, 4354773.87; 206103.29, 4354802.48; 206127.99, 
4354827.18; 206156.61, 4354847.21; 206188.26, 4354861.97; 206214.13, 
4354868.90; 208172.81, 4355368.77; 208189.62, 4355371.81; 208221.50,

[[Page 45108]]

4355372.48; 211387.70, 4355153.18; 211410.39, 4355151.28; 211445.58, 
4355146.74; 211486.68, 4355135.00; 211547.06, 4355091.87; 211556.23, 
4355027.68; 211558.18, 4354988.68; 211544.57, 4354945.59; 211505.83, 
4354878.16; 211464.05, 4354854.86; 210208.15, 4354271.78; 210182.91, 
4354265.02; 210158.47, 4354262.88; 206249.74, 4354473.91; 206222.00, 
4354476.34; 206188.26, 4354485.38; 206156.60, 4354500.14; 206127.99, 
4354520.17; 206103.29, 4354544.87; 206083.26, 4354573.48; 206068.50, 
4354605.14; 206059.46, 4354638.88; and returning to 206056.41, 
4354673.68.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this entry.
    (7) Unit 2: Garfield and Mesa Counties, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 212167.61, 4358240.79; 212181.41, 4358305.17; 216874.61, 
4369051.20; 216886.19, 4369076.04; 216906.22, 4369104.65; 216930.92, 
4369129.35; 216959.53, 4369149.38; 216988.08, 4369162.70; 217007.08, 
4369169.20; 217052.79, 4369178.50; 217098.42, 4369178.50; 217147.50, 
4369168.62; 217185.45, 4369148.30; 217228.09, 4369111.07; 217246.04, 
4369073.00; 217374.92, 4368485.88; 217316.01, 4367553.09; 218906.65, 
4364145.98; 219044.12, 4362859.72; 220022.38, 4362778.06; 220029.81, 
4362750.34; 220754.51, 4358989.62; 220756.77, 4358963.78; 220763.05, 
4358652.76; 220758.37, 4358594.29; 219463.44, 4356169.16; 219454.46, 
4356156.34; 219441.47, 4356143.35; 219429.06, 4356134.66; 218497.76, 
4355625.60; 218409.92, 4355581.68; 218172.63, 4355513.88; 215567.84, 
4354836.96; 215521.83, 4354844.15; 213794.77, 4355190.30; 213727.43, 
4355250.15; and returning to 212167.61, 4358240.79.
    (ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of critical habitat for Phacelia 
submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45109]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.007

    (8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 221791.53, 4364704.92; 221793.82, 4364731.04; 221800.60, 
4364756.36; 221811.68, 4364780.12; 221826.71, 4364801.59; 221845.25, 
4364820.12; 221866.72, 4364835.16; 221890.48, 4364846.24; 221915.80, 
4364853.02; 221941.92, 4364855.31; 221968.03, 4364853.02; 221993.35, 
4364846.24; 222017.11, 4364835.16;

[[Page 45110]]

222038.58, 4364820.12; 222057.11, 4364801.59; 222070.52, 4364782.44; 
222216.47, 4364510.68; 222225.04, 4364492.29; 222231.83, 4364466.97; 
222234.11, 4364440.85; 222232.54, 4364422.94; 222216.07, 4364254.88; 
222209.42, 4364230.07; 222198.34, 4364206.31; 222183.30, 4364184.84; 
222164.77, 4364166.30; 222143.30, 4364151.27; 222119.54, 4364140.19; 
222094.22, 4364133.40; 222068.10, 4364131.12; 222041.99, 4364133.40; 
222016.67, 4364140.19; 221992.91, 4364151.27; 221971.44, 4364166.30; 
221952.90, 4364184.84; 221937.87, 4364206.31; 221927.38, 4364228.80; 
221798.70, 4364660.60; 221793.82, 4364678.81; and returning to 
221791.53, 4364704.92.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
    (9) Unit 4: Mesa County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 221750.44, 4360417.57; 221910.53, 4360544.11; 222011.30, 
4360532.40; 224377.86, 4359858.22; 224479.87, 4359777.31; 224505.92, 
4359669.86; 224162.67, 4359105.67; 224121.94, 4359039.96; 224061.14, 
4358997.20; 223982.52, 4358972.67; 223916.23, 4358974.09; 223647.66, 
4358996.02; 221914.01, 4359996.02; 221888.97, 4360013.55; 221864.27, 
4360038.25; 221844.24, 4360066.86; 221829.48, 4360098.52; 221822.43, 
4360124.80; and returning to 221750.44, 4360417.57.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
    (10) Unit 5: Garfield County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 224674.62, 4362880.00; 224676.90, 4362906.11; 224683.69, 
4362931.43; 224694.77, 4362955.19; 224709.80, 4362976.66; 224723.94, 
4362990.81; 225361.43, 4363566.66; 225380.81, 4363580.23; 225404.57, 
4363591.31; 225429.89, 4363598.10; 225456.00, 4363600.38; 225476.05, 
4363598.63; 226724.37, 4363422.10; 226741.36, 4363417.55; 226799.80, 
4363398.33; 226821.01, 4363388.44; 226842.49, 4363373.40; 226861.02, 
4363354.87; 226876.06, 4363333.40; 226887.14, 4363309.64; 226893.92, 
4363284.32; 226896.21, 4363258.20; 226893.92, 4363232.09; 226887.14, 
4363206.77; 226876.06, 4363183.01; 226861.02, 4363161.54; 226842.49, 
4363143.01; 226821.01, 4363127.97; 226797.26, 4363116.89; 226777.13, 
4363111.50; 224847.74, 4362731.61; 224825.00, 4362729.62; 224798.89, 
4362731.90; 224773.57, 4362738.69; 224749.81, 4362749.77; 224728.34, 
4362764.80; 224709.80, 4362783.34; 224694.77, 4362804.81; 224683.69, 
4362828.57; 224676.90, 4362853.89; and returning to 224674.62, 
4362880.00.
    (ii) Note: Map of Units 3, 4, and 5 of critical habitat for 
Phacelia submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45111]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.008

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    (11) Unit 6: Mesa County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 224130.10, 4355992.22; 224137.33, 4356027.59; 224164.10, 
4356079.43; 225800.48, 4358995.39; 225813.35, 4359013.77; 225831.89, 
4359032.31; 225853.36, 4359047.34; 225877.12, 4359058.42; 225902.44, 
4359065.20; 225928.55, 4359067.49; 225954.67, 4359065.20; 225979.99, 
4359058.42; 226003.74, 4359047.34;

[[Page 45112]]

226025.22, 4359032.31; 226043.75, 4359013.77; 226058.79, 4358992.30; 
226069.86, 4358968.54; 226076.65, 4358943.22; 226078.93, 4358917.11; 
226076.86, 4358893.40; 224608.12, 4352128.37; 224602.98, 4352109.18; 
224591.90, 4352085.43; 224576.87, 4352063.95; 224558.33, 4352045.42; 
224536.86, 4352030.38; 224513.10, 4352019.30; 224487.78, 4352012.52; 
224467.81, 4352010.77; 224347.33, 4352006.47; 224323.80, 4352008.53; 
224298.48, 4352015.31; 224274.72, 4352026.39; 224253.25, 4352041.43; 
224234.71, 4352059.96; 224219.68, 4352081.44; 224208.60, 4352105.19; 
224201.81, 4352130.52; 224199.99, 4352151.35; 224629.91, 4354119.91; 
and returning to 224130.10, 4355992.22.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 6 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
    (12) Unit 7: Mesa County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 222895.27, 4348972.58; 222897.80, 4349033.20; 222915.05, 
4349089.21; 222986.91, 4349165.50; 223071.80, 4349165.50; 223127.84, 
4349151.49; 223191.28, 4349133.16; 223258.08, 4349099.76; 223289.13, 
4349042.83; 223296.46, 4348986.16; 223281.88, 4348879.74; 223202.51, 
4348825.62; 223135.45, 4348812.21; 223082.26, 4348808.17; 223046.13, 
4348816.20; 222983.74, 4348834.55; 222946.47, 4348871.83; 222913.76, 
4348920.89; and returning to 222895.27, 4348972.58.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 7 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
    (13) Unit 8: Mesa County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 227287.92, 4353124.64; 227363.29, 4353992.27; 227486.10, 
4355236.26; 227494.99, 4355269.46; 227509.75, 4355301.11; 227529.79, 
4355329.72; 227554.49, 4355354.42; 227580.17, 4355372.41; 229695.80, 
4356548.43; 229713.96, 4356556.90; 229769.67, 4356573.00; 229791.21, 
4356573.00; 229846.71, 4356568.20; 229895.06, 4356513.86; 229901.97, 
4356503.99; 230681.73, 4355125.75; 228988.56, 4353080.54; 228569.46, 
4352091.46; 229156.20, 4351102.39; 233728.76, 4349562.63; 233736.17, 
4349546.74; 234244.43, 4348051.25; 234244.43, 4347992.84; 234223.25, 
4347925.78; 234136.83, 4347851.71; 234053.14, 4347868.45; 234019.56, 
4347882.27; 228869.43, 4350285.62; 228801.70, 4350322.67; 228248.13, 
4350668.17; 228218.86, 4350689.66; 227621.62, 4351711.59; 227402.60, 
4352451.12; 227394.12, 4352487.23; 227348.70, 4352740.95; and returning 
to 227287.92, 4353124.64.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 8 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica 
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
    (14) Unit 9: Mesa County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 236060.14, 4347594.28; 236061.74, 4347612.58; 236066.50, 
4347630.33; 236074.26, 4347646.98; 236084.79, 4347662.02; 236097.78, 
4347675.01; 236112.83, 4347685.55; 236129.48, 4347693.31; 236147.22, 
4347698.07; 236160.44, 4347699.22; 238599.07, 4347734.44; 238748.35, 
4347678.56; 238818.30, 4347624.15; 238813.83, 4347530.21; 238505.71, 
4347090.68; 238427.01, 4347093.30; 236169.29, 4347430.50; 236154.51, 
4347434.46; 236137.86, 4347442.23; 236122.81, 4347452.76; 236109.83, 
4347465.75; 236099.29, 4347480.80; 236094.26, 4347491.59; 236065.90, 
4347560.46; 236061.74, 4347575.99; and returning to 236060.14, 
4347594.28.
    (ii) Note: Map of Units 6, 7, 8, and 9 of critical habitat for 
Phacelia submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45113]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.009

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
* * * * *
Family Plantaginaceae: Penstemon debilis (Parachute penstemon)

    (1) Critical habitat units are designated for Garfield County, 
Colorado.
    (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of 
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
Penstemon debilis consist of five components:
    (i) Suitable soils and geology.
    (A) Parachute Member and the Lower Part of the Green River 
Formation, although soils outside these formations would be suitable 
for pollinators (see paragraph (2)(v) of this regulation).
    (B) Appropriate soil morphology characterized by a surface layer of 
small to moderate shale channers (small

[[Page 45114]]

flagstones) that shift continually due to the steep slopes and below a 
weakly developed calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent 
coarse material.
    (ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft 
(1,600 to 2,920 m) in elevation. Climatic conditions similar to those 
of the Mahogany Bench, including suitable precipitation and 
temperatures.
    (iii) Plant community.
    (A) Barren areas with less than 10 percent plant cover.
    (B) Other oil shale endemics, which can include: Mentzelia 
rhizomata, Thalictrum heliophilum, Astragalus lutosus, Lesquerella 
parviflora, Penstemon osterhoutii, and Festuca dasyclada.
    (iv) Habitat for pollinators.
    (A) Pollinator ground and twig nesting habitats. Habitats suitable 
for a wide array of pollinators and their life-history and nesting 
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would 
provide for this diversity (see paragraph (2)(iii) of this regulation). 
These habitats can include areas outside of the soils identified in 
paragraph (2)(i) of this regulation.
    (B) Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from 
one population to the next within units.
    (C) Availability of other floral resources such as other flowering 
plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass 
species do not provide resources for pollinators.
    (D) To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we 
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-meter) area beyond occupied habitat 
to conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
    (v) High levels of natural disturbance.
    (A) Very little to no soil formation.
    (B) Slow to moderate but constant downward motion of the oil shale 
that maintains the habitat in an early successional state.
    (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as 
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the 
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on 
the effective date of this rule.
    (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were 
created on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS 
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal 
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information 
came from a wide array of sources. Geology, soil, and landcover layers 
also were utilized.
    (5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis 
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45115]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.010

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    (6) Unit 1: Garfield County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 202906.15, 4381320.29; 203687.82, 4381249.23; 203711.51, 
4380870.24; 206127.56, 4380775.50; 206151.24, 4381130.80; 206743.41,

[[Page 45116]]

4381059.74; 207481.34, 4379882.89; 207546.04, 4379737.88; 207579.46, 
4379590.78; 207560.32, 4379461.09; 207478.37, 4379389.00; 207474.54, 
4379385.64; 207331.18, 4379313.30; 207242.86, 4379310.27; 205522.68, 
4379335.39; 205374.75, 4379343.44; 203884.46, 4379765.47; 203832.32, 
4379794.30; 203128.54, 4380665.06; 202917.56, 4380968.75; 202914.21, 
4381113.81; and returning to 202906.15, 4381320.29.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis 
is provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this entry.
    (7) Unit 2: Garfield County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 200037.93, 4369152.60; 200064.07, 4369235.93; 200561.00, 
4370149.00; 200968.81, 4370359.43; 202579.41, 4370903.05; 203616.76, 
4371206.04; 204719.41, 4370944.44; 213659.95, 4368221.51; 213580.99, 
4367281.93; 208401.49, 4367866.21; 206696.04, 4368647.87; 205938.06, 
4369097.92; 205132.71, 4369500.59; 202432.42, 4369595.34; 201153.33, 
4369263.73; 200171.00, 4369099.00; and returning to 200037.93, 
4369152.6.
    (ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of critical habitat for Penstemon 
debilis follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45117]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.011

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    (8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.

    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 223794.63, 4365442.99; 226421.38, 4369052.84; 226846.74, 
4369360.71; 231279.92, 4371117.43; 231538.71, 4371188.86; 231847.17, 
4371187.49; 233083.49, 4371030.55; 234022.16, 4370823.43; 234684.25, 
4370657.01; 233636.51, 4369246.26; 231875.03, 4367395.93; 228564.25, 
4365920.22; 225627.45, 4365376.45; 224031.96, 4365135.93; and returning 
to 223794.63, 4365442.99.]
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis 
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45118]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.012

    (9) Unit 4: Garfield County, Colorado
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 242721.77, 4377480.02; 243191.00, 4378729.00; 245443.06, 
4380986.80; 245458.93, 4381002.66; 245475.49, 4381017.80; 245509.28, 
4381047.32; 245532.34, 4381066.29; 249608.89, 4384223.08; 249636.03, 
4384243.26; 249649.77, 4384253.12; 249662.66, 4384262.04; 249667.22, 
4384265.16; 249676.38, 4384271.35; 249699.98, 4384286.36; 249738.49, 
4384309.37; 249778.00, 4384330.63; 249818.42, 4384350.10; 249838.85,

[[Page 45119]]

4384359.38; 249859.67, 4384367.73; 249901.68, 4384383.50; 249922.86, 
4384390.91; 249944.35, 4384397.36; 249987.59, 4384409.30; 250031.33, 
4384419.28; 250075.48, 4384427.29; 250138.32, 4384436.98; 250178.44, 
4384442.24; 250223.13, 4384446.26; 250245.51, 4384447.77; 250267.95, 
4384448.27; 250312.81, 4384448.27; 250335.24, 4384447.77; 250357.63, 
4384446.26; 250402.32, 4384442.24; 250426.41, 4384439.48; 250430.89, 
4384438.85; 250459.56, 4384434.76; 250479.91, 4384431.42; 250520.47, 
4384423.91; 250562.42, 4384414.26; 250605.67, 4384402.32; 250648.34, 
4384388.46; 250690.34, 4384372.69; 250711.17, 4384364.34; 250731.60, 
4384355.06; 250772.02, 4384335.59; 250792.01, 4384325.41; 250811.53, 
4384314.33; 250850.04, 4384291.32; 250887.49, 4384266.60; 250923.78, 
4384240.23; 250941.63, 4384226.64; 250958.86, 4384212.26; 250992.65, 
4384182.74; 251025.07, 4384151.74; 251056.08, 4384119.31; 251076.49, 
4384096.62; 251086.93, 4384084.27; 251092.10, 4384078.05; 251109.95, 
4384056.24; 251118.88, 4384045.00; 251136.41, 4384022.27; 251157.79, 
4383992.34; 251182.51, 4383954.89; 251201.82, 4383923.11; 251216.21, 
4383897.34; 251223.21, 4383884.35; 251236.10, 4383859.56; 251239.59, 
4383852.72; 251246.47, 4383838.98; 251259.13, 4383811.66; 251276.77, 
4383770.40; 251285.12, 4383749.58; 251292.53, 4383728.40; 251306.40, 
4383685.73; 251315.85, 4383652.83; 251321.59, 4383629.94; 251324.33, 
4383618.47; 251331.27, 4383587.73; 251333.50, 4383577.32; 251337.75, 
4383556.47; 251343.27, 4383523.86; 251349.29, 4383479.40; 251353.31, 
4383434.72; 251355.32, 4383389.90; 251355.83, 4383367.46; 251355.32, 
4383345.03; 251353.31, 4383300.21; 251349.29, 4383255.53; 251343.27, 
4383211.07; 251336.94, 4383174.60; 251330.90, 4383146.08; 251327.68, 
4383131.86; 251319.74, 4383099.14; 251317.83, 4383091.52; 251313.89, 
4383076.30; 251305.40, 4383047.21; 251291.54, 4383004.54; 251280.41, 
4382973.76; 251272.78, 4382954.63; 251268.86, 4382945.10; 251257.95, 
4382919.32; 251253.09, 4382908.20; 251243.09, 4382886.07; 251227.77, 
4382855.08; 251206.51, 4382815.57; 251195.43, 4382796.06; 251183.50, 
4382777.06; 251158.78, 4382739.62; 251132.41, 4382703.32; 251104.44, 
4382668.24; 251090.06, 4382651.02; 251071.10, 4382629.21; 251042.63, 
4382596.73; 251011.62, 4382564.31; 250979.20, 4382533.30; 250945.41, 
4382503.78; 250928.19, 4382489.40; 250910.33, 4382475.81; 247067.01, 
4379599.29; 247053.05, 4379588.99; 247024.77, 4379568.88; 245278.56, 
4378356.07; 243539.79, 4377302.88; 243299.65, 4377257.84; 242735.72, 
4377245.93; and returning to 242721.77, 4377480.02]
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis 
follows:

[[Page 45120]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.013

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
* * * * *
Family Polemoniaceae: Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket)

    (1) Critical habitat units are designated for Archuleta County, 
Colorado.
    (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of 
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of 
Ipomopsis polyantha consist of five components:
    (i) Mancos shale soils.
    (ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft 
(1,950 to 2,475 m)

[[Page 45121]]

and current climatic conditions similar to those that historically 
occurred around Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Climatic conditions include 
suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and winter snow.
    (iii) Plant community.
    (A) Suitable native plant communities (as described in paragraph 
(2)(iii)(B) of this entry) with small (less than 100 ft\2\ (10 m\2\)) 
or larger (several hectares or acres) barren areas with less than 20 
percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
    (B) Appropriate potential native plant communities, although these 
communities may not be like they were historically because they have 
already been altered. Therefore, there only needs to be the potential 
for the appropriate native plant community. For example, Ponderosa pine 
forests may have been cut, or areas that had native vegetation may have 
been scraped. Native habitats and plants would be preferred to habitats 
dominated by nonnative invasive species. These plant communities 
include:
    (1) Barren shales;
    (2) Open montane grassland (primarily Arizona fescue) understory at 
the edges of open Ponderosa pine; or
    (3) Clearings within the ponderosa pine/Rocky Mountain juniper and 
Utah juniper/oak communities.
    (iv) Habitat for pollinators.
    (A) Pollinator ground and twig nesting areas. Habitats suitable for 
a wide array of pollinators and their life-history and nesting 
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would 
provide for this diversity.
    (B) Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from 
one site to the next within each population.
    (C) Availability of other floral resources, such as other flowering 
plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass 
species do not provide resources for pollinators.
    (D) To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we 
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area beyond occupied habitat to 
conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
    (v) Appropriate disturbance regime.
    (A) Appropriate disturbance levels--Light to moderate, or 
intermittent or discontinuous.
    (B) Naturally maintained disturbances through soil erosion or 
human-maintained disturbances that can include light grazing, 
occasional ground clearing, and other disturbances that are not severe 
or continual.
    (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as 
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the 
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on 
the effective date of this rule. However, because Ipomopsis polyantha 
is found along the edges of roads and buildings, the edges of roads and 
edges of structures are included in the designation.
    (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were 
created on a base of both aerial imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS 
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal 
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information 
came from a wide array of sources.
    (5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha 
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45122]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.014

    (6) Unit 1: Archuleta County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates 
(E,N): 303791.32, 4122535.03; 303793.45, 4122922.32; 304096.00, 
4123362.40; 304369.56, 4123552.58; 304559.79, 4123642.82; 305688.95, 
4123978.43; 306091.12, 4123810.03; 306288.11, 4123711.53; 306854.07, 
4123177.90; 306682.38, 4122356.39; 306421.31, 4121926.16; 305629.19, 
4121491.52;

[[Page 45123]]

305085.53, 4121418.90; 304527.32, 4121406.59; 303782.83, 4121898.71; 
and returning to 303791.32, 4122535.03.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis 
polyantha follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.015


[[Page 45124]]


BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    (7) Unit 2: Archuleta County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates 
(E,N): 306215.91, 4143150.27; 306228.72, 4143313.61; 307003.79, 
4143989.39; 307211.97, 4144018.22; 307840.95, 4143816.88; 308210.39, 
4143809.74; 308215.75, 4143886.66; 308293.59, 4143872.46; 308346.60, 
4143847.52; 309004.29, 4143385.20; 309534.52, 4142892.90; 309558.00, 
4142861.72; 309548.26, 4142623.97; 309546.44, 4142621.82; 309498.44, 
4142571.81; 309318.44, 4142432.81; 309132.45, 4142298.80; 309124.45, 
4142295.80; 309054.45, 4142279.80; 309046.45, 4142278.80; 309016.45, 
4142278.80; 308991.49, 4142282.38; 307639.65, 4142712.29; 307518.06, 
4142804.69; 307308.93, 4142897.10; 307090.07, 4143115.96; 306885.80, 
4143091.64; 306798.26, 4143140.28; 306666.95, 4143154.87; 306667.03, 
4143009.21; and returning to 306215.91, 4143150.27.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis 
polyantha follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45125]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.016

    (8) Unit 3: Archuleta County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 321192.95, 4123901.22; 321219.78, 4124232.82; 321945.28,

[[Page 45126]]

4127008.59; 322719.45, 4127682.22; 323501.91, 4127905.25; 325613.28, 
4127099.77; 326316.06, 4126714.67; 326499.78, 4125923.28; 325267.71, 
4122561.16; 324767.28, 4121430.82; 324009.92, 4120447.34; 322039.88, 
4121949.02; 321275.11, 4123556.12; and returning to 321192.95, 
4123901.22.
    (ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis 
polyantha is provided at paragraph (9)(ii) of this entry.
    (9) Unit 4: Archuleta County, Colorado.
    (i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates 
(E,N): 325341.89, 4116396.61; 325387.72, 4117588.25; 326991.87, 
4117571.07; 326986.14, 4116780.45; 328223.62, 4116654.41; 328223.62, 
4116287.75; 327816.85, 4116316.40; 327799.67, 4115921.09; 327392.90, 
4115932.55; 327369.98, 4114758.09; 326957.49, 4114763.82; 326963.22, 
4115164.85; 326567.91, 4115187.77; 326562.18, 4115588.81; 326172.61, 
4115594.53; 326161.15, 4115204.96; 325777.30, 4115210.69; 325576.78, 
4115199.23; 325737.20, 4115554.43; 325754.39, 4115795.05; 325668.45, 
4115886.72; 325324.70, 4115995.57; and returning to 325341.89, 
4116396.61.
    (ii) Note: Map of Units 3 and 4 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis 
polyantha follows:

[[Page 45127]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.017


[[Page 45128]]


* * * * *

    Dated: July 12, 2011.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2011-18428 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C