### 76985 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 2014 / Notices

1 Commission regulations referred to herein are found at 17 CFR Ch. 1 et seq. (2014). 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** 

**AGENCY :**  Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  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 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 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’sregulatory 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. )


### 76986 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 2014 / Notices

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. 2 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Draft Guidance, Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews, 79 FR 50,578, August 22, 2014. Dated: December 18, 2014. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2014–30037 Filed 12–22–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6351–01–P**

**COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY** 

**Final Guidance for Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews** 

**AGENCY :**  Council on Environmental Quality.

**ACTION :**  Notice of Availability, Final Guidance for Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews.

**SUMMARY :**  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 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.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  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.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  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 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 toolfor 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).