[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67270-67287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23103]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R5-ES-2016-0030; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BB50


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species 
Status for the Kenk's Amphipod

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
list the Kenk's amphipod (Stygobromus kenki), a ground water species 
from the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia, as an endangered 
species under the Endangered Species Act (Act). If we finalize this 
rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to this 
species. The effect of this regulation will be to add the species to 
the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
November 29, 2016. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 
Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public 
hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT by November 14, 2016.

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 Search box, enter FWS-R5-ES-2016-0030, 
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search 
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, 
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may 
submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R5-ES-2016-0030; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 
22041-3803.
    We request that you send comments only by the methods described 
above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This 
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide 
us (see Public Comments below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Genevieve LaRouche, Field Supervisor, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chesapeake Bay Field Office, 177 
Admiral Cochrane Drive, Annapolis, MD 21401, by telephone 410-573-4577 
or by facsimile 410-269-0832. Persons who use a telecommunications 
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay 
Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary

    Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, if a species is 
determined to be an endangered or threatened species throughout all or 
a significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish 
a proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our 
proposal within 1 year. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the 
maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to 
be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Listing a species 
as an endangered or threatened species and designating and revising 
critical habitat can be completed only by issuing a rule.
    What this document does. This document proposes the listing of the 
Kenk's amphipod (Stygobromus kenki) as an endangered species. The 
Kenk's amphipod is a candidate species for which we have on file 
sufficient information on its biological vulnerability and threats to 
support preparation of a listing proposal, but for which development of 
a listing regulation has been precluded by other higher priority 
listing activities. This proposed rule assesses the best available 
information and data regarding the status of and threats to the Kenk's 
amphipod.
    The basis for our action. Under the Act, we can determine that a 
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five 
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. We have determined that the Kenk's amphipod is in 
danger of extinction primarily due to poor water quality, erosion, and 
sedimentation resulting from urban runoff in Maryland and the District 
of Columbia (Factor A) and the effects of small population dynamics 
(Factor E) at all known locations.
    We will seek peer review. We will seek comments from independent 
specialists to ensure that our determination is based on scientifically 
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite these peer 
reviewers to comment on our listing proposal. Because we will consider 
all comments and information received during the comment period, our 
final determination may differ from this proposal.

Information Requested

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 the public, other concerned governmental 
agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, 
or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We 
particularly seek comments concerning:
    (1) The Kenk's amphipod's biology, range, and population trends, 
including:
    (a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including 
habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;

[[Page 67271]]

    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range including distribution patterns;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its 
habitat, or both.
    (2) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species, 
which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization, 
disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, 
or other natural or manmade factors.
    (3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threats (or lack thereof) to the species and existing regulations 
that may be addressing those threats.
    (4) Additional information concerning the historical and current 
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species, 
including the locations of any additional populations of the species.
    (5) Additional information on the hydrology (e.g., connectedness, 
size of recharge areas) of the known Kenk's amphipod sites.
    (6) Reliable methodology for estimating the total population size 
at an individual seep site (e.g., calculating the number of animals in 
the subsurface from the number of animals at the surface).
    (7) Additional information on the interspecific interactions of 
amphipods at the known Kenk's amphipod sites (e.g., predator/prey 
dynamics or competition for food or space resources).
    (8) The specific tolerance of the Kenk's amphipod or the Potomac 
groundwater amphipod (Stygobromus tenuis potomacus) to temperature, 
sewage effluent, chlorinated water, or other contaminants.
    Please include supporting documentation with your submission (such 
as scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to 
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
    Please note that submissions merely stating support for or 
opposition to the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in 
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that 
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered 
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and 
commercial data available.''
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you 
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
    If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy 
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the 
top of your document that we withhold this information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We 
will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
    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, Chesapeake Bay Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Public Hearing

    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 FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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.

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 listing determination is based on scientifically sound data, 
assumptions, and analyses. The peer reviewers have expertise in Kenk's/
Stygobromus amphipod biology, habitat, or stressors (factors negatively 
affecting the species) to the Kenk's amphipod species or its habitat. 
We invite comment from the peer reviewers during this public comment 
period.

Previous Federal Action

    In 2001, the Service received a petition to list the Kenk's 
amphipod and two other invertebrates. Higher priority workload that 
consumed the listing budget prevented the Service from making a 90-day 
finding until fiscal year (FY) 2006 when we found that the petition did 
not present substantial information (72 FR 51766, September 11, 2007) 
indicating that listing may be warranted. In 2010, the Service, under 
its own candidate assessment process, initiated a status review for the 
Kenk's amphipod, completed an analysis on the best available data, and 
determined that listing the species was warranted. However, we were 
precluded from moving forward with rulemaking for the species due to 
other higher priority listing actions. The Kenk's amphipod was added to 
the FY 2010 candidate list (75 FR 69222, November 10, 2010). The 
species' status was reviewed at least annually and continued to be 
found warranted but precluded for listing in all subsequent annual 
Candidate Notices of Review (76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 FR 
69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, November 22, 2013; 79 FR72450, 
December 5, 2014; 80 FR 80584, December 24, 2015). For additional 
information see: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile?spcode=K04P (last accessed June 22, 2016). In 2011, the 
Service entered into a settlement agreement with the Center for 
Biological Diversity and WildEarth Guardians that specified a listing 
determination must be made for all species from the FY 2010 candidate 
list (Center for Biological Diversity v. Salazar 10-cv-0230 (D.D.C.); 
WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar Nos. 10-cv-0048; 10-cv-0421; 10-cv-1043; 
10-cv-1045; 10-cv-1048; 10-cv-1049; 10-cv-50; 10-cv-51; 10-cv-1068; 10-
cv-2299; 10-cv-2595; 10-cv-3366 (D.D.C.)). Per the settlement 
agreement, a not warranted finding or proposed listing rule for the 
Kenk's amphipod must be delivered to the Federal Register no later than 
September 30, 2016.

Background

Taxonomy and Species Description

    The Kenk's amphipod (Stygobromus kenki) was first collected in 1967 
by Roman Kenk from a spring in Rock Creek Park (Park), southeast of 
North National Capitol Parks' headquarters in the District of Columbia, 
and it was formally described by J.R. Holsinger (1978, pp. 39-42). We 
have carefully reviewed the best available taxonomic data and conclude 
that the Kenk's amphipod is a valid species.
    The Kenk's amphipod is a moderately small ground water crustacean, 
with the largest male and female specimens growing to 0.15 inch (in) 
(3.7 millimeters (mm)) and 0.22 in (5.5 mm) in length, respectively. 
The Kenk's

[[Page 67272]]

amphipod is a member of the Spinosus Group of Stygobromus, which 
includes two other closely related but separate species, Blue Ridge 
stygobromid (S. spinosus) and Luray Caverns amphipod (S. 
pseudospinosus), that are found only in Virginia, primarily in 
Shenandoah National Park. The Kenk's amphipod is distinguished from 
those two species, as well as other co-occurring amphipods, such as the 
Potomac groundwater amphipod and Hay's spring amphipod (S. hayi), on 
the basis of various morphological features (Holsinger 1978, p. 39). 
For additional morphological description details, please see the Kenk's 
amphipod's FY 2015 candidate assessment form here: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/candidate/assessments/2015/r5/K04P_I01.pdf (last accessed on June 
22, 2016).
    Accurate identification of the Kenk's amphipod can occur only when 
a specimen is removed from the seepage spring site (hereafter referred 
interchangeably as seepage spring, seep, spring, or site depending upon 
the reference), and preserved in alcohol or other fixing agent for 
identification by a species expert who removes legs and other 
appendages from the specimen for microscopic examination. This 
identification method is the best scientific method available. Because 
the laboratory identification results in mortality, the Service has 
been judicious in limiting the frequency and number of specimens 
removed from known sites.

Reproduction and Longevity

    We have no reproductive or longevity information specific to the 
Kenk's amphipod, but assume those attributes are similar to other 
Stygobromus species. Like other amphipods, females of the genus 
Stygobromus deposit their eggs in a brood pouch on their underside 
(Foltz and Jepson 2009, p. 2). Young of the Potomac groundwater 
amphipod hatch from the egg and actively swim from the brood pouch, 
with days or even weeks passing between the hatching of the first and 
last young of a brood (Williams 2013, p. 10). The immature stages 
resemble the adults, and individuals undergo successive molts (usually 
between eight and nine) until maturity. Most surface amphipod species 
from the family Talitridae complete their life cycle (egg to adult) in 
1 year or less, but subterranean species like the Kenk's amphipod have 
a longer life span and may live for 4 to 6 years (Foltz and Jepson 
2009, p. 2).

Habitat

    Amphipods of the genus Stygobromus occur in ground water and ground 
water-related habitats (e.g., caves, seeps, small springs, wells, 
interstices, and rarely deep ground water lakes). Members of this genus 
occur only in freshwater and belong to the family Crangonyctidae, the 
largest family of freshwater amphipods in North America, and have 
modified morphology for survival in the subterranean ground water that 
is their primary habitat. These species are generally eyeless and 
unpigmented (without color), and frequently have attenuated (reduced in 
length and width) bodies (Holsinger 1978, pp. 1-2).
    The Kenk's amphipod is found in wooded areas where ground water 
emerges to form seepage springs (Holsinger 1978, p. 39). More 
specifically, this habitat is called the hypotelminorheic. 
Hypotelminorheic is described as habitats: (1) With a perched aquifer 
fed by subsurface water that creates a persistent wet spot; (2) 
underlain by a clay or other impermeable layer typically 5 to 50 
centimeters (cm) (2 to 20 in) below the surface; and (3) rich in 
organic matter compared with other aquatic subterranean habitats. The 
water supplying the springs infiltrates to the ground water from 
precipitation and runoff into the catchment (e.g., recharge or 
drainage) areas (see Factor A--Water Quality/Quantity Degradation Due 
to Chronic Pollution of Urban/Suburban Runoff section below for more 
details). The water exits these habitats at seepage springs. Seepage 
springs typically have a diffuse discharge of water where the flow 
cannot be immediately observed but the land surface is wet compared to 
the surrounding area (Culver et al. 2012, p. 2). The shading, 
hydrologic conditions, and organic matter found in these woodlands are 
considered important factors in maintaining suitable habitat for the 
species.
    The Kenk's amphipod has been found in the dead leaves or fine 
sediment submerged in the waters of its seepage spring outflows 
(Holsinger 1978, p. 130). The best available data indicate that the 
species will move between the surface and subterranean portions of the 
spring habitat, but it is unknown when or how often that movement 
occurs (Kavanaugh 2009, p. 3). Seepage springs typically have a 
drainage area of less than 10,000 square meters (2.5 acres (ac); 1 
hectare (ha)) and their water quality parameters differ from those 
parameters of small surface waters by having higher conductivity and 
dissolved oxygen, and lower pH and temperature (Culver et al. 2012, pp. 
5-6). For example, an unpublished study (Culver and Chestnut 2006, pp. 
1-3) found that sites supporting the genus Stygobromus had lower 
temperatures during spring and summer, higher dissolved oxygen, lower 
pH, and lower nitrate levels than other seepage springs (70 putative 
seepage springs) along the George Washington Memorial Parkway in 
Virginia. The Service has contracted with the Maryland Geological 
Survey to delineate the recharge areas and conduct electrical 
resistivity surveying to determine elevations of bedrock or clay that 
may be perching the water table, and to detect elevation of the water 
table of several seepage springs supporting the Kenk's amphipod; 
however, the results of this study will not be available until 2017.
    All Stygobromus species found in the hypotelminorheic habitats 
appear to have similar requirements--shallow ground water and springs 
with good water quality and persistent flow for most of the year in 
wooded habitats. Forest canopy cover appears to be necessary both for 
the shading and the food source its leaf litter provides. This food 
source consists of organic detritus and the microorganisms using the 
leaf litter as substrate.
    Springs currently known to support the Kenk's amphipod are found in 
forested areas with steep slopes, adjacent to streams, and overlying 
the Wissahickon geologic formation in the Piedmont of Maryland and the 
District of Columbia and in the Calvert formation just above the 
Nanjemoy formation in the upper Coastal Plain of Virginia. While the 
applicable areas containing the known appropriate geology in the 
Piedmont of Maryland and the District of Columbia have been extensively 
surveyed for Kenk's amphipod, the same is not true for areas in the 
Coastal Plain of Maryland and Virginia because information that these 
geological formations support occupied Kenk's amphipod habitat is new 
to the Service and species experts (see the Distribution and Relative 
Abundance--Current Range and Distribution Since 2016 section below for 
more information). The Service conducted a preliminary geographic 
information system (GIS) analysis to determine that the total amount of 
forested areas containing the appropriate geology in the Coastal Plain 
areas of Maryland and Virginia is approximately 20,500 ac (8,296 ha), 
with approximately 3,063 ac (1,240 ha) on public lands. However, the 
potential amount of suitable habitat for the Kenk's amphipod is less 
than 20,500 ac (8,296 ha). The Service will narrow the scope of 
potential habitat areas to

[[Page 67273]]

survey by evaluating slope, adjacent waterways, and other habitat 
quality parameters.

Distribution and Relative Abundance

Known Range and Distribution Prior to 2016
    Prior to 2016, all known occurrences of the Kenk's amphipod were 
from the Potomac River watershed in or near the District of Columbia. 
At the time of its description, this amphipod was known from two 
seepage springs (East Spring and Holsinger Spring) in Rock Creek Park 
in the District of Columbia and was initially thought to be identified 
from one shallow well in Fairfax County in northern Virginia (Holsinger 
1978, p. 39; Terwilliger 1991, p. 184). However, the single immature 
male specimen from this well was later reexamined by a taxonomic expert 
and determined not to be a Kenk's amphipod (Holsinger 2009, p. 266). 
Because of the difficulty in finding the small seepage area of 
Holsinger Spring, the location was surveyed only once (in 2003) between 
the Kenk's amphipod's original discovery at the site in 1967 and 
surveys conducted in 2015.
    The Kenk's amphipod was discovered in two additional springs 
(Sherrill Drive Spring and Kennedy Street Spring (this spring also 
supports the federally endangered Hay's Spring amphipod) in Rock Creek 
Park in 1995 and 2001 and in two springs (Coquelin Run Spring and Burnt 
Mill Spring #6) in Montgomery County, Maryland, in 2003 to 2004, 
bringing the total number of springs known to support the Kenk's 
amphipod to six. All of these sites are considered to be in the 
Washington metropolitan area because they are all within the Washington 
Beltway (i.e., the I-495 highway).
    Until 2016, the species was known only from six seepage spring 
sites in the District of Columbia and Montgomery County, MD (Culver and 
Sereg 2004, pp. 35-36; Feller 2005, p. 5) (see figure 1 below), despite 
extensive surveys for the species in the same area (Feller 1997, 
entire; Culver and Sereg 2004, entire; Feller 2005, entire). Ground 
water amphipod surveys on National Park Service (NPS) properties in 
Arlington and Fairfax Counties, VA, failed to detect the Kenk's 
amphipod (Hutchins and Culver 2008, entire). In addition, surveys in 
2014 in the vicinity of the proposed Purple Line light rail project in 
Montgomery County, MD, also failed to detect the species (Culver 2015, 
entire).
    Within the species' historical range, the District of Columbia and 
Maryland, it is plausible that urbanization of the Rock Creek and 
Northwest Branch watersheds (outside of the protected parklands) has 
reduced the range and distribution of the Kenk's amphipod because many 
large and small springs throughout these drainages have been lost as a 
result of urbanization (Williams 1977, entire; Feller 2005, p. 11). In 
particular, the southern Rock Creek watershed is where most of the 
natural tributaries and springs in the District of Columbia south of 
the National Zoo have been lost due to leveling and filling of the 
stream valleys, or conversion to covered sewers (Williams 1977, pp. 6, 
11). However, there is no available method to estimate to what extent 
the Kenk's amphipod may have been present in these areas. The best 
available data indicate that there were no ground water amphipod 
surveys at any of the springs prior to those habitat areas being filled 
or otherwise converted to unsuitable habitat.
Current Range and Distribution Since 2016
    Within the Washington metropolitan area, five of the known sites 
are within the Rock Creek drainage: Four are within Rock Creek Park in 
the District of Columbia (Holsinger Spring, Kennedy Street Spring, East 
Spring, and Sherrill Drive Spring), and the fifth (Coquelin Run Spring) 
is in Montgomery County, MD, not far from the District of Columbia 
border. A sixth known site (Burnt Mill Spring #6) is within the 
Northwest Branch Park in the Northwest Branch drainage in Montgomery 
County, MD, approximately 3 miles (mi) (4.8 kilometers (km)) from the 
District of Columbia border. Thus, the current range of this species in 
the Washington metropolitan area is limited to Federal land (four 
sites) and private property (one site) adjacent to approximately 4 
linear mi (6.4 km) of Rock Creek, and a single site to the east, on 
county parkland adjacent to the Northwest Branch. Both Rock Creek Park 
and the Northwest Branch Park are long, linear parks within heavily 
urbanized areas.
    In addition to the distribution described above for the Washington 
metropolitan area, a new area occupied by the Kenk's amphipod was 
identified in 2016--the U.S. Army's Fort A.P. Hill installation in 
Caroline County, VA, approximately 60 mi (97 km) south of all 
previously known sites (see figure 1 below). The species was collected 
during surveys conducted for another amphipod species in 2014, but not 
identified as the Kenk's amphipod until May 2016, when the Service was 
notified of the information. Out of a total of 21 surveyed sites on the 
installation, 4 were found to contain the Kenk's amphipod. Seven Kenk's 
amphipod individuals were identified from these four springs, which are 
along Mount and Mill Creeks, both tributaries of the Rappahannock River 
(J. Applegate, pers. comm., 05/02/2016; C. Hobson, pers. comm., 05/12/
2016) (see figure 1). The spring sites in the two creek systems are 
approximately 7.5 mi (12 km) apart. The area immediately surrounding 
Fort A.P. Hill is less developed than the Washington metropolitan area.
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P

[[Page 67274]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP30SE16.000

BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
Relative Abundance
    There are no reliable total population numbers for Kenk's amphipod 
sites due to sampling difficulties (e.g., flow conditions) and the lack 
of information on the portion of the population that may remain in the 
springs' ground water supply (Feller 2005, p. 10). However, because 
surveying in the Washington metropolitan area has been conducted using 
systematic and consistent

[[Page 67275]]

methodology over many years, often by the same individuals, the numbers 
of Kenk's amphipod individuals observed and the number of conducted 
surveys required to find the species are considered to be the best 
available data and do provide a reliable indication of the species' 
relative abundance.
    The species is typically found in small numbers and then only when 
ground water levels are high and springs are flowing freely, conditions 
that cause the Kenk's amphipod to be transported to the surface. These 
conditions typically occur during the spring season, except during 
especially dry years. Given the small size of the shallow ground water 
aquifers supporting the sites occupied by this species, and the known 
characteristics of subterranean invertebrates, it is probable that each 
of the Kenk's amphipod populations has always been small (Hutchins and 
Culver 2008, pp. 3-6).
    Although specimens were not collected and identified to the species 
level, Stygobromus sp., including some in the right size range for 
Kenk's amphipod, were observed during site reconnaissance visits 
between 2004 and 2015 in several of the known Kenk's amphipod 
Washington metropolitan area spring habitats (B. Yeaman, pers. comm., 
05/04/2012). In addition, visual inspections during this same time 
period indicated that most of the sites continued to appear to be 
suitable habitat, leading us to conclude that the Kenk's amphipod was 
extant at least at Burnt Mill Spring #6, Kennedy Street Spring, and 
East Spring (D. Feller, pers. comm., 04/01/2015). However, actual 
identifications of specimens collected during surveys conducted in 2015 
and 2016 (D. Feller, pers. comm., 03/16/2016) suggest that the species 
may not be extant at those sites (see below).
    Prior to 2015, all Kenk's amphipod specimens were discovered on the 
first or second survey conducted at all known sites. In 2015 and 2016, 
Kenk's amphipod was confirmed at only one of the Washington 
metropolitan area spring sites, Coquelin Run Spring, despite all of the 
sites being sampled multiple times during these 2 years (see table 1 
below) (D. Feller, pers. comm., 03/16/2016; D. Feller, pers. comm., 04/
22/2016). It is unclear whether the species may be extirpated at Burnt 
Mill Spring #6, Kennedy Street Spring, and East Spring, but the best 
available data show a decrease in observed individuals at these sites.
    Although there have been no Kenk's amphipods (Stygobromus kenki) 
observed at five of the six District of Columbia/Maryland sites during 
the 2015-2016 survey efforts, increasing numbers of Potomac groundwater 
amphipod have been observed at several of the sites (Burnt Mill Spring 
#6, East Spring, Kennedy Street Spring, and Holsinger Spring) (D. 
Feller, pers. comm., 04/22/2016). At Sherrill Drive Spring, no 
Stygobromus species have been detected for 12 years, and the water 
quality at this site has been documented to be poor (see Factor A--
Water Quality/Quantity Degradation Due to Chronic Pollution of Urban/
Suburban Runoff section below for more details), leading us to conclude 
that the species is likely extirpated at this site. This conclusion is 
consistent with the earlier characterization of the population at this 
site by Culver and Sereg (2004, p. 73) over a decade ago as ``barely 
hanging on.''

[[Page 67276]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP30SE16.001

    At Fort A.P. Hill, all collections of the Kenk's amphipod were 
taken during surveys conducted in the spring of 2014; therefore, no 
trend data exist for the four occupied spring sites. Twenty-one sites 
were surveyed with 5 to 7 visits per site. The numbers of the Kenk's 
amphipod collected that year were low at all sites, ranging from 1 to 4 
individuals (see table 1 above). Other species of Stygobromus, 
including S. tenuis (no common name), Tidewater stygonectid amphipod 
(S. indentatus), and Rappahannock Spring amphipod (S. foliatus), were 
also found at several of these Virginia sites.
    Summary of Distribution and Relative Abundance: The above 
information represents the best available data on the Kenk's amphipod's 
known distribution and relative abundance. However, the habitat areas 
at Fort A.P. Hill occur in different river drainages and geological 
formations from those in the Washington metropolitan area, which 
suggests that additional surveys may identify additional locations and 
further expand the species' current known range. The Service plans to 
fund additional amphipod surveys to be conducted during suitable 
sampling conditions in late 2016 and early 2017 in accessible areas of 
Maryland and northeastern Virginia that have geology similar to that of 
the Fort A.P. Hill sites and other suitable habitat characteristics 
(e.g., forested slopes dissected by streams). The U.S. Army also plans 
to conduct additional amphipod surveys at Fort A.P. Hill in spring 
2017. Additional surveys for the known Maryland and the District of 
Columbia sites are also planned.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an 
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors 
affecting its continued existence. In this section, we review the 
biological condition of the species and its resources, and the 
influences on such to assess the species' overall viability and the 
risks to that viability.

[[Page 67277]]

Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or 
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range

Water Quality/Quantity Degradation Due to Chronic Pollution of Urban/
Suburban Runoff

    Habitat modification, in the form of degraded water quality and 
quantity, is one of the primary drivers of Kenk's amphipod viability. 
While the species' specific tolerances to parameters affecting water 
quality and quantity is not yet known, we do know that the Kenk's 
amphipod is at increased risk to parameters that negatively affect 
water quality and quantity because these freshwater amphipods spend 
their entire life cycle in water and are, therefore, continually 
exposed to changes in the aquatic habitat. Water quality degradation of 
ground water at spring sites located in the Washington metropolitan 
area has been previously cited as a top concern in several studies and 
reports (Feller 1997, pp. 12-13; Culver and Sereg 2004, p. 13; Feller 
2005, p. 9; Hutchins and Culver 2008, p. 6; Kavanaugh 2009, p. 60; 
Culver et al. 2012, p. 37; Culver and Pipan 2014, p. 219).
    The amount of forested buffer surrounding the seep influences the 
species' vulnerability and exposure to negative effects, and the 
smaller the buffer, the greater the risk of exposure. Buffer distance 
is important because the buffer helps filter sediment and other 
contaminants from the surface water entering the catchment areas and, 
therefore, the ground water that supports the Kenk's amphipod. The 
Washington metropolitan area amphipod sites have narrow riparian 
buffers (94 feet (ft) to 1,000 ft) (29 m to 305 m) separating them from 
the surrounding urban landscape. This urban land is characterized by 
impervious surface cover, which includes paved roads, sidewalks, 
parking lots, and buildings (Sexton et al. 2013, p. 42). The general 
percentage of impervious surface inside the Capitol Beltway (I-495) 
(i.e., where all the District of Columbia and Maryland Kenk's amphipod 
sites are located) increased from 22 percent in 1984 to 26 percent in 
2010. The annual rate of increase in impervious cover within the 
Washington Beltway has also doubled since the 1980s, from 2 to 4 square 
(sq.) miles (6 to 12 sq. km) (Sexton et al. 2013, pp. 42-53; Song et 
al. 2016, pp. 1-13; http://www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=87731, last accessed 07/07/2016).
    Urban impervious surfaces can result in increased surface water 
flow after storm events due to decreased opportunity for immediate or 
proximal infiltration. The surface flow waters have higher 
temperatures, higher sediment loads, and higher levels of heavy metals 
(zinc, cadmium), nitrogen, phosphorus, and fecal coliform bacteria 
(Walsh et al. 2005, pp. 706-723). In addition to affecting water 
quality, urban impervious surfaces can affect water quantity; decreased 
infiltration can result in depletion of ground water reserves and 
ultimately cause springs to dry up over time (Frazer 2005, p. 3).
    It is well documented that impervious cover from urbanization 
affects biological communities in streams. For example, a review of 
more than 30 studies by the Center for Watershed Protection (2003, pp. 
101-102) found that sensitive aquatic insect species were absent or 
less abundant in streams that drain from urban areas, and aquatic 
insect diversity decreased when imperviousness reached 10 to 15 
percent. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDDNR) found 
that, in Maryland when the general percentage of watershed 
imperviousness exceeds 15 percent, stream health is never rated as 
``good,'' based on a combined fish and benthic macroinvertebrate Index 
of Biotic Integrity. The Potomac Washington metropolitan basin, which 
incorporates the area surrounding Kenk's amphipod sites, has the 
smallest percentage of stream miles rated as ``good'' (less than 1 
percent) (Boward et al. 1999, p. 45).
    Hyporheic habitat, which is a transition area between surface and 
shallow ground water, is found within the interstitial spaces within 
the sediments of a stream bed but also can be found in spring runs 
(Culver and Sereg 2004, pp. 70-71) that support the Kenk's amphipod. 
Hancock (2002, pp. 766-775) evaluated human activities that affect the 
hyporheic zone. Pesticide pollution, heavy metal and chemical pollution 
from industrial and urban sources, increased salinity, and acidity were 
all cited as stressors that may make this habitat unsuitable for 
invertebrates. In addition to documenting lethal effects on individuals 
from these stressors, researchers have documented changes in 
macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance that include an increase in 
species that are tolerant to elevated levels of the stressors and a 
decrease in species sensitive to elevated levels of those stressors 
(Hancock 2002, pp. 768-770).
    The hypotelminorheic zone, which is described as the main habitat 
required by the Kenk's amphipod, may be more vulnerable to the effects 
of urban runoff than streams or the hyporheic zone with respect to 
pollutants, erosion, and sedimentation because of the small size and 
shallow nature of the habitat. In addition, the aforementioned narrow 
buffer zones around the hypotelminorheic sites increase the habitat's 
and species' exposure to urban runoff.
    Storm water runoff in urban areas is commonly transported through 
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s), from which it is often 
discharged untreated into local waterbodies. Storm water is regulated 
to prevent harmful discharges of pollutants into MS4s. The Clean Water 
Act's (CWA's) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program 
requires permits for discharges into MS4s and development of storm 
water management programs. Despite these regulatory requirements, poor 
water quality has been documented in the past at several springs in 
Rock Creek Park (Culver and Sereg 2004, p. 69).
    In the Washington metropolitan area, water quality degradation from 
urban runoff is believed to have affected the Kenk's amphipod's 
Sherrill Drive Spring population (Culver and Sereg 2004, p. 69). 
Sherrill Drive Spring is close (approximately 115 ft (35 m)) to the 
edge of Rock Creek Park where there is an abrupt change from forested 
habitat to an urban landscape along 16th Street Northwest, which 
parallels the park boundary. There is a significant amount of 
impervious cover that routes runoff into the catchment area surrounding 
the Sherrill Drive Spring.
    While there have been no laboratory studies conducted to evaluate 
the effects and tolerance of the Kenk's amphipod or the more common 
Potomac groundwater amphipod to chemical, nutrient, pesticide, or heavy 
metal pollution, we do know from published studies that amphipods may 
be one of the most vulnerable groups of organisms to chemical pollution 
due to their high sensitivity to toxicants and contaminant accumulation 
(Borgmann et al. 1989, p. 756; Brumec-Turc 1989, p. 40). Culver and 
Sereg (2004, pp. 30-31) collected water samples from the East Spring, 
Kennedy Spring, and Sherrill Drive Spring sites on four occasions 
(October 2000, April 2001, July 2001, and March 2003) to measure 
temperature, pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and nitrates. Sediment 
samples surrounding the springs were also collected in September 2001 
at East Spring and Sherrill Drive Spring to analyze metal and organic 
contaminants. From these samples, Sherrill Drive Spring showed evidence 
of water quality degradation via the presence of heavy metals and 
higher nitrate and conductivity levels as

[[Page 67278]]

compared to the other sampled spring sites; East Spring also had 
evidence of heavy metals (see below) (Culver and Sereg 2004, pp. 30-
31).
    Heavy metals were found in sediment samples taken from Sherrill 
Drive Spring and East Spring in Rock Creek Park. Values were similar 
for the two sites, although East Spring had the highest values for all 
heavy metals, with the exception of zinc (Culver and Sereg 2004, p. 
65). Because the spring sediments instead of water samples were 
collected for heavy metal analysis, it is difficult to know whether the 
value of the heavy metals measured in the sediments exceed aquatic life 
standards in water or any published values for freshwater amphipod 
species. Sources of trace metals in an urban environment may include 
vehicles, streets, parking lots, snowpacks, and rooftops (Center for 
Watershed Protection 2003, p. 73).
    Nitrate levels as high as 30.8 milligrams per liter (mg/L) were 
also found at Sherrill Drive Spring. There are no aquatic life 
standards for nitrates issued by the Maryland Department of the 
Environment, the District of Columbia Department of the Environment, or 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Therefore, we reviewed 
the best available and relevant guidance values from Minnesota, Canada, 
and New Zealand (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2010, p. 9; 
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 2012, p. 1; Hickey and 
Martin 2009, p. 20). Based on the comparison with available guidance, 
the nitrate concentrations collected at Sherrill Drive Spring (up to 
30.8 mg/L) exceeded the chronic aquatic life exposure criterion for 
nitrate (e.g., 2.4 mg/L to 4.9 mg/L) based on Minnesota, New Zealand, 
and Canada guidance values on three of the four sampling events. It is 
not known how typical these concentrations are and if chronic exposure 
is occurring. The source of the nitrate is unknown; nitrate could come 
from runoff containing fertilizers or animal waste or from sanitary 
sewer leaks. There is a sanitary sewer line that runs adjacent to the 
spring, and this sewer line has leaked in the past (Feller 1997, p. 37; 
B. Yeaman, pers. comm., 06/02/2014).
    Chloride levels as high as 207 mg/L were detected at Sherrill Drive 
Spring. Chronic concentrations of chloride as low as 250 mg/L have been 
recognized as harmful to freshwater life (Canadian Council of Ministers 
of the Environment 2011, p. 1; https://www.epa.gov/wqc/national-recommended-water-quality-criteria-aquatic-life-criteria-table, last 
accessed 07/19/2016). Although we do not know the exact source of the 
elevated chloride levels at Sherrill Drive Spring, one potential source 
could be road salt. The Washington metropolitan area receives, on 
average depending on where it was measured and the time series, 
approximately 15 inches of snow annually (https://www.sercc.com/climateinfo/historical/avgsnowfall.html, last accessed August 10, 2016; 
https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/US/washington-dc-snowfall-totals-snow-accumulation-averages.php, last accessed 8/10/2106). The 
District of Columbia Department of Public Works uses road salt and 
other salt products to pre- and post-treat road surfaces before and 
after ice and snowfall events (http://dpw.dc.gov/service/dc-snow-removal, last accessed 8/10/2016). Studies have shown that the 
widespread use of salt to deice roadways has led to regionally elevated 
chloride levels equivalent to 25 percent of the chloride concentration 
in seawater during winter. The chloride levels can remain high 
throughout the summer even in less urbanized watersheds due to long-
term (e.g., decades) accumulation of chloride in ground water (Kaushal 
et al. 2005, pp. 13518-13519).
    At Coquelin Run Spring, ground water pollution from yard chemicals 
and road runoff (e.g., road salts, oil) could be a concern for the 
species' long-term viability. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research on 
water quality degradation in other urban areas indicates that chemicals 
enter waterways and ground water primarily through runoff from rain 
events and these chemicals have commonly been detected in streams and 
shallow ground water (USGS 1999a, pp. 1-3; USGS 1999b, p. 1; USGS 2001, 
p. 2; http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1998/fs007-98/index.html, last accessed 
07/19/2016). Although no water samples have been taken at the Coquelin 
Run Spring site, it is separated from backyards in this neighborhood by 
a narrow, wooded riparian strip (less than 100 ft) (30 m) that slopes 
steeply down to the site. Therefore, the Coquelin Run Spring may be at 
increased risk of exposure to chemical pollutants from the surrounding 
urban development.
    The other four Washington metropolitan area sites (Burnt Mill 
Spring #6, Holsinger Spring, East Spring, and Kennedy Spring) have 
wider buffers than Sherrill Drive Spring and Coquelin Run Spring, with 
buffer distances ranging from approximately 272 ft (83 m) to 1,000 ft 
(305 m). East Spring and Kennedy Spring had much lower conductivity and 
nitrate levels than Sherrill Drive Spring (Culver and Sereg 2004, pp. 
55-58). Surveys conducted in 2015 and 2016 did not re-confirm the 
Kenk's amphipod at any of these sites but consistently found the more 
common Potomac groundwater amphipod at all the sites in higher numbers 
(e.g., greater than 40 observed at Burnt Mill Spring #6 during 1 
sampling event). As discussed previously, urban runoff can decrease 
biotic richness and favor more pollution-tolerant species in urban 
streams (Center for Watershed Protection 2003, pp. 101-102). If the 
Potomac groundwater amphipod has a higher tolerance than Kenk's 
amphipod to poor water quality parameters, the change in species' 
composition discussed above in the Relative Abundance section and below 
in Factor E--Changes in Species Composition could indicate that urban 
runoff is negatively affecting the Kenk's populations at these spring 
sites. Water quality samples will be collected at these sites in 2016 
and 2017 to better assess whether water quality parameters exceed 
general EPA guidance values for aquatic life.
    The NPS manages the surrounding habitat at the four seepage spring 
sites supporting the Kenk's amphipod in Rock Creek Park. Conservation 
of park resources is mandated by the National Park Service Organic Act 
of 1916, which requires the NPS ``to conserve the scenery and the 
natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide 
for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will 
leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.'' It is 
also mandated by section 7 of the Rock Creek Park enabling legislation 
of 1890, which states that ``such regulations shall provide for the 
preservation from injury and spoilation of all timber, animals, or 
curiosities within said park, and their retention in their natural 
condition, as nearly as possible.'' These laws are implemented through 
the NPS's formal management policy that requires that management of 
candidate species should, to the greatest extent possible, parallel the 
management of federally listed species (D. Pavek, pers. comm., 05/12/
2011). While the NPS is utilizing its regulatory authority to manage 
water quality concerns for the species within Rock Creek Park, the 
agency has little influence over the protection of or effects to any 
seep recharge areas occurring outside park boundaries, and over 
maintenance or repair of city-owned infrastructure such as storm water 
and sewer systems located near the spring sites.
    The NPS worked with the District of Columbia Department of 
Transportation (DCDOT) to incorporate the construction of a storm sewer 
under

[[Page 67279]]

Sherrill Drive into the design of the 16th Street road reconstruction 
and storm drainage project (B. Yeaman, pers. comm., 05/19/2015), 
resulting in the elimination of a major outfall at the Sherrill Drive 
Spring site. However, as discussed above, this effort has not 
completely eliminated the documented erosion and poor water quality 
concerns at the site.
    The NPS is communicating with DCDOT on the need to move the 
sanitary sewer line adjacent to the Sherrill Drive Spring out of Rock 
Creek Park and into the neighborhood on the other side of 16th Street. 
If the line cannot be moved, the alternative is to reline the existing 
pipe to prevent further leakage (B. Yeaman, pers. comm., 07/11/2016). 
In addition, the Service, NPS, and the District of Columbia Department 
of the Environment have worked cooperatively to obtain funding for best 
management practices (reducing erosion and increasing infiltration) on 
two tributaries flowing into the drainage of Kennedy Street Spring, 
which supports both the Kenk's amphipod and the federally endangered 
Hay's Spring amphipod. Project funding was approved in January of 2015, 
and implementation, which includes construction of bioretention basins 
and infiltration berms, is to be completed by November 2017.
    In Virginia, poor water quality may not be affecting the species at 
the Fort A.P. Hill because the sites are substantially buffered by 
currently undeveloped property.
    Summary of Water Quality--In total, poor water quality is believed 
to be a significant or contributing stressor at all six of the 
Washington metropolitan area sites (i.e., 60 percent of the total known 
sites). Water quality in this area is expected to worsen due to 
significant runoff events from anticipated increases in both winter and 
spring precipitation and the frequency of high intensity storms. See 
Factor A--Excessive Storm Water Flows and Factor E--Effects of Climate 
Change sections below for more details.

Excessive Storm Water Flows

    Runoff from impervious surfaces after heavy rain events can result 
in flooding (Frazer 2005, p. 4; http://www.nbcwashington.com/traffic/transit/Metro-Station-Flooding-Nearby-Parking-Lot-Expansion-Could-Be-Part-of-Cause-384015451.html; last accessed 06/24/16). Flash flooding 
can also result in erosion and sedimentation (Center for Center for 
Watershed Protection 2003, pp. 30-33), which, if it occurs in the 
catchment area, can subsequently degrade a spring site's value as 
habitat for the Kenk's amphipod.
    In the Washington metropolitan area, excessive storm water flows 
are causing significant habitat degradation at two sites--Sherrill 
Drive Spring and Coquelin Run Spring. A washout at Sherrill Drive 
Spring from 16th Street was observed in 2016 making it difficult to 
find a seep to survey (D. Feller, pers. comm., 06/15/2016). Coquelin 
Run Spring is severely degraded by runoff from the surrounding Chevy 
Chase Lake Subdivision, where severe erosion was first observed at this 
site in 2006 (D. Feller, pers. comm., 07/01/2016). When the site was 
first re-surveyed in 2016, a plastic underground pipe several inches in 
diameter was observed less than 1 ft (0.3 m) from the original seep (D. 
Feller, pers. comm., 02/27/2016; D. Feller, pers. comm., 05/27/2016), 
which may have been an attempt to address water flow and erosion at the 
site. Erosion was still evident during the 2016 surveys and it was 
difficult for MDDNR to find a flowing seep (D. Feller, pers. comm., 02/
27/2016). A small flow was observed in May 2016, but was located 
several feet above the original seep documented in 2006. Plastic sheet 
material was also observed under this uphill seep (D. Feller, pers. 
comm., 05/25/2016), which may have been an attempt to address water 
flow and erosion at the site. It is unknown what affect the pipe or 
plastic may have on the long-term hydrology of the site.
    Erosion from storm water flows has also been observed at the other 
four springs in Rock Creek Park, but not to the extent that it has been 
observed at Sherrill Drive and Coquelin Run springs. It is unknown how 
much chronic or acute erosion and sedimentation causes a site to become 
unsuitable for the Kenk's amphipod; however, Culver and Sereg (2004, p. 
69) found that sediment transported by storm runoff results in the 
degradation of ground water animals' habitat by clogging the 
interstices of gravels in the spring seep, thereby preventing the 
species from using those interstitial spaces for shelter. It is 
uncertain to what extent Kenk's amphipod uses those interstitial 
spaces, but if they do, then it is plausible that this type of 
sedimentation would cause the habitat to become unsuitable for the 
species.
    At the Virginia sites, we have no information indicating excessive 
storm water flows may affect the species.
    Summary of Excessive Storm Water Flows--Excessive storm water flows 
are a concern at 60 percent (6 of 10) of the species' sites.

Sewer Line Breaks and Spills

    The same riparian areas that contain the habitats of the Kenk's 
amphipod are among the principal areas where sewer lines are located in 
the Washington metropolitan area (Feller 2005, p. 2). Most of these 
sewer lines are old (most installed between 1900 and 1930 in the 
District of Columbia, and between 1941 and 1971 in Montgomery County, 
MD) and subject to periodic breakage and leakage (Shaver 2011, entire; 
Kiely 2013, entire). While there have been no laboratory or field 
studies evaluating the effect of sewage leaks or spills on the Kenk's 
amphipod or the Potomac groundwater amphipod, adverse effects of sewage 
contamination on amphipods and other invertebrates have been documented 
by several researchers. For instance, Simon and Buikema (1977, entire) 
studied a karst ground water system and found that amphipods were 
absent from ground water pools polluted by septic system effluent. The 
authors reported that the highest densities of Virginia cave isopods 
were found in pools that were slightly and moderately polluted from 
septic systems, whereas an amphipod, Stygobromus makini (southwestern 
Virginia cave amphipod), was absent from all polluted pools. de-la-
Ossa-Carretero et al. (2012, p. 137) stated that, as an Order, 
amphipods were generally sensitive to sewage pollution, but that there 
are substantial differences in sensitivity between amphipod species 
(de-La-Ossa-Carretero et al. 2012, p. 129).
    Releases of large volumes of sewage (up to 2 million gallons (gal)) 
from sanitary sewer leaks have occurred in the District of Columbia and 
Montgomery County, MD. Distances of seep sites to nearby upslope sewer 
lines are shown in table 2 below. Based on these distances, Coquelin 
Run Spring, Burnt Mill Spring #6, and Sherrill Drive Spring are most 
vulnerable to sewage spills (see table 2 below). As mentioned above, a 
sanitary sewer line located nearby Sherrill Drive Spring has been 
described as structurally unsound and is subject to leakage (Feller 
1997, p. 37; B. Yeaman, pers. comm., 06/02/2014; B. Yeaman, pers. 
comm., 02/24/15).
    Over the 10-year period from 2005 through 2015, the Washington 
Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) has documented approximately 38 
leaks of more than 1,000 gal in the Rock Creek drainage and 15 leaks of 
more than 1,000 gal in the Northwest Branch in Montgomery County. 
During the same period there were 136 leaks of more than 100 gal in the 
Rock Creek drainage and 51 leaks of more than 100 gal in the

[[Page 67280]]

Northwest Branch in Montgomery County (WSSC 2015). The District of 
Columbia does not have such detailed records, but the District of 
Columbia Water Chief Executive Officer has stated that half the 
District's 1,800 mi (2,896 km) of sewer lines are at least 84 years old 
and has estimated that faulty pipes result in two dozen sewer spills 
every year (Olivio 2015). The frequency of spills is likely to increase 
in the future as the sewer lines continue to age.

                                               Table 2--Sewer and Water Lines Near Kenk's Amphipod Springs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                           Distance from
            Site name                    Location              Pipe type         Diameter in      Year installed        Pipe material     spring in feet
                                                                                 inches ('')                                                    (')
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              12  1924................  unknown............              10
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              12  1926................  unknown............             200
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              30  1958................  unknown............              30
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              24  1933................  unknown............              60
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              15  1949................  unknown............             120
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Transmission                30  1955................  PCCP Lined Cylinder             130
                                                          Main.
Sherrill Drive Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                12  1919................  cast iron..........             155
                                                          Main.
East Spring......................  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              18  unknown.............  unknown............             475
East Spring......................  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              10  1925................  unknown............             658
East Spring......................  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              10  1911................  unknown............             750
East Spring......................  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                 6  1921................  cast iron..........             560
                                                          Main.
East Spring......................  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                 8  1911................  cast iron..........             740
                                                          Main.
Kennedy Street Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              10  1911................  unknown............             900
Kennedy Street Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              21  1931................  unknown............            1300
Kennedy Street Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              10  1911................  unknown............            1350
Kennedy Street Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                 8  1911................  cast iron..........             860
                                                          Main.
Kennedy Street Spring............  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                 8  1912................  cast iron..........            1357
                                                          Main.
Coquelin Run Spring..............  Montgomery County,    Gravity sewer pipe..               8  1954................  unknown............             220
                                    MD.
Coquelin Run Spring..............  Montgomery County,    Water pipe..........               8  1954 (lined 1995)...  cast iron or sand               205
                                    MD.                                                                               spun.
Coquelin Run Spring..............  Montgomery County,    Water pipe..........               4  unknown.............  ductile iron.......             213
                                    MD.
Coquelin Run Spring..............  Montgomery County,    Water pipe..........               8  1954 (lined 1995)...  cast iron or sand               232
                                    MD.                                                                               spun.
Burnt Mill Spring #6.............  Montgomery County,    Gravity sewer pipe..               6  unknown.............  cast iron..........             186
                                    MD.
Burnt Mill Spring #6.............  Montgomery County,    Gravity sewer pipe..               8  unknown.............  unknown............             383
                                    MD.
Burnt Mill Spring #6.............  Montgomery County,    Water pipe..........               6  1959................  cast iron or sand               394
                                    MD.                                                                               spun.
Holsinger Spring.................  Rock Creek Park.....  Storm Sewer.........              36  1931................  unknown............            1875
Holsinger Spring.................  Rock Creek Park.....  Sanitary Sewer......              18  1908................  unknown............            1925
Holsinger Spring.................  Rock Creek Park.....  Water Distribution                 6  1898................  cast iron..........            1885
                                                          Main.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the Virginia sites, we have no information indicating sewer 
pipelines may affect the species.
    Summary of Sewer Line Spills--In total, sewer line breaks and 
spills are a concern at 30 percent (3 of 10) of the species' sites.

Water Pipe Breaks

    Bursting of large-diameter water pipes can cause significant 
erosion of surrounding areas as a result of the large volume of fast-
moving water that exits the pipe at the break point. Bursting water 
pipes and the resulting erosion has been documented within the 
Washington metropolitan area, including at areas near but not directly 
at a specific Kenk's amphipod seep site. For example, a 60-in (152.4-
cm) water main broke at the Connecticut Avenue crossing of Coquelin Run 
in 2013, releasing 60 million gal of water and scouring out a 500-ft 
(152.4-m) length of the creek (Dudley et al. 2013, entire). The 
Coquelin Run Spring site is on a small tributary that flows into 
Coquelin Run, about a quarter mile downstream of the aforementioned 
severely damaged section of the creek bed and, due to its elevation 
above Coquelin Run, was not affected by the flood and subsequent 
erosion caused by this burst pipe.
    The exposure risk of bursting water pipes at locations that could 
affect Kenk's amphipod sites is increasing given the age of the water 
pipe infrastructure (see table 2 above). As an example, there is one 
very-large-diameter (30-in (76-cm)) water pipe within 130 ft (39.6 m) 
of Sherrill Drive Spring that was installed more than 60 years ago. The 
significant erosion resulting from a large break, should the break 
occur near Kenk's amphipod habitat, could eliminate the seep and all 
associated amphipods.

[[Page 67281]]

    The best available data indicate that there are smaller pipes near 
three of the sites (Sherrill Drive Spring, Burnt Mill #6 Spring, 
Coquelin Run Spring) (WSSC GIS Web site, http://gisweb.wsscwater.com/WERI/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=%2fweri, last accessed 12/21/2015) (see 
table 2 above). Although less likely to eliminate habitat of springs, 
breakage of smaller pipes (less than 1 ft (0.3 m) in diameter) is even 
more frequent (Water Research Foundation 2016, p. 2) and still may 
result in erosion or sedimentation at the spring site. Coquelin Run 
Spring is within 250 ft of a 6- to 8-in (15- to 20-cm) water pipe 
installed in 1954 (WSSC GIS Web site). Given the overall age of the 
infrastructure and the District of Columbia and Maryland utilities' 
inability to keep up with the needed replacements (Shaver 2011, entire; 
Kiely 2013, entire), additional breaks are predicted to occur.
    At the Virginia sites, we have no information indicating water 
pipeline breaks may affect the species.
    Summary of Water Pipe Breaks--In total, large water pipeline breaks 
are a concern at 10 percent (1 of 10) of the species' sites, while 
smaller water pipeline breaks are a concern for 30 percent (3 of 10) of 
the sites.

Other Habitat Considerations

    Compared to the stressors to the Kenk's amphipod habitat in the 
Washington metropolitan area, the stressors to the species' habitat at 
Fort A.P. Hill are likely minimal. Little or no development is expected 
to occur near the spring sites (J. Applegate, pers. comm., 05/5/2016). 
However, military training exercises may be conducted in areas 
surrounding the springs, which may result in disturbance of the spring 
recharge areas. Live-fire exercises may result in uncontrolled burns 
that reduce canopy cover that shades the seep sites, moderates water 
temperature, and provides leaf litter for food. Timber harvests and 
other forest management activities such as timber stand improvement, 
prescribed burns, and possible pesticide application for forest-
destroying pests such as gypsy moths may occur in the general vicinity 
of the springs (Fort A.P. Hill 2016, pp. 751-754). Fort A.P. Hill has 
included a 100-ft (30.5-m) buffer around the springs in the 
installation's Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) 
(2016, pp. 9-22), but it is unknown whether this buffer distance is 
sufficient to protect the sites and recharge areas from all of the 
activities (e.g., forest management, live-fire exercises) outlined in 
the INRMP. However, staff at Fort A.P. Hill have indicated a 
willingness to work with the Service to delineate recharge areas based 
on topography, and, if needed, institute more protective buffers (J. 
Applegate, pers. comm., 06/15/2016).
    Summary of Factor A--Habitat modification, in the form of degraded 
water quality and quantity, is one of the primary drivers affecting 
Kenk's amphipod viability, despite the discussed ongoing conservation 
measures. Reductions in water quality are occurring primarily as a 
result of urbanization, which increases the amount of impervious cover 
in the watersheds surrounding Kenk's amphipod sites. Impervious cover 
increases storm water flow velocities and increases erosion and 
sedimentation. Impervious cover can also increase the transport of 
contaminants and nutrients common in urban environments, such as heavy 
metals (zinc, cadmium), nitrogen, phosphorus, and fecal coliform 
bacteria. The Washington metropolitan area sites have narrow riparian 
buffers separating them from the surrounding development, increasing 
the sites' exposure to poor water quality runoff. Poor water quality 
has been documented at Sherrill Drive Spring but is likely affecting 
all six sites in the Washington metropolitan area, whereas the Virginia 
sites are not thought to be affected by poor water quality because of 
the larger forested buffers on Fort A.P. Hill.
    Excessive storm water runoff from heavy rain events can result in 
flooding, which can cause erosion and sedimentation. Habitat 
degradation due to excessive storm water flows is having significant 
effects at two sites--Sherrill Drive Spring and Coquelin Run Spring--
but has also been observed at the other four springs in Rock Creek 
Park, and may increase in the future. At the Virginia sites, we have no 
information indicating excessive storm water flows may affect the 
species.
    Sewer and water line breaks and leaks are a concern at the 
Washington metropolitan area sites because most of them are located in 
the same riparian areas that contain the habitats of the Kenk's 
amphipod. While leaks and breaks of these pipelines have not yet been 
known to directly affect the species or its habitat, the pipeline 
systems are subjected to chronic leaks and breaks, the frequency of 
which is likely to increase given the age of the infrastructure, and 
thus the exposure risk of the species to this stressor will continue to 
increase. Coquelin Run Spring, Burnt Mill Spring #6, and Sherrill Drive 
Spring are most vulnerable to sewage spills and water pipe breaks due 
to the pipe's proximity to each site and the age of the pipes. At the 
Virginia sites, we have no information indicating sewer or water 
pipeline breaks may affect the species.
    Potential stressors to Kenk's amphipod habitat are lesser in scope 
and severity at Fort A.P. Hill, as opposed to the Washington 
metropolitan area habitat, and are associated with disturbance to the 
surface habitat.

                      Table 3--Relative Vulnerability of Kenk's Amphipod Seep Habitat Sites
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Current biological status
             Site name                     Location            Current seep status       of the Kenk's amphipod
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherrill Drive Spring.............  Rock Creek Park,       Approximately 50' to road,  Extirpated? Not found in
                                     Washington, DC.        documented decrease in      recent surveys. No other
                                                            water quality (chemical     Stygobromus present.
                                                            and sedimentation),         Last detected 2001 (8
                                                            within 10' of 1924 sewer    surveys since and none
                                                            pipe and 130' of 1955       found).
                                                            30'' water pipe.
East Spring.......................  Rock Creek Park,       Approximately 300-500'      Unknown. Not found in
                                     Washington, DC.        buffer of protected         recent surveys but other
                                                            forest, within 560' of 6-   Stygobromus present.
                                                            8'' 1921 water pipe.        Last detected 2001 (7
                                                                                        surveys in 2015-2016 and
                                                                                        none found).
Kennedy Street Spring.............  Rock Creek Park,       Approximately 500' buffer   Unknown. Not found in
                                     Washington, DC.        of protected forest,        recent surveys but other
                                                            within 860' of 6-8'' 1911   Stygobromus present.
                                                            water pipe.                 Last detected 2001 (5
                                                                                        surveys since and none
                                                                                        found).
Holsinger Spring..................  Rock Creek Park,       Approximately 700-1,000'    Historical? Not
                                     Washington, DC.        buffer of protected         documented since 1967. 1
                                                            forest.                     survey in 2003 and 3
                                                                                        surveys in 2015 and none
                                                                                        found.
Burnt Mill Spring #6..............  Northwest Branch       In county park protected    Unknown. Not found in
                                     Park, Montgomery       from further development,   recent surveys but other
                                     County, MD.            within 186' of unknown      Stygobromus present.
                                                            age sewer pipe and 394'     Last detected in 2005
                                                            of 6-8'' 1959 water pipe.   (10 surveys since and
                                                                                        none found).

[[Page 67282]]

 
Coquelin Run Spring...............  Private land,          Erosion problems are        Present in upslope
                                     Montgomery County,     already apparent, site      portion of seep (1
                                     MD.                    has been modified with a    individual found in last
                                                            plastic pipe and plastic    survey); lower portion
                                                            material, and riparian      has some erosion and
                                                            forest is very narrow,      species absent in recent
                                                            within 220' of 1952 sewer   surveys (3 surveys and
                                                            pipe and 250' of 6-8''      none found).
                                                            1954 water pipe.
Fort A.P. Hill....................  Department of          Good habitat quality,       Recently discovered. 1
(4 seeps).........................   Defense, Caroline      sites unaffected by         individual each found at
                                     County, VA.            urbanization. Military      Upper Mill 2, Mill 4,
                                                            exercises and forest        and Mount 2; 4
                                                            management could affect     individuals found at
                                                            surface habitat if          Mill 5.
                                                            protective areas
                                                            encompassing the recharge
                                                            area are not established
                                                            and implemented.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes

    Overutilization is not known to be a factor affecting the Kenk's 
amphipod. The Kenk's amphipod is a Maryland State endangered species 
under its Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act (Section 10-
2A-01-09 of the Maryland Code). This designation makes ``taking, 
possession, transportation, exportation, processing, sale, offer for 
sale, or shipment within the State'' of a State-listed species 
unlawful. Kenk's amphipod is considered a species of greatest 
conservation need in the District of Columbia's State Wildlife Action 
Plan (http://doee.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddoe/service_content/attachments/03%202015%20WildlifeActionPlan%20%20Ch2%20SGCN.pdf; last accessed 8/10/
2016), but this status does not confer any regulatory protection; the 
species is not State-listed in Virginia.
    Distribution surveys for the species are coordinated with the 
Service and, where required, collection is permitted through the 
Service, NPS, and the MDDNR. Whether specifically permitted or not, all 
amphipod surveys are conducted using consistent methodology and 
collection protocols. The target species of Stygobromus is collected 
based on size, and the number of individuals collected at each spring 
has been limited to 10 or fewer individuals in the target species' size 
range. However, the Service has allowed larger numbers to be collected 
during 2016 surveys in the Washington metropolitan area since none of 
the specimens of appropriate size collected in the 2015 surveys have 
been identified to be Kenk's amphipod. These protocols are followed to 
minimize effects to the species. Because the occurrence of subterranean 
invertebrates at spring emergence sites likely represents only a 
portion of the actual underground population, the Service has 
considered the collecting procedures (Feller 1997, p. 2) to be 
nondetrimental to the populations.

Factor C. Disease or Predation

    We have no information that indicates that either disease or 
predation is affecting the Kenk's amphipod.

Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

    The following existing regulatory mechanisms were specifically 
considered and discussed as they relate to the stressors, under the 
applicable Factors, affecting the Kenk's amphipod: The CWA's National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Rock Creek Park enabling 
legislation of 1890, and National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 
(Factor A) and Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act (Factor 
B). In Factor A we conclude that habitat modification, in the form of 
degraded water quality and quantity, is one of the primary drivers 
affecting Kenk's amphipod viability. In Factor B we conclude that 
overutilization is not known to be affecting the species. There are no 
existing regulatory mechanisms to address the stressors affecting the 
species under Factor E (see below).

Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued 
Existence

Small Population Dynamics

    The observed small size of each of the 10 Kenk's amphipod 
populations makes each one vulnerable to natural environmental 
stochasticity and human-caused habitat disturbance, including 
relatively minor impacts in their spring recharge areas. Each 
population is also vulnerable to demographic stochasticity, including 
loss of genetic variability and adaptive capacity. Unless the 
populations are larger than we know or are hydrologically connected 
such that individuals can move between sites, we conclude that these 
small populations are vulnerable to the effects of small population 
dynamics.
    Species that are restricted in range and population size are more 
likely to suffer loss of genetic diversity due to genetic drift, 
potentially increasing their susceptibility to inbreeding depression, 
and reducing the fitness of individuals (Soule 1980, pp. 157-158; 
Hunter 2002, pp. 162-163; Allendorf and Luikart 2007, pp. 117-146). 
Small population sizes and inhibited gene flow between populations may 
increase the likelihood of local extirpation (Gilpin and Soul[eacute] 
1986, pp. 32-34). With the exception for the Mount Creek #2 and Mount 
Creek #5 populations at Fort A.P. Hill, which are separated by only 
approximately 360 ft (110 m), all the other populations of the Kenk's 
amphipod are isolated from other existing populations and known 
historical habitats by long distances, inhospitable upland habitat, and 
terrain that creates barriers to amphipod movement. The level of 
isolation and the restricted range seen in this species, based on our 
current knowledge of known habitat, make natural repopulation of 
historical habitats (e.g., the District of Columbia sites and Burnt 
Mill Spring #6 where the species' presence has not been recently 
confirmed) and other potentially suitable habitat virtually impossible 
without human intervention.

Effects of Climate Change

    Climate change may result in changes in the amount and timing of 
precipitation, the frequency and intensity of storms, and air 
temperatures. All of these changes could affect the Kenk's amphipod and 
its habitat. The amount and timing of precipitation influence spring 
flow, which is an important feature of the habitat of this groundwater 
species. Also, the frequency and intensity of storms affects the 
frequency, duration, and intensity of runoff events, and runoff 
transport of sediment and contaminants (see Factor A above) into 
catchment areas of Kenk's amphipod sites, especially in the Washington 
metropolitan area, where there is a substantial amount of impervious 
cover in close proximity to the habitat. Below we discuss the best 
available climate predictions for the areas supporting the Kenk's 
amphipod.

[[Page 67283]]

    The 2014 National Climate Assessment (Melillo et al. 2014, entire) 
predicts increasing ambient temperatures, increasing winter and spring 
precipitation, increasing frequency of heavy downpours, and increasing 
summer and fall drought risk as higher temperatures lead to greater 
evaporation and earlier winter and spring snowmelt (Horton et al. 2014, 
p. 374 In Melillo et al. 2014). These droughts may result in the drying 
up of springs and mortality of the Kenk's amphipod, while the increase 
in heavy downpours will likely result in increased runoff and resulting 
erosion of surface features at spring sites, based on previously 
documented events. The 2014 National Climate Assessment further 
indicates that overall warming in the Northeast, including Maryland and 
the District of Columbia, but not Virginia, will be from 3 to 10 
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) (1.7 to 5.6 degrees Celsius ([deg]C)) by 
the 2080s (Horton et al. 2014, p. 374 In Melillo et al. 2014).
    Data specific to the District of Columbia from NOAA's National 
Climate Data Center (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us/49/USW00093738/tavg/1/5/1895-2016?base_prd=true&firstbaseyear=1901&lastbaseyear=2000&trend=true&trend_base=10&firsttrendyear=1895&lasttrendyear=2016, last accessed 07/20/
2016) shows that the average annual air temperature in the District of 
Columbia area has already increased by approximately 3[emsp14][deg]F 
(1.7 [deg]C) from 1960, the decade corresponding to the first Kenk's 
amphipod surveys, to 2015. This higher rate of change in the District 
of Columbia area may be due to the urban heat island effect (Oke 1995, 
p. 187), which is an increase in ambient temperature due to heating of 
impervious surfaces. This activity also results in an increase in 
temperature of rainwater that falls on heat-absorbing roads and parking 
lots. A sudden thunderstorm striking a parking lot that has been 
sitting in hot sunshine can easily result in a 10[emsp14][deg]F (5.6 
[deg]C) increase in the rainfall temperature. Menke et al. (2010, pp. 
147-148) showed that these temporary increases in temperature of storm 
water can still result in a shift in the biotic community composition 
and even accelerate changes in species distributions. Based on the work 
of Menberg et al. (2014, entire), we expect these changes in air 
temperature to be reflected in the temperature of the shallow ground 
water within a few years, but at a lower magnitude. While we do not 
have specific temperature tolerance information for the Kenk's 
amphipod, there are studies of other amphipod species that indicate 
sensitivity to elevated temperatures, exhibited by reduced or 
eliminated egg survival at water temperatures above 75[emsp14][deg]F 
(24 [deg]C) to 79[emsp14][deg]F (26 [deg]C) (Pockl and Humpesch 1990, 
pp. 445-449).
    In summary, it is highly probable that by the 2080s some increase 
in ground water temperatures will occur at sites occupied by the Kenk's 
amphipod, but the magnitude and significance of these changes is 
difficult to predict.

Change in Species Composition

    At most of the Washington metropolitan area sites supporting the 
Kenk's amphipod, numbers of the Potomac groundwater amphipod, which is 
the most widely distributed and abundant Stygobromus species in the 
lower Potomac drainage (Kavanaugh 2009, p. 6), have increased as 
numbers of observed Kenk's amphipod have declined (D. Feller, pers. 
comm., 03/16/2016; D. Feller, pers. comm., 04/22/2016). The exact cause 
of this change is not known, but it may be an indication that some 
stressor has led to a competitive advantage for the Potomac groundwater 
amphipod (Culver et al. 2012, p. 29). Other than at Coquelin Run 
Spring, there are no obvious physical changes at these sites indicating 
a cause for the decline. However, as described above in Factor A, 
impaired water quality could favor a more common species over a rare 
species. Culver and Sereg (2004, pp. 72-73) indicated that there is a 
possibility that the Kenk's amphipod is a poor competitor with other 
Stygobromus species, which may be a factor promoting the Kenk's 
amphipod's natural rarity, and that in cave locations Stygobromus 
species strongly compete with each other. While the Kenk's amphipod may 
have always been naturally rare, we conclude that the species may be 
getting rarer due to the stressors discussed above.
    Summary of Factor E--Small population size at all of the sites 
makes each one of them vulnerable to natural environmental 
stochasticity and human-caused habitat disturbance, including 
relatively minor impacts in their spring recharge areas. The small size 
and isolation of sites also make each population vulnerable to 
demographic stochasticity, including loss of genetic variability and 
adaptive capacity.
    The best available climate data indicate that the areas supporting 
the Kenk's amphipod will see increasing ambient temperatures, 
increasing winter and spring precipitation, increasing frequency of 
heavy downpours, and increasing summer and fall drought risk as higher 
temperatures lead to greater evaporation and earlier winter and spring 
snowmelt. Droughts could result in drying up of spring sites, while the 
increase in heavy downpours could result in erosion and sedimentation 
of sites. Ambient air temperature has increased by 3 [deg]F (1.7 
[deg]C) since 1960, and is expected to increase by 10[emsp14][deg]F 
(5.6 [deg]C) by the 2080s. It is highly probable that by the 2080s some 
increase in ground water temperatures will occur at sites occupied by 
the Kenk's amphipod, but the magnitude and significance of these 
changes is difficult to predict.

Cumulative Effects

    Many of the factors discussed above are cumulatively and 
synergistically affecting the Kenk's amphipod. For example, Kenk's 
amphipod habitat can be degraded by storm water runoff, which is likely 
to increase with more frequent and intense storms and precipitation 
levels in the future. Species with larger populations are naturally 
more resilient to the stressors affecting individuals or local 
occurrences, while smaller populations or individuals are more 
susceptible to demographic or stochastic events. Below we discuss the 
Kenk's amphipod's viability as expressed through the conservation 
biology principles of representation, redundancy, and resiliency, which 
illustrate how the cumulative and synergistic effects are affecting the 
species as a whole.
    Redundancy--The species has some redundancy given its known 
distribution is 10 sites across 3 municipal jurisdictions and multiple 
streams. For example, the isolation of the two Montgomery County, MD, 
populations from other Washington metropolitan area populations and 
their occurrence along different tributary streams make it unlikely 
that a single catastrophic adverse event (e.g., a spill) will eliminate 
more than one occurrence at a time. In addition, the Virginia sites 
occur in two stream areas, Mill Creek and Mount Creek, making it 
unlikely that a single military training event or other catastrophic 
event will eliminate more than one occurrence at a time.
    Representation--Based on the information about historical changes 
to the landscape across the Washington metropolitan area, we conclude 
it is likely that the species' historical distribution was larger than 
the current distribution; therefore, the species may have previously 
experienced a significant loss in representation. Also, because we do 
not yet have any information on the genetics of these populations, we 
cannot determine

[[Page 67284]]

whether the species possesses a single genetic identity or has genetic 
variability across populations. Therefore, we conclude that the 
species' representation has likely been reduced, and may currently be 
limited.
    Resiliency--Given the range of the species, the small number of 
seeps and individuals at those seeps, and each seep's vulnerability to 
stressors, the Kenk's amphipod's overall resiliency is low. Based on 
the best available data, we conclude that the stressors to the species 
are not decreasing and, in most cases, are expected to increase in the 
future. Furthermore, the small size of each of the 10 habitat areas 
makes each population vulnerable to natural environmental stochasticity 
and human-caused habitat disturbance, including relatively minor 
effects in the spring recharge area. As a result of habitat 
fragmentation/isolation there is a lack of connectivity and genetic 
exchange between populations and, we assume, a lack of ability to 
recolonize extirpated sites, leading to an overall reduced resiliency 
for the species.

Determination

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 
part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal 
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section 
4(a)(1) of the Act, we may list a species based on (A) The present or 
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 
range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors 
affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted 
based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in combination.
    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial 
information available regarding the past, present, and future stressors 
to the Kenk's amphipod and find that several of those stressors rise to 
the level of threats to the species as a whole. Habitat loss and 
degradation (Factor A) from poor water quality parameters associated 
with urban runoff in Maryland and the District of Columbia has 
decreased water quality and increased erosion and sedimentation at 
several shallow ground water habitat sites. These parameters are likely 
to be exacerbated in the future by the increasing risk of exposure to 
breaks and leaks from the aging sewer and water pipe infrastructure 
(Factor A), as well as more frequent and intense rainfall events, due 
to the effects of climate change (Factor E). In addition, all 10 sites 
are characterized by small numbers of the Kenk's amphipod that appear 
to be declining and affected by the inherent vulnerabilities associated 
with small population dynamics (Factor E). Overutilization (Factor B), 
disease (Factor C), and predation (Factor C) are not considered threats 
to the Kenk's amphipod. The existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) 
for the stressors and threats affecting the species have been evaluated 
under Factors A, B, and E. While the Kenk's amphipod has some 
redundancy and representation, the resiliency of each individual site 
is compromised, making the species' overall resiliency low.
    The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``that is likely to 
become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range 
within the foreseeable future.'' We find that the Kenk's amphipod is 
presently in danger of extinction throughout its entire range based on 
the severity and immediacy of threats currently affecting the species. 
The best available data indicate that, while the species may have 
always been represented by small numbers of individuals found at the 
surface of each seep site, the species' abundance appears to be 
declining. In addition, each of the 10 known seep sites are vulnerable 
to varying levels of stressors and threats: 1 Seep (Sherrill Drive 
Spring), based on repeated negative survey results combined with 
documented poor water quality, may be extirpated, and another seep 
(Coquelin Run Spring) has visible erosion and sedimentation. The Kenk's 
amphipod has some redundancy and representation, but those two 
conservation parameters are compromised due to each site's low 
resiliency, all of which makes the species' overall resiliency low. The 
primary drivers affecting the species' viability (water quality and 
habitat degradation and small population dynamics) are difficult to 
manage because either they are caused by factors outside the control of 
the landowner's jurisdiction (e.g., poor water quality or risk of 
sewer/water line spills at NPS-controlled sites) or there are no 
apparent management actions to minimize or control them (e.g., small 
population dynamics), and some of those threats and additional 
stressors are likely to increase in the future.
    Therefore, on the basis of the best available scientific and 
commercial information, we propose listing the Kenk's amphipod as 
endangered in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We 
find that a threatened species status is not appropriate for the Kenk's 
amphipod based on the high magnitude and imminence of the threats 
across the species' range. If additional Kenk's amphipod sites are 
found and those sites are individually resilient and add to the 
species' overall representation, redundancy, and resiliency, then a 
threatened species status may be appropriate at that time.
    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may 
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the 
Kenk's amphipod is an endangered species throughout all of its range, 
no portion of its range can be ``significant'' for purposes of the 
definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.'' See 
the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion 
of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of 
``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 37578; July 1, 
2014).

Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or 
threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions, 
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain 
practices. Recognition, through listing, results in public awareness 
and conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, private 
organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the 
States and other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried 
out for listed species. The protection required by Federal agencies and 
the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part, 
below.
    The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered 
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The 
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these 
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of 
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop 
and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and 
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the 
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the 
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and 
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a 
point where they are secure, self-

[[Page 67285]]

sustaining, and functioning components of their ecosystems.
    Recovery planning includes the development of a recovery outline 
shortly after a species is listed and preparation of a draft and final 
recovery plan. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation 
of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to be used to 
develop a recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address 
continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive 
information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies 
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for 
downlisting or delisting, and methods for monitoring recovery progress. 
Recovery plans also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate 
their recovery efforts and provide estimates of the cost of 
implementing recovery tasks. Recovery teams (composed of species 
experts, Federal and State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and 
stakeholders) are often established to develop recovery plans. When 
completed, the recovery outline, draft recovery plan, and the final 
recovery plan will be available on our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our Chesapeake Bay Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the 
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal 
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, 
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat 
restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research, captive 
propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The 
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on 
Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-
Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires 
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands. 
If this species is listed, funding for recovery actions will be 
available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State 
programs, and cost share grants for non-Federal landowners, the 
academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition, 
pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the State of Maryland, Commonwealth 
of Virginia, and the District of Columbia would be eligible for Federal 
funds to implement management actions that promote the protection or 
recovery of the Kenk's amphipod. Information on our grant programs that 
are available to aid species recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
    Although the Kenk's amphipod is only proposed for listing under the 
Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in 
participating in recovery efforts for this species. Additionally, we 
invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it 
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery 
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Section 7(a), and in particular section 7(a)(1), of the Act 
requires Federal agencies to evaluate their actions with respect to any 
species that is proposed or listed as an endangered or threatened 
species and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is designated. 
Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the 
Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act 
requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on any action that 
is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species proposed 
for listing or result in destruction or adverse modification of 
proposed critical habitat. If a species is listed subsequently, section 
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities 
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of the species or destroy or adversely modify its 
critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species or 
its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into 
consultation with the Service.
    Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require 
conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding 
paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering 
activities on Federal lands administered by the National Park Service 
(Rock Creek Park) and U.S. Army (Fort A.P. Hill); issuance of section 
404 CWA permits by the Army Corps of Engineers; and construction and 
maintenance of roads or highways by the Federal Highway Administration.
    The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of 
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife. 
The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at 50 CFR 
17.21 make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the 
United States to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, 
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of 
these) endangered wildlife within the United States or on the high 
seas. In addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive, 
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the 
course of commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate 
or foreign commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess, 
sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has 
been taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the 
Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land 
management agencies, and State conservation agencies.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations 
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to 
endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes: 
For scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the 
species, and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful 
activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the 
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
    It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at 
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not 
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this 
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed 
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the 
species proposed for listing. At this time, we are unable to identify 
specific activities that would not be considered to result in a 
violation of section 9 of the Act because the Kenk's amphipod occurs in 
seep habitats that are influenced by the surrounding environment and it 
is likely that site-specific conservation measures may be needed for 
activities that may directly or indirectly affect the species.
    Based on the best available information, the following activities 
may potentially result in a violation of section 9 of the Act; this 
list is not comprehensive:
    (1) Unauthorized handling or collecting of the species;
    (2) Destruction/alteration of the species' habitat by discharge of 
fill material, use of motorized vehicles such as all-terrain vehicles 
or creation of trails that would increase foot traffic through the 
spring area, draining, or diversion or alteration of surface or ground 
water flow into or out of the seepage springs or catchment basins;
    (3) Forest management practices that alter the seepage spring sites 
or remove canopy cover from above the seepage spring sites;

[[Page 67286]]

    (4) Discharge of chemicals, storm water, or runoff into the seepage 
springs or catchment basins.
    Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a 
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Chesapeake 
Bay Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Critical Habitat for the Kenk's amphipod (Stygobromus Kenki)

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.
    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 ensure, 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 requests Federal agency 
funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species 
or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2) 
of the Act would apply, but 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.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on 
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on 
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in 
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information 
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), 
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, 
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions 
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our 
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of 
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources 
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical 
habitat.

Prudency Determination

    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing 
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at 
the time the species is determined to be endangered or threatened. Our 
regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of 
critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following 
situations exist: (1) The species is threatened by taking or other 
human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected 
to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) such 
designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
    There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to 
collection or vandalism under Factor B for the Kenk's amphipod. 
Identification and mapping of critical habitat is not likely to 
increase any such threat. In the absence of finding that the 
designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if 
there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation, then a 
prudent finding is warranted. The potential benefits of designation 
include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the Act, in new 
areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus where it would 
not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has become 
unoccupied or the occupancy is in question; (2) focusing conservation 
activities on the most essential features and areas; (3) providing 
educational benefits to State or county governments or private 
entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent harm to 
the species. Therefore, because we have determined that the designation 
of critical habitat will not likely increase the degree of threat to 
this species and may provide some measure of benefit, we find that 
designation of critical habitat is prudent for the Kenk's amphipod.

Critical Habitat Determinability

    Having determined that designation is prudent, under section 
4(a)(3) of the Act we must find whether critical habitat for the 
species is determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state 
that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the 
following situations exist: (i) Information sufficient to perform 
required analyses of the impacts of the designation is lacking, or (ii) 
The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to 
permit identification of an area as critical habitat.
    As discussed above, we have reviewed the available information 
pertaining to the biological needs of the Kenk's amphipod and habitat 
characteristics where the species is located. Because we are awaiting 
the results of hydrology studies that support the species' physical and 
biological features, and additional surveys in new habitat areas (e.g., 
accessible areas within steep, sloped, forested habitat overlaying the 
Calvert formation in Maryland and Virginia), we conclude that the 
designation of critical habitat is not determinable for the Kenk's 
amphipod at this time. We will make a determination on critical habitat 
no later than 1 year following any final listing determination.

Required Determinations

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;

[[Page 67287]]

    (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 ADDRESSES. 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.

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

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental 
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be 
prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or 
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a 
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal 
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the 
Chesapeake Bay Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of 
the Chesapeake Bay Field Office and the Northeast Regional 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

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

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless 
otherwise noted.

0
2. In Sec.  17.11(h), add an entry for ``Amphipod, Kenk's'' to the List 
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order under 
CRUSTACEANS to read as set forth below:


Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Listing citations
           Common name               Scientific name        Where listed         Status        and  applicable
                                                                                                    rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
           Crustaceans
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Amphipod, Kenk's.................  Stygobromus kenki..  Wherever found.....  E               [Federal Register
                                                                                              citation when
                                                                                              published as a
                                                                                              final rule]
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: September 7, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-23103 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4333-15-P