Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62587 

activities and typically involves external 

scientific peer review or demonstration 

of comparable safety oversight by other 

expert U.S. Federal agencies. The 

biosafety review cannot be waived or 

delegated. 

(c) A biosafety review precludes the 

use of a categorical exclusion for the 

proposed activity. The EA or EIS for the 

activity will include the results of the 

biosafety review. 

§ 237.9 Endangered species. 

An EIS must be prepared if a 

proposed project, program, or activity 

may adversely affect a federally listed 

threatened or endangered species, or 

adversely modify its critical habitat. It is 

USAID policy to conduct its Agency 

operations in a manner that is sensitive 

to the protection of endangered or 

threatened species and their critical 

habitats. The EIS for each project, 

program or activity having an effect on 

the environment shall specifically 

determine whether the project, program 

or activity will have an effect on 

endangered or threatened species, or 

critical habitat. 

§ 237.10 Filing and publishing. 

All Draft, Final and Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statements shall 

be filed electronically with USEPA’s 

Office of Federal Activities as required 

in 40 CFR 1506.9. They must be filed no 

earlier than they are transmitted to 

Cooperating Agencies and made 

available to the public. This assures that 

the EIS is received by all interested 

parties by the time the USEPA Notice of 

Availability appears in the Federal 

Register, and therefore allows for the 

full minimum review periods prescribed 

in 40 CFR 1506.10. Such filings will be 

in collaboration with the relevant 

Bureau Environmental Officer and the 

Agency Environmental Coordinator. 

§ 237.11 Public hearings. 

(a) In most instances USAID will be 

able to gain the benefit of public 

participation in the process through 

circulation of draft scoping documents, 

draft final EAs and EISs and notice of 

public availability as set out at 40 CFR 

1506.6. However, in some cases the 

Administrator may wish to hold 

physical public hearings on a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). 

In deciding whether or not such a 

public hearing is appropriate and 

making a recommendation to the 

Administrator, heads of Bureaus or 

Independent Offices in conjunction 

with the Agency Environmental 

Coordinator should consider: 

(1) The magnitude of the proposal in 

terms of economic costs, the geographic 

area involved, and the uniqueness or 

size of commitment of the resources 

involved; 

(2) The degree of interest in the 

proposal as evidenced by requests from 

the public and from Federal, state and 

local authorities, and private 

organizations and individuals, that a 

hearing be held; 

(3) The complexity of the issue and 

likelihood that information will be 

presented at the hearing which will be 

of assistance to the Agency; and 

(4) The extent to which public 

involvement already has been achieved 

through other means, Such as earlier 

public hearings, meetings with citizen 

representatives, and/or written 

comments on the proposed action. 

(b) If public hearings are held, the 

documents to be discussed should be 

made available to the public at least 

fifteen (15) days prior to the time of the 

public hearings, and a notice will be 

placed in the Federal Register giving 

the subject, time and place of the 

proposed hearings. To the extent 

possible, such public hearings shall be 

held in the local community or 

jurisdiction where the action is 

proposed. 

§ 237.12 Records and reports. 

Agency Bureaus and Independent 

Offices will maintain copies of finalized 

NEPA compliance documents and 

approved decision documents as part of 

the official project files, and make them 

freely available to the public by posting 

them on the Agency’s internet pages. To 

the extent any national security 

classified information or procurement 

sensitive information is included, those 

portions will be redacted before making 

such documents available to the public. 

Angelique M. Crumbly, 

Agency Regulatory Official, U.S. Agency for 

International Development. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24828 Filed 10–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

25 CFR Parts 81 and 82 

[BIA–2014–0006; K00103 12/13 A3A10; 

134D0102DR–DS5A300000– 

DR.5A311.IA000113] 

RIN 1076–AE93 

Secretarial Election Procedures 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of tribal consultation 

meetings. 

SUMMARY: This document announces 

tribal consultation meetings on the 

proposed rule amending regulations 

governing Secretarial elections and 

petitioning procedures. 

DATES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document 

for dates of the tribal consultation 

meetings. 

ADDRESSES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document 

for addresses of the tribal consultation 

meetings. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of 

Tribal Government Services, Central 

Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs at 

telephone (202) 513–7641. Individuals 

who use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service at 1 (800) 

877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 9, 2014, we published a 

proposed rule amending 25 CFR parts 

81 (Secretarial Elections) and 82 

(Petitioning Procedures), combining 

them into one Code of Federal 

Regulations part at 25 CFR part 81. See 

79 FR 61021. The proposed rule is 

available at: http://www.bia.gov/

WhoWeAre/AS–IA/ORM/SecElections/

index.htm. 

We will be hosting the following 

tribal consultations sessions on this 

proposed rule: 

Date Time Location Venue 

Sunday, October 26, 2014 .. 1:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m. (Local 

time).

Atlanta, GA ........................ National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) Annual 

Convention, Hyatt Regency Atlanta, 265 Peachtree 

St. NE., Atlanta, GA 30303. 

Tuesday, November 18, 

2014.

8:30 a.m.–12:00 p.m. 

(Local time).

Oklahoma City, OK ........... Embassy Suites Oklahoma City Airport, 1815 S. Meridian Ave., Oklahoma City, OK 73108. 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
62588 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Date Time Location Venue 

Thursday, November 20, 

2014.

8:30 a.m.–12:00 p.m. 

(Local time).

Rocklin, CA ........................ Whitney Oaks Golf Club, 2305 Clubhouse Drive, 

Rocklin, CA 95765. 

Dated: October 15, 2014. 

Lawrence Roberts, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24906 Filed 10–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4J–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

41 CFR Parts 300–3, 301–10, and 301– 

70 

[FTR Case 2014–302; Docket 2014–0014, 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 3090–AJ48 

Federal Travel Regulation; 

Enhancement of Privately Owned 

Vehicle and Rental Vehicle Policy 

AGENCY: Office of Government-wide 

Policy (OGP), General Services 

Administration (GSA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: GSA is proposing to amend 

the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) by 

requiring agencies to have an internal 

policy for determining whether to 

authorize a privately owned vehicle 

(POV), as opposed to a rental car, in 

conjunction with temporary duty travel 

(TDY). Further, GSA proposes to specify 

that travelers, who have been authorized 

to travel via common carrier or rental 

car, and choose to use a POV instead, 

will be reimbursed at the applicable 

POV mileage rate. Also, this amendment 

proposes to add specific provisions 

addressing the type of rental vehicles 

travelers must use, as well as pre-paid 

refueling options and other rental car 

surcharges. Finally, this amendment 

proposes to make certain miscellaneous 

corrections, where applicable. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat at one of the addresses 

shown below on or before December 19, 

2014 to be considered in the formation 

of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by FTR Case 2014–302 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portals: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Submit 

comments via the Federal eRulemaking 

portal by searching for ‘‘FTR Case 2014– 

302.’’ Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ 

that corresponds with ‘‘FTR Case 2014– 

302’’ and follow the instructions 

provided at the screen. Please include 

your name, company name (if any), and 

‘‘FTR Case 2014–302’’ on your attached 

document. 

• Fax: 202–208–1398. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), Attn. Ms. Hada Flowers, 1800 

F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FTR Case 2014–302 in all 

correspondence related to this case. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

clarification of content, contact Mr. Cy 

Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of 

Government-wide Policy, at 202–219– 

2349. Contact the Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755, 

for information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules. Please cite FTR 

case 2014–302. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The FTR already provides for 

determining when the use of a POV or 

rental vehicle in conjunction with TDY 

could be advantageous to the 

Government (see FTR Part 301–10, 

Subparts D and E, and Part 301–70, 

Subpart B). The FTR also advises that 

when using a rental vehicle, travelers 

should consider renting a vehicle from 

a vendor that participates in the Defense 

Travel Management Office’s (DTMO) 

U.S. Government Car Rental Agreement 

to avail themselves of the Agreement’s 

benefits (see FTR section 301–10.450). It 

has been determined that more specific 

guidance regarding the use of POVs and 

rental cars will save agencies money 

when authorizing employees to travel. 

This proposed rule provides that 

agencies must have an internal policy 

for determining whether to authorize a 

POV, as opposed to a rental car, in 

conjunction with TDY. Additionally, 

GSA proposes specifying that travelers 

who have been authorized by their 

agencies to travel via common carrier or 

rental car, and choose to use a POV 

instead, will be reimbursed at the 

applicable POV mileage rate up to the 

constructive cost of the authorized 

mode of transportation plus per diem. 

Further, this amendment proposes that 

travelers who are authorized to use a 

rental car in conjunction with TDY must 

use the least expensive compact car 

available. This amendment also 

proposes that travelers will not be 

reimbursed for pre-paid refueling 

options for rental cars. Moreover, this 

amendment proposes that agencies may 

not reimburse travelers surcharges 

involved when rental car companies 

purchase miles from airlines and 

provide those miles to their vehicle 

customers. Finally, this amendment also 

proposes to make certain miscellaneous 

corrections, where applicable. 

B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives, and if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. This proposed rule is not a 

significant regulatory action, and 

therefore, was not subject to review 

under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, dated 

September 30, 1993. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. This 

proposed rule is also exempt from the 

Administrative Procedure Act pursuant 

to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) because it applies 

to agency management or personnel. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the proposed changes 

to the FTR do not impose recordkeeping 

or information collection requirements, 

or the collection of information from 

offerors, contractors, or members of the 

public that require the approval of the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

E. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

This proposed rule is also exempt 

from Congressional review prescribed 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS