30 Day Renewal Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 2014 / Notices
Authorization (e.g., previously wounded
animal, carcass with moderate to
advanced decomposition, or scavenger
damage), Point Blue will report the
incident to the Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, at 301–427–8401
and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@
noaa.gov and ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and
the Assistant West Coast Regional
Stranding Coordinator at (562) 980–
3264 (Justin.Greenman@noaa.gov)
within 24 hours of the discovery. Point
Blue will provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to us and the Marine Mammal
Stranding Network. Point Blue can
continue their research activities.
11. A copy of this Authorization must
be in the possession of Point Blue and
its designees (including contractors and
marine mammal monitors) operating
under the authority of this Incidental
Harassment Authorization at all times.
Request for Public Comments
NMFS requests comment on the
analyses, the draft Authorization, and
any other aspect of the Notice of
Proposed Incidental Harassment
Authorization for Point Blue’s seabird
research activities. Please include with
your comments any supporting data or
literature citations to help inform the
final decision on Point Blue’s request
for an MMPA Authorization.
Dated: December 18, 2014.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–29991 Filed 12–22–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities Under OMB Review
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(‘‘PRA’’), this notice announces that the
Information Collection Request (‘‘ICR’’)
abstracted below has been forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget
(‘‘OMB’’) for review and comment. The
ICR describes the nature of the
information collection and its expected
costs and burden.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before January 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted to OMB within 30 days of the

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:44 Dec 22, 2014

Jkt 235001

notice’s publication, identified by
‘‘Privacy of Consumer Financial
Information’’ (OMB Control No. 3038–
0055). Comments can be mailed to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503, or sent by email
to OIRAsubmissions@omb.eop.gov, and
also mailed to Kathy Harman-Stokes,
Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, 1155 21st
Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Comments may also be submitted,
regarding the burden estimated or any
other aspect of the information
collection, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, identified by
‘‘Privacy of Consumer Financial
Information’’ (OMB Control No. 3038–
0055), by any of the following methods:
• Agency Web site, via its Comments
Online process: http://
comments.cftc.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
through the Web site.
• Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission,
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Centre,
1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC
20581.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as
Mail, above.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
All comments must be submitted in
English, or if not, accompanied by an
English translation. Comments will be
posted as received to http://
www.cftc.gov. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. If you wish the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) to
consider information that is exempt
from disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act, a petition for
confidential treatment of the exempt
information may be submitted according
to the procedures set forth in § 145.9 of
the Commission’s regulations.1
The Commission reserves the right,
but shall have no obligation, to review,
pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or
remove any or all of your submission
from www.cftc.gov that it may deem to
be inappropriate for publication, such as
obscene language. All submissions that
have been redacted or removed that
contain comments on the merits of the
rulemaking will be retained in the
1 Commission regulations referred to herein are
found at 17 CFR Ch. 1 et seq. (2014).

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

76985

public comment file and will be
considered as required under the
Administrative Procedure Act and other
applicable laws, and may be accessible
under the Freedom of Information Act.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathy Harman-Stokes, Chief Privacy
Officer, U.S. Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, 1155 21st Street
NW., Washington, DC 20581; (202) 418–
6629; FAX: (202) 418–5532; email:
kharman-stokes@cftc.gov, and refer to
OMB Control No. 3038–0055. This
contact can also provide a copy of the
ICR.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: ‘‘Privacy of Consumer Financial
Information,’’ OMB Control No. 3038–
0055—Extension. This is a request for
extension of a currently approved
information collection.
Abstract: The passage of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’),
Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376
(2010), broadened the Commission’s
regulatory authority under the GrammLeach-Bliley Act (‘‘GLB Act’’) to cover
two new entities: Swap Dealers and
Major Swap Participants, in addition to
Futures Commission Merchants,
Commodity Trading Advisors,
Commodity Pool Operators, and
Introducing Brokers. Specifically,
amendments to the GLB Act found in
section 1093 of the Dodd-Frank Act,
reaffirmed the Commission’s authority
to promulgate regulations to require
entities that are subject to the
Commission’s jurisdiction to provide
certain privacy protections for consumer
financial information. These regulations
were later extended to Retail Foreign
Exchange Dealers.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the Commission’s
regulations were published on
December 30, 1981. See 46 FR 63035
(Dec. 30, 1981). The Federal Register
notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on this collection
of information was published on
October 23, 2014 (79 FR 63384).
No comments have been received.
Burden statement: The respondent
burden for this collection is estimated to
average 0.24 hours per response.
Respondents/Affected Entities: 110.
Estimated number of responses: 20.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 528 hours.
Frequency of collection: Annual.
(Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM

23DEN1

76986

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 2014 / Notices

Dated: December 18, 2014.
Christopher J. Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.

Environmental Policy Act Web site
(www.nepa.gov). Paper copies are
available upon request by contacting the
CEQ Associate Director for National
Environmental Policy Act Oversight,
722 Jackson Place NW., Washington, DC
20503. Telephone: (202) 395–5750.

[FR Doc. 2014–30037 Filed 12–22–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY

The
Council on Environmental Quality
(ATTN: Horst Greczmiel, Associate
Director for National Environmental
Policy Act Oversight), 722 Jackson Place
NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Telephone: (202) 395–5750.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Final Guidance for Effective Use of
Programmatic NEPA Reviews
Council on Environmental
Quality.
ACTION: Notice of Availability, Final
Guidance for Effective Use of
Programmatic NEPA Reviews.
AGENCY:

The Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing
its final guidance on programmatic
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) reviews. This guidance provides
clarification on when and how Federal
agencies should use programmatic
environmental analyses in accordance
with NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4332, and the
CEQ Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA, 40 CFR
parts 1500–1508. Guidance on
programmatic NEPA reviews has been
requested by the agencies and attention
on programmatic NEPA reviews has
increased as agencies undertake more
broad landscape-scale analyses for
proposals that affect the resources they
manage. This guidance is designed to
assist agency decisionmakers and the
public in understanding the
environmental impacts from proposed
large-scope Federal actions and
activities and to facilitate agency
compliance with NEPA by clarifying the
different planning scenarios under
which an agency may prepare a
programmatic, broad-scale, review. The
guidance also addresses how agencies
can prepare such reviews to ensure they
are timely, informative, and useful for
advancing decision-making. The goal of
this guidance is to encourage a more
consistent approach to programmatic
NEPA reviews so that the analyses and
documentation will allow for the
expeditious and efficient completion of
any necessary tiered reviews. It builds
on previous guidance that explained the
use of tiering and its place in the NEPA
process.
DATES: The guidance is effective
December 23, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The Final Guidance for
Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA
Reviews is available at White House
Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/
administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/
nepa) and on the National

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:44 Dec 22, 2014

Jkt 235001

Enacted in
1970, the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370, is a fundamental tool used to
harmonize our environmental,
economic, and social aspirations and is
a cornerstone of our Nation’s efforts to
protect the environment. NEPA
recognizes that many Federal activities
affect the environment and mandates
that Federal agencies consider the
environmental impacts of their
proposed actions before deciding to
adopt proposals and take action.1 NEPA
environmental reviews (the analyses
and documentation prepared under
NEPA) may be on the project-specific or
on broader programmatic level. The
analyses in a programmatic NEPA
review are valuable in setting out the
broad view of environmental impacts
and benefits for a proposed decision
such as a rulemaking, or establishing a
policy, program, or plan. That
programmatic NEPA review (e.g.,
Programmatic Environmental
Assessment (EA), Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS))
can then be relied upon when agencies
make decisions based on the
programmatic EA or programmatic EIS,
as well as decisions based on a
subsequent (also known as tiered) NEPA
review. Programmatic NEPA reviews
should result in clearer and more
transparent decision-making, as well as
provide a better defined and more
expeditious path toward decisions on
proposed actions. This guidance
clarifies the use of programmatic NEPA
reviews by describing: (1) The nature of
programmatic NEPA reviews; (2) when
to use a programmatic and tiered NEPA
review; (3) practical considerations for
programmatic reviews and documents;
(4) how to effectively conduct
subsequent proposal-specific NEPA

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1 A discussion of NEPA applicability is beyond
the scope of this guidance. For more information
see CEQ, The Citizen’s Guide to the National
Environmental Policy Act, available at https://
ceq.doe.gov/nepa/Citizens_Guide_Dec07.pdf.

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

reviews; and (5) the lifespan of a
programmatic NEPA document.
The Federal Register notice
announcing the draft programmatic
guidance and requesting public
comments was published on August 22,
2014.2 CEQ appreciates the thoughtful
responses to its request for comments on
the draft guidance. Commenters
included private citizens, corporations,
environmental organizations, trade
associations, federal agencies, and state
agencies. CEQ received twenty-eight
public comments, which are available
online at www.whitehouse.gov/
administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/
nepa/comments and at www.nepa.gov.
The comments that suggested editorial
revisions and requested clarification of
terms are addressed in the text of the
final guidance. Comments that raised
policy or substantive concerns are
grouped into thematic issues and
addressed in the following sections of
this notice.
Highlighting the Value of NEPA
Many commenters expressed support
for CEQ’s efforts to encourage timely
and efficient use of the NEPA
environmental review process to inform
agency decision-making. Some
commenters asserted that the draft
guidance did not adequately highlight
NEPA’s value and successes. These
commenters urged CEQ to further
discuss how NEPA is an effective tool
for ensuring fully informed decisionmaking and meaningful public
participation.
CEQ agrees and expanded the
introduction of the final guidance to
incorporate a broader discussion of
NEPA’s role in assisting agencies in
decision-making and providing
opportunity for meaningful public
participation. This final guidance was
developed to provide for the consistent,
proper, and appropriate development
and use of programmatic NEPA reviews
by Federal agencies. It reinforces the
process required to establish
opportunities for public involvement,
increased transparency, and informed
decision-making.
Applicability to Environmental
Assessments
One commenter asked for further
explanation as to why programmatic
approaches apply to developing an
Environmental Assessment (EA) as well
as Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).
2 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Draft
Guidance, Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA
Reviews, 79 FR 50,578, August 22, 2014.

E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM

23DEN1