WSP03664

• File Number: 8065
• Description: Section D General Statewide Issues - Endangered Species Act - Fisheries
• State: CO
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 8/1/1993
• Author: American Bar Associa
• Title: Natural Resources and Environment - Number 8-Volume 1 - Summer 1993 - Endangered Species Protection
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

Altbougb public
notice is not
required of filing a
petition, tbe ninety.
day findi"g 0" the
petition must be
published i" the
Federal Regisler.

28

002Hl

tition review; (2) listing acrion rulemaking; (3)
critical habitat rulemaking; (4) emergency
rulemaking; and (5) post. listing programs. The
Secretary of the Interior has de legated imple.
mentation of these functions to the FWS, and
the Secretary of Commerce has done so through
the NMFS. Those agencies promulgated rules
that elaborate upon the statutory programs and
establish an additional implementing program,
the candidate species review procedure.
Petition Review. Any person or orga-
nization may petition FWS/NMFS to add a spe.
cies to the endangered or threatened species
list, delist a species, or reclassify a listed spe.
cies (e.g.. from threatened to endangered). 16
U.S.c. ~ 1533(b)(3)(A) (1988); 50 C.F.R.
~ 424.14(b)(I) (1992). Petitions can also be
submitted to tevise critical habitat, 16 U.S.c.
~ 1533(b)(3)(D)(i) (1988); 50 C.F.R.
$ 424.14(c)(I) (1992), and, under the regu-
lations, to designate critical habitat. 50 C.F.R.
$ 424.14(d) (1992). To the maximum extent
practicable, within ninety days of receiving a
petition, the agency must determine whether
the petition presents "substantial" biological
data to indicate that the petitioned action may
be warranted. 16 U.S.c. $$ 1533(b)(3)(A)
(listing), 1533(b)(3)(D)(i) (1988) (critical
habitat revisions); 50 C.F.R. $$ 424.14(b)(I)
(listing actions), 424.14(c)(I) (1992) (criti-
cal habitat revisions). To facilitate that evalua-
tion, the FWS/NMFS regulations require that a
petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species
supply information which
. clearly indicates the administrative mea-
slIre recommended and gives the scientific and
any common name of the species involved;
. contains detailed narrative justification for
the recommended measure, describing, based
on available information, past and present num-
bers and distribution of the species involved
and any threats faced by the species;
. provides information regarding the status
of the species overall or a significant ponion of
its range; and
. is accompanied by appropriate support-
ing documentation in the form of bibliographic
references, reprints of peninent publications,
copies of repons or leuers from authorities, and
maps.
50 C.F.R. ~$ 424. 14(b)(2)(i)-(iv) (1992).
Similar factors for consideration are detailed
for petitions to revise critical habitat. [d.
$$ 424.14(c)(2)(i)-(ii), 424.14(d). The data
supplied on these subjects satisfy the "substan-
tial information" criterion if they would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the measure
proposed in the petition may be warranted. [d.
$ 424.14(b)(I). Although public notice is not
required of filinga petition, the ninety.day find-

NR&E/SUMMER 1993

ing on the petition must be published in the
Federal Register. 16 U.S.c. $$ 1533(b)(3)(A)
(listing actions), 1533(b)(3)(D)(i) (1988)
(critical habitat revisions); 50 C.F.R. ~$ 424.14
(b)(l) (listing actions), 424.14(c)(I) (1992)
(critical habitat revisions).

If the FWS/NMFS finds after its ninery-day
review that a species listing action petition
does not satisfy the "substantial informa-
tion" requirement, the unsuccessful peti-
tioner may appeal that decision directly to
federal district court. 16 U.S.C. $$ 1533
(b)(3)(C)(ii) (1988). For any petition FWS/
NMFS finds to present adequate biological data
suggesting the petitioned action may be war-
ranted, the agency must commence a review of
the petitioned action and make a determination
as to whether the action is warranted within
twelve months of filing the petition (a twelve.
month finding). [d. $ 1533(b)(3)(B) (listing
actions), 1533(b)(3)(D)(ii) (critical habitat
revisions); 50 C.F.R. ~$ 424.14(b)(3) (listing
actions), 424.14(c)(3) (1992) (critical habi-
tat revisions). More specifically, for listing, del-
isting, and reclassification petitions, the agency
can find the petition is either warranted, not
warranted, or warranted but precluded. 16
U.S.c. $$ 1533(b)(3)(B)(i)-(iii) (1988); 50
C.F.R. $$ 424.14(b)(3)(i)-(iii) (1992). The
latter category is reserved for situations when
expeditious progress is being made on other
pending listing status decisions which take
precedence over the petitioned action. 16 U.S.c.
$ 1533(b)(3)(B)(iii) (1988); 50 C.F.R.
$~ 424.14(b)(3)(iii) (1992). For petitions in-
volving critical habitat, FWS/NMFS must simply
determine how the agency intends to proceed.
16 U.S.c. ~ 1533(b)(3)(D)(ii) (1988) (revi-
sions); 50 C.F.R. $$ 424.14(c)(3) (revisions),
424.14 (d) (1992) (designation). Alternative-
ly, for any type of petition that may be war-
ranted, the FWS/NMFS may decide that addi-
tional data are needed to make a definitive find-
ing, in which case the agency will publish a
"notice of review" in the Federal Register to
solicit additional data. [d. $ 424.15(a).
The agency's twelve.month finding must be
published in the Federal Register. 16 U.S.c.
~$ 1533 (b)(3)(B) (listing actions), 1533(b)
(3)(D)(ii) (1988) (critical habitat revision);
50 C.F.R. ~$ 424.14(b)(3)(i)-(iii) (listing ac.
tions). 424.14(c)(3) (1992) (critical habitat
revisions). An unsuccessful listing action peti-
tioner may appeal a not warranted or warranted
but precluded finding directly to federal dis.
trict court. 16 U.S.c. $ 15 33(b) (3 )(C)(ii)
(1988). Warranted but precluded findings on
listing action petitions must be reviewed on an