Proposed Rule2021-20923
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Two Species Not Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 29, 2021
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce findings that two species are not warranted for listing as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that it is not warranted at this time to list Black Creek crayfish (Procambarus pictus) or hairy- peduncled beakrush (Rhynchospora crinipes). However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new information relevant to the status of any of the species mentioned above or their habitats.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 186 (Wednesday, September 29, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 29, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53933-53937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20923]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Two Species Not
Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of findings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce
findings that two species are not warranted for listing as endangered
or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). After a thorough review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we find that it is not warranted at this
time to list Black Creek crayfish (Procambarus pictus) or hairy-
peduncled beakrush (Rhynchospora crinipes). However, we ask the public
to submit to us at any time any new information relevant to the status
of any of the species mentioned above or their habitats.
DATES: The findings in this document were made on September 29, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the bases for these findings are
available on the internet at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> under the
following docket numbers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black Creek crayfish.............. FWS-R4-ES-2021-0045
Hairy-peduncled beakrush.......... FWS-R4-ES-2021-0046
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supporting information used to prepare this finding is available by
contacting the appropriate person as specified under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. Please submit any new information, materials,
comments, or questions concerning this finding to the appropriate
person, as specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Contact information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black Creek crayfish.................... Lourdes Mena, Chief of Listing
and Recovery, Jacksonville
Fish and Wildlife Office, 904-
731-3134,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ae6e5fff8eeeff9d5e7efe4ebcaecfdf9a4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="670b081215030214380a0209062701101449000811">[email protected]</span></a>.
Hairy-peduncled beakrush................ Stephen Ricks, Field
Supervisor, Mississippi
Ecological Services Field
Office, 601-321-1122,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9aaadbca9b1bcb786abb0bab2aa99bfaeaaf7beb6af"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ef9c9b8a9f878a81b09d868c849caf89989cc1888099">[email protected]</span></a>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please
call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we
are required to make a finding whether or not a petitioned action is
warranted within 12 months after receiving any petition for which we
have determined contains substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted
(``12-month finding''). We must make a finding that the petitioned
action is: (1) Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3) warranted but
precluded. We must publish a notification of these 12-month findings in
the Federal Register.
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations at part 424 of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for adding species to, removing
species from, or reclassifying species on the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists). The Act defines ``species'' as
any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which
interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). The Act defines
``endangered species'' as any species that is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C.
1532(6)), and ``threatened species'' as any species that is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be determined to be an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the
following 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.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or
[[Page 53934]]
required resources (stressors). The term ``threat'' may encompass--
either together or separately--the source of the action or condition or
the action or condition itself. However, the mere identification of any
threat(s) does not necessarily mean that the species meets the
statutory definition of an ``endangered species'' or a ``threatened
species.'' In determining whether a species meets either definition, we
must evaluate all identified threats by considering the expected
response by the species, and the effects of the threats--in light of
those actions and conditions that will ameliorate the threats--on an
individual, population, and species level. We evaluate each threat and
its expected effects on the species, then analyze the cumulative effect
of all of the threats on the species as a whole. We also consider the
cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions and
conditions that will have positive effects on the species, such as any
existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary
determines whether the species meets the definition of an ``endangered
species'' or a ``threatened species'' only after conducting this
cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect on the species
now and in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term
``foreseeable future'' extends only so far into the future as the
Service can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the
species' responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the
prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to
depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define foreseeable future
as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable future
uses the best scientific and commercial data available and should
consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and to the
species' likely responses to those threats in view of its life-history
characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the
species' biological response include species-specific factors such as
lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and
other demographic factors.
In conducting our evaluation of the five factors provided in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine whether Black Creek crayfish or
hairy-peduncled beakrush meet the definition of ``endangered species''
or ``threatened species,'' we considered and thoroughly evaluated the
best scientific and commercial information available regarding the
past, present, and future stressors and threats. We reviewed the
petitions, information available in our files, and other available
published and unpublished information. Our evaluation may include
information from recognized experts; Federal, State, and Tribal
governments; academic institutions; foreign governments; private
entities; and other members of the public.
The species assessment forms for these species contain more
detailed biological information, a thorough analysis of the listing
factors, a list of literature cited, and an explanation of why we
determined that the species does not meet the Act's definition of an
endangered species or a threatened species. A thorough review of the
taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the Black Creek crayfish and the
hairy-peduncled beakrush is presented in the species' Species Status
Assessment reports. This supporting information can be found on the
internet at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> under the appropriate docket
number (see ADDRESSES, above). The following are informational
summaries for the findings in this document.
Black Creek Crayfish
Previous Federal Actions
On April 20, 2010, the Service received a petition from the Center
for Biological Diversity (CBD), Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch
Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration Network, Tennessee
Forests Council, and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to list 404
aquatic, riparian, and wetland species, including the Black Creek
crayfish (Procambarus pictus), from the southeastern United States as
endangered or threatened species under the Act (CDB 2010, entire). On
September 27, 2011, we published a 90-day finding (76 FR 59836) for 374
of the 404 petitioned species, including the Black Creek crayfish,
stating the petition presented substantial information that listing the
Black Creek crayfish may be warranted, due to the threats of present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the species'
habitat or range and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. The
finding solicited information on, and initiated status reviews for, the
374 species, including the Black Creek crayfish.
On February 27, 2020, CBD filed a complaint alleging, among other
things, that the Service failed to make statutorily required 12-month
findings for 241 species, including the Black Creek crayfish. The
Service moved to dismiss most of the actions, including the 12-month
finding claim for the Black Creek crayfish, on May 4, 2020. The motion
is fully briefed, and the court has not ruled on it as of July 12,
2021. However, we are effectively mooting the claim by publishing this
notification, which fulfils our statutory duty to make a 12-month
finding for the Black Creek crayfish.
Summary of Finding
The Black Creek crayfish is endemic to four northeastern Florida
counties (Clay, Duval, Putnam, and St. Johns) in the Lower St. Johns
River Basin. This small to medium-sized crayfish has dark claws and a
dark carapace with a white or yellowish mid-dorsal stripe, white spots
or streaks on its sides, and a rust-colored abdomen. The Black Creek
crayfish lives about 16 months and reproduces once during its life
cycle. The Black Creek crayfish occurs in flowing, sand-bottomed,
tannic-stained streams that contain cool, unpolluted water, and
maintain a constant flow of highly oxygenated water (5 to 8 parts per
million). Within these streams, Black Creek crayfish require aquatic
vegetation and debris for shelter with alternating shaded and open
canopy cover where they eat aquatic plants, dead plant and animal
material, and detritus.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Black Creek crayfish, and we evaluated all relevant factors
under the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these threats. The potential threats
affecting the Black Creek crayfish are due to land conversion impacts
and from climate change. The threat of land conversion impacts includes
water quality and water quantity degradation from urbanization mining,
logging, and agriculture, and the threat of climate change primarily is
from sea level rise (SLR), and combined effects. These threats can
impact the Black Creek crayfish by degrading or inundating its habitat.
The effects from these impacts may result in a decrease in habitat
quality and quantity across the species'
[[Page 53935]]
range during some years. However, significant ongoing conservation
actions are protecting the species.
Currently, 47% of Black Creek crayfish habitat is protected,
including Camp Blanding Joint Training Center (Camp Blanding)
conservation agreements. The range of the Black Creek crayfish largely
overlaps public lands managed by the Florida Army National Guard, Camp
Blanding, and the Florida Forest Service, specifically 2 state forests:
Jennings and Etoniah Creek. These lands are wildlife management areas
wherein wildlife is managed by the Florida Wildlife Conservation
Commission and the Florida Forest Service. Additional conservation
lands with occurrence records for Black Creek crayfish include parcels
owned by the St. John's River Water Management District (District) and
mitigation banks. Management of the upland habitat adjacent to Black
Creek crayfish habitat is provided by Camp Blanding and the Florida
Forest Service, while the District has regulatory authority regarding
water quality.
Upon examining the current trends and future forecast scenarios, we
expect that the primary threats--water quality and water quantity
degradation due to land conversion, and SLR from climate change--may
impact the Black Creek crayfish. But a substantial portion (47 percent)
of the habitat is protected (Camp Blanding conservation agreements,
Florida Forest Service, and the District), alleviating many of the
primary threats to the crayfish. Habitat protection and conservation
measures, including measures to manage and protect water quality and
water quantity degradation, maintain adequate water conditions and
flows that will keep a sufficient number of populations viable to
ensure overall species viability into the foreseeable future (30-50
years). In addition, protection of special management zones (SMZs) may
reduce its contribution to nonpoint source water pollution. SMZs are
meant to provide shade for temperature regulation, a natural vegetation
strip, intact ground cover, large and small woody debris, leaf litter,
and a variety of tree species and age classes, most of these
benefitting Black Creek crayfish. Also, monitoring of SLR by Camp
Blanding and the District in protected habitat areas will help inform
the Service on the status of the SLR threat. All 19 extant Black Creek
crayfish populations are expected to maintain resiliency, redundancy,
and representation under examined future scenarios out to 2050 and 10
out to 2070 with conservation measures. We examined the interactions of
the white tubercled crayfish (Procambarus spiculifer), and while
uncertainty still exists, the possibility remains that white tubercled
crayfish may have the potential to decrease occupancy and abundance of
Black Creek crayfish; however, the best available information indicates
that it is likely that the two species co-exist at sites where Black
Creek crayfish occur (Service 2020, p.37, 39, Fig. 4-6)). We expect
that existing regulatory mechanisms and conservation measures are
adequate and would continue to help ameliorate or reduce impacts of
threats to the species and protect the Black Creek crayfish and its
habitat which would also help the Black Creek crayfish continue to
maintain an adequate level of resiliency, representation, and
redundancy now and into the foreseeable future (30 to 50 years). For
Black Creek crayfish, we considered whether the threats are
geographically concentrated in any portion of the species' range at a
biologically meaningful scale. We examined the following threats: Land
use conversion impacts and climate change, including cumulative
effects. Based on the species' response to threats, current resiliency,
and predicted future resiliency throughout its range, we found no
concentration of threats in any portion of the Black Creek crayfish's
range at a biologically meaningful scale. We found that the identified
threats act uniformly throughout the range, because it occurs in four
northeastern Florida counties (Clay, Duval, Putnam, and St. Johns) in
the Lower St. Johns River Basin that are geographically close to each
other. Thus, there are no portions of the species' range where the
species has a different status from its range-wide status.
After evaluating the best available scientific and commercial
information on potential threats acting individually or in combination,
we found that all 19 extant Black Creek crayfish populations are
expected to maintain resiliency, redundancy, and representation, under
examined future scenarios out to 2050, and 10 out to 2070 with
conservation measures, in all or a significant portion of the species'
range.
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information regarding the past, present, and future threats to the
species indicates that the Black Creek crayfish is not in danger of
extinction nor likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and that
the Black Creek crayfish does not meet the definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species under the Act. Therefore, we find that
listing the Black Creek crayfish as an endangered or threatened species
under the Act is not warranted at this time. A detailed discussion of
the basis for this finding can be found in the Black Creek crayfish
species assessment form and other supporting documents (see ADDRESSES,
above).
Hairy-Peduncled Beakrush
Previous Federal Actions
On April 20, 2010, the Service received a petition from CBD,
Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, Gulf
Restoration Network, Tennessee Forests Council, and West Virginia
Highlands Conservancy to list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland
species, including hairy-peduncled beakrush (Rhynchospora crinipes),
from the southeastern United States as endangered or threatened species
under the Act (CDB 2010, entire). On September 27, 2011, we published a
90-day finding (76 FR 59836) for 374 of the 404 petitioned species,
including hairy-peduncled beakrush, stating that the petition presented
substantial information indicating that listing hairy-peduncled
beakrush may be warranted, due to the threats of present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat or
range and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. The finding
solicited information on, and initiated status reviews for, the 374
species, including hairy-peduncled beakrush. Hairy-peduncled beakrush
is on the Service's National Workplan for a 12-month finding in Fiscal
Year 2021.
On February 27, 2020, CBD filed a complaint alleging, among other
things, that the Service failed to make statutorily required 12-month
findings for 241 species, including the hairy-peduncled beakrush. The
Service moved to dismiss most of the actions, including the 12-month
finding claim for the hairy-peduncled beakrush, on May 4, 2020. The
motion is fully briefed, and the court has not ruled on it as of July
12, 2021. However, we are effectively mooting the claim by publishing
this notification, which fulfils our statutory duty to make a 12-month
finding for the hairy-peduncled beakrush.
Summary of Finding
A member of the sedge family (Cyperaceae), hairy-peduncled beakrush
is a perennial grass-like herb that occurs solitary or as clumps to
dense mats of plants typically 2-3\1/4\ feet (60-100
[[Page 53936]]
centimeters) tall. Hairy-peduncled beakrush has a broad geographic
range within the southeastern United States, spanning nearly 700 miles
(over 1,100 kilometers) from southwestern Mississippi to central North
Carolina. The species has been found in at least 28 counties in 5
southeastern States: Mississippi (5 counties), Alabama (6 counties),
Florida (5 counties), Georgia (10 counties) and North Carolina (2
counties).
Hairy-peduncled beakrush typically occurs on banks and bars along
blackwater streams and associated spring runs that are prone to
flooding and periodic scouring. Within these systems, plants are often
found in peaty silt on streamside shelves or sandy-clay stream bars,
but have also occasionally been found rooting on stumps and tree bases
as well as in the streambed. The species is an obligate wetland
species, meaning that they are almost always found in standing water or
soils that are seasonally saturated. Hairy-peduncled beakrush plants
typically occur in full sun to partly shady conditions under open to
filtered canopies, often along north-south oriented streams. The
species' deep, extensive root system provides a strong attachment to
the substrate and allows it to withstand strong flood events, which may
also provide a competitive advantage over other species with weaker
root systems that are more readily washed away during flood events.
Likewise, hairy-peduncled beakrush's ability to root at its nodes
allows it to withstand being partially buried by sediment deposited
during flooding events and facilitates clonal spread. Together, these
adaptations to flooding and sedimentation suggest that hairy-peduncled
beakrush is not only tolerant of disturbance, but may be disturbance-
dependent, with periodic disturbances (such as scouring floods) being
required to remove competing vegetation from occupied and unoccupied
habitat, thereby allowing the species to thrive and spread locally and
disperse more widely.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to hairy-peduncled beakrush, and we evaluated all relevant factors
under the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these stressors. The primary stressors
affecting the hairy-peduncled beakrush include sedimentation from
development and urbanization, incompatible logging practices, military
and recreational activities, sand and gravel mining, and an altered
hydrologic regime resulting from climate change and development and
urbanization. Sedimentation currently represents a localized threat to
hairy-peduncled beakrush. Activities that produce excessive
sedimentation may smother plants or otherwise degrade habitats;
however, hairy-peduncled beakrush is able to tolerate at least some
sediment deposition, as partially buried plants have been observed
rooting at their buried nodes. This adaptation limits the threat to
hairy-peduncled beakrush from all but the most extreme sedimentation
events. Flooding has been suggested as a threat to hairy-peduncled
beakrush; however, natural flooding is unlikely a major threat to
hairy-peduncled beakrush rangewide in light of its association with
systems that are subject to periodic flooding and various other natural
disturbances that may contribute to extreme flooding (e.g., hurricanes,
tropical storms), which suggests that the species is adapted to
tolerate such periodic disturbances.
Sedimentation and hydrologic regime changes are influenced by
development and urbanization, incompatible logging practices, sand and
gravel mining, activities on military installations, and right-of-way
maintenance; however, most of these threats are considered historical,
or occur on a very limited number of sites, or are actively managed and
monitored by Federal and State agencies through adequate regulatory
protections. In the assessment of hairy-peduncled beakrush current
condition, 30 populations (of a total of 39 populations) exhibit
moderate to high resiliency, as evidenced by population size, multiple
subpopulations, current status and resilience through time, and little
evidence of threats. Although changes in the hydrologic regime may
occur as a result of climate change, the species is resilient to
fluctuating water levels and relies on periodic high flow events to
some extent for dispersal of propagules and removal of competing
vegetation (i.e., hairy-peduncled beakrush is a disturbance-dependent
species).
Our future scenarios assessed the viability of hairy-peduncled
beakrush over a 40-year time period in response to urbanization and
hydrological changes. In Scenario 1, current land protection and
management are projected to remain unchanged, urbanization continues at
the current pace, and changes to the hydrological regime are those
predicted under a moderate emissions scenario, representative
concentration pathway 4.5 (RCP 4.5). Under this scenario, 37 of 39
populations are predicted to remain at their current levels of
resiliency, while 2 populations are expected to exhibit decreased
resiliency by 2060. In Scenario 2, current land protection and
management are projected to remain unchanged, urbanization increases
relative to Scenario 1, and changes to the hydrological regime are
those predicted under a higher atmospheric emission scenario (RCP 8.5).
Under this scenario, four populations are expected to exhibit decreased
resiliency and one population is expected to exhibit increased
resiliency, while 34 are predicted to remain at their current levels of
resiliency. We expect the species' representation and redundancy to
remain high under both future scenarios.
For hairy-peduncled beakrush, we considered whether the threats are
geographically concentrated in any portion of the species' range at a
biologically meaningful scale. We examined the following threats:
Sedimentation and hydrologic regime change, including cumulative
effects. Based on the species' adaptation to stressors, current
resiliency, and predicted future resiliency throughout its range, we
found no concentration of threats in any portion of hairy-peduncled
beakrush's range at a biologically meaningful scale. Thus, there are no
portions of the species' range where the species has a different status
from its range-wide status.
After evaluating the best available scientific and commercial
information on potential stressors acting individually or in
combination, we found no indication that the combined effects are
causing a population-level decline, or that the combined effects are
likely to do so in the next 10 to 40 years, in all or a significant
portion of the species' range.
Therefore, we find that listing hairy-peduncled beakrush as an
endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not
warranted. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be
found in the hairy-peduncled beakrush species assessment and other
supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
New Information
We request that you submit any new information concerning the
taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or stressors to the
Black Creek crayfish or hairy-peduncled beakrush to the appropriate
person, as specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it
becomes available. New information will help us monitor these species
and make appropriate decisions about their conservation and status. We
encourage local agencies and
[[Page 53937]]
stakeholders to continue cooperative monitoring and conservation
efforts.
References Cited
A list of the references cited in these petition findings is
available on the internet at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> in the species
assessment form or in the appropriate docket provided above in
ADDRESSES, or upon request from the appropriate person, as specified
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the
Species Assessment Team, Ecological Services Program.
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-20923 Filed 9-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 29, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.