### 24743 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Notices

16 See Draft Revised Investigation Guidance, 65 FR 39,650, 39,671 (proposed June 27, 2000).

17 40 CFR 7.120(d)(1).

18 See Draft Revised Investigation Guidance, 65 FR at 39,671.

19 40 CFR 7.85(b), (f).

20 In addition to considering information supplied by recipients, OCR will also evaluate information provided by complainants.

21 40 CFR 7.120(d)(1)(iii). 22 40 CFR 7.115(d)(2).

23 40 CFR 7.130(b)(2).

24 40 CFR 7.130(b)(3). 25 When preliminary finding has been made and the EPA is engaging in voluntary compliance in accordance with 40 CFR 7.115(d), EPA retains the discretion to contact the Recipient first. claims. 16 Specifically, during the jurisdictional review of Title VI complaints, OCR may seek clarification regarding the issues articulated by the complainants. 17 OCR may also request interviews of complainants or request additional information from the complainants during the course of an investigation. Finally, in appropriate cases, OCR may offer complainants and recipients an opportunity to participate in Alternative Dispute Resolution concerning the matters raised in the complaint.

B. Recipients: EPA’s Draft Investigation Guidance states that OCR may work closely with recipients to ensure that the Agency has a complete and accurate record of all relevant information pertaining to the complaint, and a full understanding of the recipient’s position relating to the allegations. 18 In order for OCR to perform the appropriate analyses, one of the most important things recipients may do as early as possible is to provide OCR with all of the information relevant to the complaint, including, but not limited to, background information, the permit application(s), monitoring data, computer modeling, other aspects of the recipient’s analysis of the application(s), and any information relating to steps the recipient took to address potential Title VI concerns. Moreover, under EPA’s Title VI regulations, OCR has the authority to obtain information from recipients and interview recipient staff. 19 Full and expeditious disclosure of such information helps to facilitate resolution of Title VI complaints. 20

EPA’s Title VI regulations provide the recipient with several opportunities to respond to the complaint and to any OCR finding. First, the recipient may make a written submission responding to, rebutting, or denying the allegations raised in a complaint. 21 Second, OCR may attempt to resolve the complaint informally, during which time the recipient will be able to state its position. Third, if OCR makes a preliminary finding of noncompliance with the regulations, the recipient may submit a written response within 50 calendar days of receiving the preliminary finding, demonstrating that the preliminary finding is incorrect or that compliance may be achieved through steps other than those recommended by OCR. 22

Finally, if OCR begins the procedure to deny, annul, suspend, or terminate EPA assistance, recipients may request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) 23 and, if the ALJ’s decision upholds a finding of noncompliance, the recipient may then file exceptions with the Administrator. 24 III. Proposed Position

EPA has evaluated its current policy and practices on the role and opportunities of complainants and recipients in complaint processing and resolution efforts. The following is intended to clarify and expand on EPA’s existing policy and practices in this regard.

EPA intends to follow these principles in the processing and resolution of Title VI complaints, as applicable and appropriate:
A. Complaint Process

1. EPA may seek clarification from the complainants during its initial review of the administrative complaint. At the time they file a complaint, complainants should provide EPA any relevant information available to them which supports their claim(s).

2. Upon acceptance of a complaint, but prior to the initiation of an investigation, EPA will offer in appropriate cases, at EPA’s expense, complainants and recipients the opportunity to engage in Alternative Dispute Resolution efforts. EPA considers the ADR process to be a viable option for complainants and recipients to address some, if not all, of the issues raised in a complaint.

3. EPA will continue its present practice of requesting additional information (e.g. interviews) from the complainants and recipients during the course of an investigation.

4. EPA will make information in its case tracking system available.

B. Informal Resolution And/Or Voluntary Compliance

EPA may, at any point prior to a preliminary finding of compliance, seek to informally resolve complaints of discrimination.

Following issuance of a preliminary determination of noncompliance, EPA may enter into a voluntary compliance agreement with a recipient to resolve a complaint. Where EPA issues a preliminary finding of noncompliance, in addition to notifying the recipient, per the regulations, EPA intends to notify complainant of said finding. 25 EPA will also, at the appropriate time, notify the public of a preliminary finding of noncompliance by posting its decision on its public access Web sites.

If resolution discussions are occurring between EPA and the recipient, EPA will use its discretion, when appropriate, to engage complainants who want to provide input on potential remedies, and EPA will determine based on its discretion when such engagement may occur during the process. For instance, EPA, in appropriate cases, may request and consider complainant’s input on potential remedies for the complaint and may forward the suggested remedies to the recipient for further discussion with EPA. Alternatively, depending on the complaint, EPA may seek and consider complainant’s input on potential terms of a settlement agreement.
C. Alternative Dispute Resolution

As stated above, EPA considers the ADR process to be a viable option for complainants and recipients to address some, if not all, of the issues raised in Title VI complaints. As appropriate, EPA may offer the complainant and the recipient an opportunity to engage in the ADR process at any stage in the complaint process, even if an investigation has started.

Dated: April 16, 2013. Diane E. Thompson, Chief of Staff, Office of the Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2013–09922 Filed 4–25–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[ER–FRL–9008–8]**

**Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability** 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202)

564–7146 or http://www.epa.gov/ compliance/nepa/

. Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact

Statements Filed 04/15/2013 Through 04/19/2013 Pursuant to 40 CFR

1506.9.

Notice

Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters


### 24744 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Notices

on EISs are available at: http:// www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ eisdata.html

.
**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Due to EPA’s agency-wide furlough day on Friday, May 24th and the Federal holiday on Monday, May 27th, all EISs must be filed with EPA by Thursday, May 23rd by 5:00 p.m. eastern time for publication under a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register for Friday, May 31st. EIS No. 20130100, Draft EIS, USACE,

CA , Placer Vineyards Specific Plan (SPK–1999–00737), Comment Period Ends: 06/10/2013, Contact: William
Ness 916–557–5268. EIS No. 20130101, Final EIS, BLM, NV

, Proposed Sloan Hills Competitive Mineral Material Sales, Review Period Ends: 05/28/2013, Contact: Shonna
Dooman 702–515–5174. EIS No. 20130102, Final EIS, BLM, WY

, Gateway West Transmission Line Project, Wyoming and Idaho, Review Period Ends: 06/28/2013, Contact: Walt George 307–775–6116. EIS No. 20130103, Final EIS, NMFS, 00

,

Amendment 5 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 05/28/2013, Contact: Carrie Nordeen 978–281–9272. EIS No. 20130104, Draft EIS, FHWA,

AZ , South Mountain Freeway (Loop 202), Interstate 10 (Papago Freeway) to Interstate 10 (Maricopa Freeway), Comment Period Ends: 07/24/2013, Contact: Alan Hansen 602–382–8964. EIS No. 20130105, Draft EIS, FHWA,

TX , US 281 from Loop 1604 to Borgfeld, Comment Period Ends: 07/ 01/2013, Contact: Mr. Salvador Deocampo 512–536–5950. EIS No. 20130106, Final EIS, NMFS, 00

,

Amendment 5a to the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 05/28/2013, Contact: Peter Cooper 301–427–8503. EIS No. 20130107, Final EIS, NRCS,

WY , Henrys Fork Salinity Control Project Plan and Irrigation Improvements, Review Period Ends: 05/28/2013, Contact: Astrid Martinez

307–233–6750. EIS No. 20130108, Final EIS, USA, HI

, Construction and Operation of a Platoon Battle Course at Pohakuloa Training Area, Review Period Ends: 05/28/2013, Contact: Linda B. McDowell 210–466–1593.
Dated: April 23, 2013. Cliff Rader, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 2013–09951 Filed 4–25–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EXPORT-IMPORT BANK** 

**Postponement Notice of Open Special Meeting of the Sub-Saharan Africa** **Advisory Committee of the Export Import Bank of the United States**  **(Ex-Im Bank)**

**SUMMARY :**  The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee was established by Public Law 105–121, November 26, 1997, to advise the Board of Directors on the development and implementation of policies and programs designed to support the expansion of the Bank’s financial commitments in Sub-Saharan Africa under the loan, guarantee, and insurance programs of the Bank. Further, the Committee shall make recommendations on how the Bank can facilitate greater support by U.S.commercial banks for trade with SubSaharan Africa.

Postponement: The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States must postpone its Tuesday, April 30, 2013, Open Special Meeting until further notice.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For further information, contact Exa Richards, 811 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565–3455.

Sharon Whitt, Director, Information Quality and Records Management.
[FR Doc. 2013–09868 Filed 4–25–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6690–01–P**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION** 

**Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications**  **Commission Under Delegated Authority** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Communications Commission.

**ACTION :**  Notice; request for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 3520), the Federal Communications Commission invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s).

Comments are requested concerning whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission’s burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a valid OMB control number.

**DATES :**  Written Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments should be submitted on or before June 25, 2013. If you anticipate that you will be submitting PRA comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the FCC contact listed below as soon as possible.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via fax at 202– 395–5167 or via Internet at Nicholas

_ A.

_Fraser@omb.eop.gov and to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, via the
Internet at judith-b.herman@fcc.gov. To submit your PRA comments by email send them to: PRA@fcc.gov.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Judith B. Herman, Office of Managing Director, (202) 418–0214.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Form Number: N/A. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.

Number of Respondents: 70 respondents; 70 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 4 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement and on occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i) and 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 280 hours. Total Annual Cost: $42,400. Privacy Impact Assessment: N/A. Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking OMB approval for an extension of this information collection in order to obtain the full three year approval from them. There are no changes to the