### 36532 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 117 / Tuesday, June 18, 2013 / Notices

from the pile, respectively. No other pinniped haulout site exists in the vicinity of the proposed project area. Therefore, pinnipeds hauled out at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard security barrier will not be affected.

For the reasons discussed in this document, NMFS has determined that the impact of vibratory pile removal and pile driving associated with wingwall replacements at Bremerton Ferry Terminal would result, at worst, in the Level B harassment of small numbers of six marine mammals that inhabit or visit the area. While behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating the area around the construction site, may be made by these species to avoid the resultant visual and acoustic disturbance, the availability of alternate areas within Washington coastal waters and haul-out sites has led NMFS to determine that this action will have a negligible impact on these species in the vicinity of the proposed construction area.

In addition, no take by TTS, Level A harassment or death is anticipated and harassment takes should be at the lowest level practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation and monitoring measures mentioned previously in this document. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) and analyzed the potential impacts to marine mammals that would result from WSDOT’s wingwalls replacement work at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed on June 10, 2013. A copy of the EA and FONSI is available upon request (see **ADDRESSES**). Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The humpback whale, Southern Resident stock of killer whale, and the eastern population of Steller sea lions, are the only marine mammal species currently listed under the ESA that could occur in the vicinity of WSDOT’s construction projects. NMFS’ Permits and Conservation Division consulted with NMFS’ Northwest Regional Office Division of Protected Resources under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of an IHA to WSDOT under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this activity. A Biological Opinion was issued on February 19, 2013, which concludes that issuance of the IHA is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the ESA-listed marine mammal species. NMFS will issue an Incidental Take Statement under this Biological Opinion which contains reasonable and prudent measures with implementing terms and conditions to minimize the effects of take of listed species.

Authorization

NMFS has issued an IHA to WSDOT for the potential harassment of small numbers of six marine mammal species incidental to wingwalls replacement construction activities at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal in Washington State, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

Dated: June 12, 2013. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2013–14494 Filed 6–17–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3510–22–P**

**BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION** 

**[Docket No: CFPB–2013–0015]**

**Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB**  **Review; Comment Request**

**AGENCY :**  Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

**ACTION :**  Notice and request for comment.

**SUMMARY :**  In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) is proposing a new information collection, titled, ‘‘Policy to Encourage Trial Disclosure Programs: Information Collection.’’

**DATES :**  Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before July 18, 2013 to be assured of consideration.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

• Electronic: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.

Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will be posted without change to regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or social security numbers, should not be included. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.reginfo.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435–9575, or email: CFPB

_Public

_PRA@cfpb.gov. Please do not submit comments to this email box.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Title: Policy to Encourage Trial Disclosure Programs: Information Collection.

OMB Control Number: 3170–XXXX. Type of Review: New collection; request for new OMB control number.

Affected Public: Private Sector (Certain businesses offering consumer financial services or products that meet the definition of ‘‘covered person’’under Section 1002(6) of the DoddFrank Act, as well as third-parties, such as trade associations, that may coordinate the submission of information by covered persons).

Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 10.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 100.

Abstract: In subsection 1032(e) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5532(e), Congress gave the Bureau authority to provide certain legal protections to companies to conduct trial disclosure programs. This authority can be used to help further the Bureau’s statutory objective, stated in subsection 1021(b)(5) of the Act, to ‘‘facilitate access and innovation’’ in the ‘‘markets for consumer financial products and services.’’

Request for Comments: The Bureau issued a 60-day Federal Register notice on December 17, 2012, 77 FR 74625. Comments were solicited and continue to be invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Bureau’s estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and the assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.


### 36533 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 117 / Tuesday, June 18, 2013 / Notices

Dated: June 13, 2013. Matthew Burton, Acting Chief Information Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

[FR Doc. 2013–14488 Filed 6–17–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P**

**CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE** 

**Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request** 

**AGENCY :**  Corporation for National and Community Service.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled the Senior Corps Progress Report (PPR) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104–13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Wanda Carney, at (202) 606–6934 or email to wcarney@cns.gov. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY–TDD) may call 1–800– 833–3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service, by any of the following two methods within 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register:

(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974, Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service; or

(2) By email to: smar@omb.eop.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments

A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2012. This comment period ended on February 10, 2013. A total of 99 public comments were received from this Notice. Summary of Comments by Category and CNCS Response

Category 1: Statements of Support for a PPR Update. A total of 26 comments included statements of support for an updated PPR: Nineteen commenters support updating the PPR to align with new performance measures and 7 commenters shared that the PPR is a valuable reporting tool.

Response: CNCS agrees with the need to align the PPR with new performance measures and also the overall value of the PPR.

Category 2: Burden. CNCS received 72 comments citing semi-annual reporting will increase reporting burden, and that CNCS should retain an annual reporting cycle. Nineteen comments stated that a semi-annual PPR would take too much time away from other project management responsibilities. Four of the 19 comments specifically noted that grantee time is needed to shift service activities to new National Performance Measures or to focus on RSVP Competition. Eight of the 19 comments noted that a Senior Corps project director’s time and project management abilities are already stretched due to recent budget cuts which have resulted in reduced staff time and reduced travel budgets

Response: CNCS recognizes the time needed to support other Senior Corps project management responsibilities, and agree that requesting a full PPR every six months does not result in benefits that outweigh the additional administrative burden imposed. CNCS proposes the following refinements to semi-annual reporting: Only grantees that have adopted the new standard performance measures will be required to report semi-annually. These grantees comprise 33 percent of the Senior Corps portfolio in FY 2013; 66 percent in FY 2014; and 100 percent in FY 2015. The increase in percentage is due to the phased in approach of the required performance measures. In this way, grantees not yet operating under the performance measures requirements will retain their original annual reporting cycle until the time that they compete for a new grant (RSVP only) or submit a renewal for a new grant (FGP and SCP only).

CNCS will require only demographic and performance measure output data reports on the mid-year PPR, rather than the full PPR. Completing only the sections that address the performance and results will provide the data needed by CNCS to gauge progress, but will abbreviate the mid-year PPR submission.

Category 3: Lack of useful data to justify increase in burden. A total of 26 comments stated that a semi-annual PPR is unnecessary because performance measure data includes an annual target. Thus, a semi-annual report would not yield useful data. Eighteen of these comments stated that information reported on a semi-annual PPR would unfairly be used as a measure towards progress on achieving final targets. Two of the comments stated that commenters believed CNCS would not use the data reported.

Response: CNCS recognizes that performance measure targets are a goal to be achieved at the end of a 12-month period. However, information reported on a semi-annual PPR provides information used to determine whether the project is on track to achieve the target on time. The data will be used to determine adequate progress during the project period to assess whether an administrative renewal or competition is the appropriate next step for RSVPprojects. The data submitted at the midpoint each year will also allow CNCS to access data needed for key documents, such as the Congressional Budget Submission.

Category 4: Burden on volunteer stations, which are the organizations where the volunteers are placed. A total of 15 comments expressed concern about an additional reporting burden on volunteer stations. One comment stated that the project would be at risk of losing volunteer stations due to an increased reporting burden. Two comments cited technology issues at the volunteer stations may present challenges to gathering reporting information from volunteer stations.

Response: CNCS recognizes the potential increase in volunteer station burden due to additional reporting. Rather than asking for a full PPR to be submitted every six months, CNCS will compromise with a requirement for only demographic and output information to be reported on the six-month PPR.