60-day notice

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Notices
interdependent actions on the Pacific
walrus on February 11, 2014. On
January 31 and March 19, 2014, EPA
received letters of concurrence from the
USFWS and NMFS, respectively,
agreeing with EPA’s determinations of
effects. On March 13, 2014, in response
to EPA’s request for a conference on the
Pacific walrus, the USFWS confirmed
that the proposed permit action would
not jeopardize the continued existence
of this species.
Essential Fish Habitat. The
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
requires EPA to consult with NMFS
when a proposed permit action has the
potential to adversely affect Essential
Fish Habitat (EFH). EPA’s EFH
assessment is included as Appendix A
to the BE. The EFH assessment
concluded that the discharges
authorized by the Geotechnical General
Permit will not adversely affect EFH.
Coastal Zone Management Act. As of
July 1, 2011, there is no longer a Coastal
Zone Management Act (CZMA) program
in Alaska. Consequently, federal
agencies are no longer required to
provide the State of Alaska with CZMA
consistency determinations.
Executive Order 12866. The Office of
Management and Budget exempts this
action from the review requirements of
Executive Order 12866 pursuant to
Section 6 of that order.
Paperwork Reduction Act. EPA has
reviewed the requirements imposed on
regulated facilities in the Geotechnical
General Permit and finds them
consistent with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq., a federal agency must
prepare an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis ‘‘for any proposed rule’’ for
which the agency ‘‘is required by
section 553 of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA), or any other law,
to publish general notice of proposed
rulemaking.’’ The RFA exempts from
this requirement any rule that the
issuing agency certifies ‘‘will not, if
promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.’’ EPA has
concluded that NPDES general permits
are permits, not rulemakings, under the
APA and thus not subject to APA
rulemaking requirements or the RFA.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law 104–4,
generally requires federal agencies to
assess the effects of their ‘‘regulatory
actions’’ (defined to be the same as
‘‘rules’’ subject to the RFA) on tribal,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:16 Jan 28, 2015

Jkt 235001

state, and local governments and the
private sector. However, the
Geotechnical General Permit is not a
‘‘rule’’ subject to the RFA, and are
therefore not subject to the UMRA.
Appeal of Permit. Any interested
person may appeal the Geotechnical
General Permit in the Federal Court of
Appeals in accordance with section
509(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33
U.S.C. 1369(b)(1). This appeal must be
filed within 120 days of the General
Permit issuance date. Affected persons
may not challenge the conditions of the
General Permit in further EPA
proceedings (see 40 CFR 124.19).
Instead, they may either challenge the
general permit in court or apply for an
individual NPDES permit.
Authority: This action is taken under the
authority of Section 402 of the Clean Water
Act as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1342. I hereby
provide public notice of the final
Geotechnical General Permit in accordance
with 40 CFR 124.15(b).

injunction that requires EPA to stop all
work connected to the 404(c)
proceeding, including reviewing and
considering public comments. EPA is
complying with the court’s order and as
such is not taking any steps to withdraw
the Proposed Determination or to
prepare a Recommended Determination
while the preliminary injunction is in
place.
Dated: January 21, 2015.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015–01701 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Extension Without Change
of an Existing Collection; Comments
Request

Dated: January 21, 2015.
Daniel D. Opalski,
Director, Office of Water and Watersheds,
Region 10.

AGENCY:

[FR Doc. 2015–01704 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]

SUMMARY:

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–R10–OW–2014–0505; FRL–9922–23–
Region–10]

Notice of Status Update on the
Proposed Determination for the Pebble
Deposit Area, Southwest Alaska
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of status update.
AGENCY:

On July 21, 2014, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published in the Federal Register a
Notice of Proposed Determination,
under Section 404(c) of the Clean Water
Act, to restrict the use of certain waters
in the South Fork Koktuli River, North
Fork Koktuli River, and Upper Talarik
Creek watersheds in Southwest Alaska
as disposal sites for dredged or fill
material associated with mining the
Pebble deposit, a copper-, gold-, and
molybdenum-bearing ore body. On
September 19, 2014, EPA published in
the Federal Register a notice extending
the time period to either withdraw the
Proposed Determination or to prepare
the Recommended Determination until
no later than February 4, 2015. As part
of ongoing litigation brought by the
Pebble Limited Partnership, on
November 25, 2014, a Federal District
Court Judge issued a preliminary

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00065

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

4917

Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Commission announces that it intends
to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) a request for a threeyear extension without change of the
existing recordkeeping requirements
under 29 CFR part 1602 et seq.,
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements under Title VII, the ADA,
and GINA. The Commission is seeking
public comments on the proposed
extension.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before March 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to
Bernadette Wilson, Acting Executive
Officer, Executive Secretariat, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission,
131 M Street NE., Washington, DC
20507. As a convenience to
commenters, the Executive Secretariat
will accept comments totaling six or
fewer pages by facsimile (‘‘FAX’’)
machine. This limitation is necessary to
assure access to the equipment. The
telephone number of the fax receiver is
(202) 663–4114. (This is not a toll-free
number). Receipt of FAX transmittals
will not be acknowledged, except that
the sender may request confirmation of
receipt by calling the Executive
Secretariat staff at (202) 663–4070
(voice) or (202) 663–4074 (TTY). (These
are not toll-free numbers.) Instead of
sending written comments to EEOC, you
may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://
www.regulations.gov, which is the

E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM

29JAN1

4918

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Notices

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the
instructions online for submitting
comments. All comments received
through this portal will be posted
without change, including any personal
information you provide. Copies of
comments submitted by the public to
EEOC directly or through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal will be available for
review, by advance appointment only,
at the Commission’s library between the
hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
Time or can be reviewed at http://
www.regulations.gov. To schedule an
appointment to inspect the comments at
EEOC’s library, contact the library staff
at (202) 663–4630 (voice) or (202) 663–
4641 (TTY). (These are not toll-free
numbers.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas J. Schlageter, Assistant Legal
Counsel, (202) 663–4668, or Erin N.
Norris, Senior Attorney, (202) 663–4876,
Office of Legal Counsel, 131 M Street
NE., Washington, DC 20507. Requests
for this notice in an alternative format
should be made to the Office of
Communications and Legislative Affairs
at (202) 663–4191 (voice) or (202) 663–
4494 (TTY). (These are not toll-free
numbers.)
The Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) enforces Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), Title I of
the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), and Title II of the Genetic
Information Nondiscrimination Act of
2008 (GINA), which prohibit
discrimination on the basis of race,
color, religion, sex, national origin,
disability, or genetic information.
Section 709(c) of Title VII, section
107(a) of the ADA, and section 207 of
GINA authorize the EEOC to issue
recordkeeping and reporting regulations
that are deemed reasonable, necessary
or appropriate. EEOC has promulgated
recordkeeping regulations under those
authorities that are contained in 29 CFR
part 1602 et seq. Those regulations do
not require the creation of any particular
records but generally require employers
to preserve any personnel and
employment records they make or keep
for a period of one year. The EEOC seeks
extension of the recordkeeping
requirement in these regulations
without change.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Overview of This Information
Collection
Collection title: Recordkeeping under
Title VII, the ADA, and GINA.
OMB Control number: 3046–0040.
Description of affected public:
Employers with 15 or more employees

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:16 Jan 28, 2015

Jkt 235001

are subject to Title VII, the ADA, and
GINA.
Number of responses: 914,843.
Reporting hours: Not applicable.
Number of forms: None.
Federal cost: None.
Abstract: Section 709(c) of Title VII,
42 U.S.C. 2000e–8(c), section 107(a) of
the ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12117(a), and
section 207 of GINA, 42 U.S.C. 2000ff–
6 require the Commission to establish
regulations pursuant to which
employers subject to those Acts shall
make and preserve certain records to
assist the EEOC in assuring compliance
with the Acts’ nondiscrimination in
employment requirements. This is a
recordkeeping requirement. Any of the
records maintained which are
subsequently disclosed to the EEOC
during an investigation are protected
from public disclosure by the
confidentiality provisions of section
706(b) and 709(e) of Title VII which are
also incorporated by reference into the
ADA at section 107(a) and GINA at
section 207.
Burden statement: The estimated
number of respondents is 914,843
employers. An employer subject to the
recordkeeping requirement in 29 CFR
part 1602 must retain all personnel or
employment records made or kept by
that employer for one year, and must
retain any records relevant to charges
filed under Title VII, the ADA, or GINA
until final disposition of those matters,
which may be longer than one year.
This recordkeeping requirement does
not require reports or the creation of
new documents, but merely requires
retention of documents that an
employer has already made or kept in
the normal course of its business
operations. Thus, existing employers
bear no burden under this analysis,
because their systems for retaining
personnel and employment records are
already in place. Newly formed firms
may incur a small burden when setting
up their data collection systems to
ensure compliance with EEOC’s
recordkeeping requirements. We assume
some effort and time must be expended
by employers to familiarize themselves
with the Title VII, ADA, and GINA
recordkeeping requirements and inform
staff about those requirements. We
estimate that 30 minutes would be
needed for this one-time familiarization
process. Using 2011 data from the Small
Business Administration, we estimate
that there are 82,516 firms that would
incur this start-up burden. Assuming a
30 minute burden per firm, the total
annual hour burden is 41,258 hours.
Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, and OMB regulation 5 CFR

PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

1320.8(d)(1), the Commission solicits
public comment to enable it to:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
Commission’s functions, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
Commission’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
For the Commission.
Dated: January 23, 2015.
Jenny R. Yang,
Chair.
[FR Doc. 2015–01624 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6570–01–P

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.
[Public Notice 2014–3011]

Agency Information Collection
Activities: Final Collection; Comment
Request
Export-Import Bank of the U.S.
Submission for OMB review and
comments request.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

Form Title: EIB 11–04, Co-Financing
with Foreign Export Credit Agency.
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of
the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden,
invites the general public and other
Federal Agencies to comment on the
proposed information collection, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
This form will enable Ex-Im Bank to
identify the specific details of the
proposed co-financing transaction
between a U.S. exporter, Ex-Im Bank,
and a foreign export credit agency; the
information collected includes vital
facts such as the amount of U.S.-made
content in the export, the amount of
financing requested from Ex-Im Bank,
and the proposed financing amount
from the foreign export credit agency.
These details are necessary for
approving this unique transaction
structure and coordinating our support

E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM

29JAN1