70538 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Notices 

Place: National Cancer Institute Shady 

Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 

1E030, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone 

Conference Call). 

Contact Person: Gerald G. Lovinger, Ph.D., 

Scientific Review Officer, Research 

Technology and Contract Review Branch, 

Division of Extramural Activities, National 

Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 

Room 7W266, Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, 

240–276–6385, lovingeg@mail.nih.gov. 

Name of Committee: National Cancer 

Institute Special Emphasis Panel Omnibus 

SEP–17. 

Date: March 25, 2015. 

Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 

Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 

applications. 

Place: National Cancer Institute Shady 

Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 7W124, 

Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Conference 

Call). 

Contact Person: David Ransom, Ph.D., 

Research Programs Review Branch, Division 

of Extramural Activities, National Cancer 

Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 

Room 7W124, Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, 

240–276–6351 david.ransom@nih.gov. 

Information is also available on the 

Institute’s/Center’s home page: http://

deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, 

where an agenda and any additional 

information for the meeting will be posted 

when available. 

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 

93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention 

Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and 

Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 

Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology 

Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 

93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, 

Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, 

HHS) 

Dated: November 20, 2014. 

Melanie J. Gray, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory 

Committee Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27937 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Institutes of Health 

Center for Scientific Review Amended; 

Notice of Meeting 

Notice is hereby given of a change in 

the meeting of the Center for Scientific 

Review Special Emphasis Panel, 

November 11, 2014, 02:00 p.m. to 

November 11, 2014, 03:00 p.m., 

National Institutes of Health, 6701 

Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 

which was published in the Federal 

Register on October 16, 2014, 79 FR 200 

Pg. 62166. 

The meeting will be held on 

December 9, 2014 instead of November 

11, 2014. The meeting will start at 12:00 

p.m. and will end at 2:00 p.m. The 

meeting location remains the same. The 

meeting is closed to the public. 

Dated: November 20, 2014. 

Carolyn A. Baum, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory 

Committee Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27936 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

[Docket Number DHS–2013–0052] 

Environmental Planning and Historic 

Preservation Program 

AGENCY: Department of Homeland 

Security. 

ACTION: Notice of Final National 

Environmental Policy Act Implementing 

Procedures. 

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is 

to inform the public that the Department 

of Homeland Security (DHS or the 

Department) is issuing the final update 

to its policy and procedures for 

implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as 

amended, and the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations for implementing the 

procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 

parts 1500–1508). The Department’s 

NEPA procedures are contained in 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 01 and 

Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, 

Rev. 01, Implementation of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (herein after 

referred to as Directive and Instruction). 

This notice also responds to the 

comments received on the Department’s 

draft updated procedures published on 

June 5, 2014 (79 FR 32563). 

DATES: The Directive and Instruction 

will be effective on March 26, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. 

Marie Ecton, Senior Environmental 

Specialist, Department of Homeland 

Security, Telephone (202) 360–5661, or 

Email a.marie.ecton@hq.dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Once 

effective, the Directive and Instruction 

will apply to all of DHS, which is 

currently comprised of over 20 support 

and operational components, and help 

ensure the integration of environmental 

stewardship into DHS decision making 

as required by NEPA. The Directive and 

Instruction will serve as the DHS 

implementing procedures for NEPA and 

the CEQ regulations (as required by 40 

CFR 1505.1 and 1507.3) and therefore 

must be read in conjunction with the 

CEQ regulations. 

The Directive and Instruction were 

substantially revised to address a 

number of circumstances and 

requirements that have arisen since 

April 19, 2006, the effective date of the 

original DHS NEPA procedures (Federal 

Register, Vol. 71, No. 64, April 4, 2006). 

For example, when originally published 

in 2006 the Directive and Instruction 

did not apply to the following three 

Components of DHS: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA), Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP), and 

United States Coast Guard (USCG); 

these three Components each 

maintained their own procedures for 

implementing NEPA when the 

Department was established in 2002. 

This revision to the Directive and 

Instruction incorporates FEMA, CBP, 

and USCG into the Department’s NEPA 

procedures and addresses the full scope 

of DHS activities to which NEPA 

applies. When the updated procedures 

become effective, they will apply to all 

Components of DHS, including FEMA, 

CBP, and USCG. In addition, every 

Component will have the option of 

developing Supplemental Instructions 

to establish how that particular 

Component will meet the requirements 

of the final version of the DHS Directive 

and Instruction. In a separate yet related 

effort, FEMA will pursue rescission of 

its regulations at 44 CFR 10 and replace 

them with Supplemental Instructions 

that conform to requirements of the DHS 

Directive and Instruction. 

The requirements put forth in the 

revised Directive and Instruction 

emphasize that the NEPA process must 

be appropriately integrated into the 

performance of DHS missions and 

activities and decision making. The 

revised Directive establishes the overall 

policy that DHS will comply with 

NEPA, and the revised Instruction 

establishes the procedures for ensuring 

this compliance is implemented in an 

effective and efficient manner. The 

Instruction covers the following: 

Overview of NEPA requirements, 

including requirements for the 

preparation and content of NEPA 

documents; management of NEPA 

implementation in DHS; criteria for 

Components to obtain a delegation of 

authority to approve their respective 

NEPA reviews; public involvement; 

dispute resolution; information 

protected from public disclosure; 

procedures for emergencies; review of 

applications from persons or 

organizations outside of DHS (e.g., grant 

applications); and an identification of 

the types of DHS activities normally 

reviewed in a CATEX, Environmental 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Notices 70539 

Assessment, or Environmental Impact 

Statement. 

The CATEXs published in 2006 are 

being retained and are included in the 

Instruction (Appendix A, Table 1). In 

addition, the Instruction includes the 

following new CATEXs: One CATEX for 

an administrative activity; five CATEXs 

for real property management activities; 

13 CATEXs for non-grant activities 

unique to FEMA’s mission and 

authorities; and 19 CATEXs for federal 

assistance (e.g., grant) activities. For 

synopses of the administrative record 

support for the Department’s list of 2006 

and new CATEXs, see the docket and 

the DHS NEPA Web page at http://

www.dhs.gov/nepa. 

DHS invested over three years in 

developing the proposed revision to its 

NEPA procedures. The draft revised 

Directive and Instruction were provided 

to CEQ in the fall of 2013 for review and 

discussion prior to the June 5, 2014 

publication for public comment. DHS 

provided its proposed final revised 

Directive and Instruction to CEQ in 

early September 2014; CEQ responded 

with a letter dated November 10, 2014 

prior to this publication of the final 

Directive and Instruction as required 

under 40 CFR 1507.3(a), indicating that 

the Department’s revised procedures 

conform to NEPA and the CEQ 

regulations. 

Comments on Categorical Exclusions 

and DHS Response: 

DHS received a comment from the 

International Association of Fire Chiefs 

(IACF) regarding the proposed new 

CATEX for federally-assisted wildfire 

mitigation activities. To improve 

readability (but with no change to the 

scope), DHS revised the CATEX 

between the draft and final version to 

read as follows: 

*N11 Federal Assistance for Wildfire 

Hazard Mitigation Actions. Federal 

assistance for wildfire hazard mitigation 

actions involving the creation of 

defensible space or hazardous fuel 

reduction for up to 100 feet of at-risk 

structures which includes the selective 

removal of vegetation less than 12 

inches in diameter through thinning, 

pruning, limbing, sawing, or brush 

cutting; removal of downed, dead, or 

dry vegetation material as part of the 

overall action. 

The actions must be limited to less 

than 100 acres of vegetation removal 

either individually or when combined 

with other reasonably foreseeable 

private or public actions and follow 

appropriate best management practices. 

Although IACF was supportive of the 

draft proposed CATEX, they 

recommended removal of the 100-foot 

limit on the creation of defensible space. 

DHS supports the mission and respects 

the perspective of IACF; however, for 

the time being DHS has decided to 

retain the proposed wording of the 

CATEX. DHS relied on only a small 

number of FEMA Environmental 

Assessments (EAs) to support 

development of the new CATEX, and 

none of those EAs included a buffer 

greater than 100 feet. Without sufficient 

information from past DHS-funded 

wildfire mitigation projects that 

demonstrates that a larger buffer results 

in no potential for environmental 

impacts, DHS currently believes that a 

higher level of NEPA review and impact 

evaluation is necessary for actions 

involving more than 100 acres of 

vegetation removal. 

If, as a result of additional DHS 

reviews of wildfire mitigation projects, 

DHS is able to document and determine 

that the buffer can reasonably be 

extended because there are few to no 

environmental impacts associated with 

larger scale clearing for wildfire 

mitigation purposes, then DHS will 

consider revising the CATEX. In 

addition, DHS will work with subject 

matter experts, including IACF, to 

obtain other data that may support 

future revisions to the CATEX. 

Lastly, it is important to note that if 

proposed vegetation clearing for 

wildfire mitigation purposes is greater 

than 100 feet from a structure, DHS can 

still provide grant funding for the 

project once the appropriate level of 

environmental review has been 

conducted. 

DHS received two comments from the 

State of Arizona Game and Fish 

Department (AZGFD) regarding the 

following proposed CATEX for 

federally-assisted new construction 

activities: 

*N8 Federal Assistance for New 

Construction Activities of Less Than 

One Acre in Undisturbed or 

Undeveloped Areas. Federal assistance 

for new construction and associated site 

preparation activities in undisturbed or 

undeveloped areas when the activities 

comprise less than one acre and follow 

best management practices to control 

noise, water, and air pollution. This 

category does not apply to new 

construction in undisturbed or 

undeveloped floodplains, wetlands, or 

seaward of the limit of moderate wave 

action (or V zone when the limit of 

moderate wave action has not been 

identified). This CATEX covers the 

range of activities typically necessary for 

new construction, including field work 

(e.g.orings, site inspection) and 

temporary staging and use of 

construction equipment and vehicles. 

AZGFD’s first comment was that the 

draft proposed CATEX as written ‘‘has 

the potential to impact wildlife 

resources in undisturbed/undeveloped 

areas without appropriate direct or 

cumulative impact analysis of 

construction activities. Construction 

activities within an acre of undisturbed 

or undeveloped areas have the potential 

to result in direct take of wildlife, 

habitat fragmentation, and reduced 

landscape wildlife permeability.’’ 

AZGFD’s second comment was a 

request that DHS include ‘‘clarifying 

language that ensures cumulative 

impacts for state trust wildlife resources 

are identified for all related actions, and 

that reasonable mitigation measures are 

implemented’’ and include ‘‘Best 

Management Practices (BMPs) . . . that 

reduce impacts to wildlife including 

timing restrictions, trenching 

guidelines, fencing guidelines, etc.’’ 

In response to AZGFD’s comments on 

new CATEX N8, DHS added the 

following sentence to Section V.B(2) of 

the Instruction, which discusses how to 

appropriately apply CATEXs to 

proposed actions: ‘‘Application of a 

CATEX to a proposed action presumes 

review and compliance under other 

relevant environmental planning and 

historic preservation laws, regulations, 

and Executive Orders (e.g., National 

Historic Preservation Act, Endangered 

Species Act) has occurred, and that a 

higher level of NEPA analysis is not 

warranted as a result of any identified 

impacts to resources protected under 

those other requirements.’’ In addition, 

DHS believes it has enough data from 

past actions to justify that no significant 

cumulative impacts result from the 

clearing of plots less than one acre each. 

If DHS were to provide federal 

assistance for the clearing of multiple 

one acre plots in close proximity to each 

other, this situation would constitute an 

extraordinary circumstance that would 

prohibit use of the CATEX and would 

require a higher level of NEPA analysis. 

The list of DHS extraordinary 

circumstances is provided in Section 

V.B(2)(c) of the Instruction; these 

include a consideration of impacts to 

protected species and habitat and 

environmentally sensitive areas, and a 

consideration of whether the proposed 

action is related to other actions with 

individually insignificant, but 

cumulatively significant impacts. As to 

cumulative impacts on habitat and 

species, these will get covered in the 

ESA consultation process; 

notwithstanding the new CATEX N8, 

DHS will consult with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and relevant state 

agencies, such as AZGFD, for proposed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

70540 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Notices 

actions potentially affecting protected 

species and habitat. 

AZGFD also commented that the 

definition of Cooperating Agency 

included in Section II of the draft 

Instruction was not fully consistent with 

the CEQ definition in 40 CFR 1508.5. 

DHS agrees with AZGFD, and has 

revised the definition accordingly in the 

final Instruction. 

DHS received questions regarding the 

need for CATEXs for Congressionallymandated activities (existing USCG 

CATEXs L18 and L53, and new DHSwide CATEX C6), to which NEPA does 

not apply. When Congress mandates an 

activity, such as the transfer of DHS 

controlled real property to a nonFederal entity, DHS has no discretion 

whether or not to perform the activity; 

however, DHS may have discretion on 

some aspects of how the activity is 

executed. Therefore, DHS NEPA 

practitioners expressed the need for 

such CATEXs where DHS has some 

level of discretion and the activities 

have been determined not to have the 

potential for significant environmental 

impacts. 

Lastly, DHS received three comments 

regarding the accessibility and 

readability of the draft revised Directive 

and Instruction and supporting 

documents; namely that the Federal 

Register notice was inadequate as a 

means of communicating with 

stakeholders and the public, that 

hyperlinks to the documents should 

have been clearly identified and easily 

accessible, and that the documents were 

difficult to comprehend. The Federal 

Register and www.regulations.gov are 

widely recognized as appropriate 

sources for the public to learn about and 

comment on Federal government 

initiatives. DHS wrote the documents 

according to style guides and writing 

standards applicable to the federal 

government as well as DHS-specific 

requirements of its formal Directives 

system. All relevant documents were 

and remain available to the public on 

the Department’s NEPA Web page 

(www.dhs.gov/nepa) and on the 

www.regulations.gov Web site under 

Docket Number DHS–2013–0052. The 

June 5, 2014 Federal Register notice 

provided clear instructions to readers to 

visit these two Web sites to view the 

draft revised Directive and Instruction 

and supporting documents. 

A copy of this Federal Register 

publication and the final Directive and 

Instruction and supporting documents 

are available on the internet at 

www.regulations.gov (Docket Number 

DHS–2013–0052) and http://

www.dhs.gov/nepa. 

Teresa R. Pohlman, 

Director of Sustainability and Environmental 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27966 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

[USCG–2014–0666; OMB Control Number 

1625–0022] 

Collection of Information Under 

Review by Office of Management and 

Budget 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the 

U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding 

Information Collection Requests (ICRs), 

abstracted below, to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA), requesting approval of a 

revision to the following collection of 

information: 1625–0022, Application for 

Tonnage Measurement of Vessels. 

Review and comments by OIRA ensure 

we only impose paperwork burdens 

commensurate with our performance of 

duties. 

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast 

Guard and OIRA on or before December 

26, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number [USCG–2014–0666] to the 

Docket Management Facility (DMF) at 

the U.S. Department of Transportation 

(DOT) and/or to OIRA. To avoid 

duplicate submissions, please use only 

one of the following means: 

(1) Online: (a) To Coast Guard docket 

at http://www.regulations.gov. (b) To 

OIRA by email via: OIRA-submission@

omb.eop.gov. 

(2) Mail: (a) DMF (M–30), DOT, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. (b) To 

OIRA, 725 17th Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk 

Officer for the Coast Guard. 

(3) Hand Delivery: To DMF address 

above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The telephone number is 202– 

366–9329. 

(4) Fax: (a) To DMF, 202–493–2251. 

(b) To OIRA at 202–395–6566. To 

ensure your comments are received in a 

timely manner, mark the fax, attention 

Desk Officer for the Coast Guard. 

The DMF maintains the public docket 

for this Notice. Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents mentioned in this Notice as 

being available in the docket, will 

become part of the docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying at 

room W12–140 on the West Building 

Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 

SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. You may also 

find the docket on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Copies of the ICRs are available 

through the docket on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Additionally, copies are available from: 

COMMANDANT (CG–612), ATTN: 

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT 

MANAGER, US COAST GUARD, 2703 

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AVE SE., 

STOP 7710, WASHINGTON DC 20593– 

7710. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of 

Information Management, telephone 

202–475–3532 or fax 202–372–8405, for 

questions on these documents. Contact 

Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, 202–366–9826, for 

questions on the docket. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

This Notice relies on the authority of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 

44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An 

ICR is an application to OIRA seeking 

the approval, extension, or renewal of a 

Coast Guard collection of information 

(Collection). The ICR contains 

information describing the Collection’s 

purpose, the Collection’s likely burden 

on the affected public, an explanation of 

the necessity of the Collection, and 

other important information describing 

the Collection. There is one ICR for each 

Collection. 

The Coast Guard invites comments on 

whether these ICRs should be granted 

based on the Collection being necessary 

for the proper performance of 

Departmental functions. In particular, 

the Coast Guard would appreciate 

comments addressing: (1) The practical 

utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy 

of the estimated burden of the 

Collection; (3) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of 

information subject to the Collection; 

and (4) ways to minimize the burden of 

the Collection on respondents, 

including the use of automated 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES