### 4917 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, 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).

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

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

**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**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency.

**ACTION :**  Notice of status update.

**SUMMARY :**  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 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** 

**AGENCY :**  Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Commission announces that it intends to submit to the Office of Managementand 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


### 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.)

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  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.

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 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 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**

**AGENCY :**  Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

**ACTION :**  Submission for OMB review and comments request.

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