9669 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment , ' Application of NEPA to Recovery Plans and Recovery Actions Under the Endangered Species Act Recovery Plans Section 4(g) of ESA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to develop and implement plans for the conservation and survival of endangered and threatened species. Development and approval of recovery plans are considered categorically excluded under the Department's categorical exclusion 8(6) in 516 OM 6, Appendix 1 and under 1.10 in 516 OM 2, Appendix 1 based on their consultative and technical assistance nature and because speci'fic proposed tasks in the plan will be subject later to the NEPA process. This determination is indicated in a memorandum from the Director to the Regional Directors (through Assistant Solicitor - Fish and Wildlife), dated November 5, 1986. , In unusual cases when a recovery plan itself is the vehicle for implementing a specific proposed recovery task, an EA or EISmay be required if the action is determined to be a major Federal action affecting the quality of the human environment or if there is a need to determine if the proposed action will cause significant impacts (30 AM 3.9). Section 1003 of the Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1988 requires that prior to final approval of a new or revised recovery plan, the Secretary of the Interior shall "provide public notice and an opportunity for public review and comment on such plan." As appropriate, this requirement may be consolidated with interagency cooperation procedures required by other statutes, such as NEPA [50 CFR 402.06(a)]. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) policies and guidelines for recovery planning were revised in May 1990. Recovery Actions ~ t The lead Federal agency that proposes or implements a specific recovery task is responsible for complying with NEPA. The implementation of a specific proposed recovery task could require the preparation of an EA or EIS if a determination is made that it is a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment or if there is a need to determine if the proposed action will cause significant impacts (30 AM 3.9). Examples include the EA on the Grizzly Bear Population Augmentation Test in Montana, EA on the Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, and EA on Fakahatchee Strand: A Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Proposal.