Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 1999 / Notices 26465

to alleviate the regulatory constraint that

appears to have led to the less than

optimal practice, described above, for

transporting SNM waste to Envirocare.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

Envirocare is licensed by the State of

Utah, an NRC Agreement State, under a

10 CFR Part 61 equivalent license for

the disposal of LLW. Envirocare is also

licensed by Utah to dispose of mixedradioactive and hazardous wastes. In

addition, Envirocare has an NRC license

(SMC–1559) to dispose of waste

containing 11(e)2 byproduct material.

NRC has prepared an environmental

impact statement (EIS) (NUREG–1476),

SERs, and environmental assessments

(EAs) for its licensing action. The State

of Utah, in support of its licensing

activities, has also prepared SERs. The

proposed actions now under

consideration would not change the

potential environmental effects assessed

in these documents.

The regulations regarding SNM

possession in 10 CFR part 150 set mass

limits whereby a licensee is exempted

from the licensing requirements of 10

CFR part 70 and can be regulated by an

Agreement State. The licensing

requirements in 10 CFR part 70 apply to

persons possessing greater than critical

mass quantities (as defined in 10 CFR

150.11). The principal emphasis of 10

CFR part 70 is criticality safety and

safeguarding SNM against diversion or

sabotage. The NRC staff considers that

criticality safety can be maintained by

relying on concentration limits, under

the specified conditions. These

concentration limits are considered an

alternative definition of quantities not

sufficient to form a critical mass to the

weight limits in 10 CFR 150.11; thereby,

assuring the same level of protection.

Therefore, the NRC concludes that

this proposed exemption will have no

significant radiological or

nonradiological environmental impacts.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

The NRC staff considered two

alternatives to the proposed action. One

alternative to the proposed action would

be to not grant the exemption (no-action

alternative); therefore, increased

handling of SNM waste would continue

to occur in Salt Lake City, Utah, and at

a nearby industrial site. Although the

incremental dose increase to

transportation workers and to the public

may be small, it is greater than if the

shipments continued to the site via rail.

The current practice is considered less

desirable.

Another alternative would be to grant

the exemption without condition. This

option would not provide sufficient

protection of health, safety, and the

environment.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

Officials from the State of Utah,

Department of Environmental Quality,

Division of Radiation Control were

contacted about this EA for the

proposed action and had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The environmental impacts of the

proposed action have been reviewed in

accordance with the requirements set

forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based upon the

foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the

proposed action of granting an

exemption from NRC licensing

requirements in 10 CFR Part 70 will not

significantly impact the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

NRC has decided not to prepare an EIS

for the proposed exemption.

For Further Information Contact:

Timothy E. Harris, Decommissioning

Branch, Division of Waste Management,

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001. Telephone: (301) 415–6613. Fax.:

(301) 415–5398.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day

of May 1999.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John T. Greeves,

Director, Division of Waste Management,

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 99–12241 Filed 5–13–99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY

CORPORATION

Interest Assumption for Determining

Variable-Rate Premium; Interest

Assumptions for Multiemployer Plan

Valuations Following Mass Withdrawal

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of interest rates and

assumptions.

SUMMARY: This notice informs the public

of the interest rates and assumptions to

be used under certain Pension Benefit

Guaranty Corporation regulations. These

rates and assumptions are published

elsewhere (or are derivable from rates

published elsewhere), but are collected

and published in this notice for the

convenience of the public. Interest rates

are also published on the PBGC’s web

site (http://www.pbgc.gov).

DATES: The interest rate for determining

the variable-rate premium under part

4006 applies to premium payment years

beginning in May 1999. The interest

assumptions for performing

multiemployer plan valuations

following mass withdrawal under part

4281 apply to valuation dates occurring

in June 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General

Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,

1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC

20005, 202–326–4024. (For TTY/TDD

users, call the Federal relay service tollfree at 1–800–877–8339 and ask to be

connected to 202–326–4024.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Variable-Rate Premiums

Section 4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II) of the

Employee Retirement Income Security

Act of 1974 (ERISA) and § 4006.4(b)(1)

of the PBGC’s regulation on Premium

Rates (29 CFR part 4006) prescribe use

of an assumed interest rate in

determining a single-employer plan’s

variable-rate premium. The rate is the

‘‘applicable percentage’’ (currently 85

percent) of the annual yield on 30-year

Treasury securities for the month

preceding the beginning of the plan year

for which premiums are being paid (the

‘‘premium payment year’’). The yield

figure is reported in Federal Reserve

Statistical Releases G.13 and H.15.

The assumed interest rate to be used

in determining variable-rate premiums

for premium payment years beginning

in May 1999 is 4.72 percent (i.e., 85

percent of the 5.55 percent yield figure

for April 1999).

The following table lists the assumed

interest rates to be used in determining

variable-rate premiums for premium

payment years beginning between June

1998 and May 1999.

For premium payment years

beginning in:

The assumed interest rate is:

June 1998 ................................. 5.04

July 1998 .................................. 4.85

August 1998 ............................. 4.83

September 1998 ....................... 4.71

October 1998 ............................ 4.42

November 1998 ........................ 4.26

December 1998 ........................ 4.46

January 1999 ............................ 4.30

February 1999 .......................... 4.39

March 1999 ............................... 4.56

April 1999 ................................. 4.74

May 1999 .................................. 4.72

Multiemployer Plan Valuations

Following Mass Withdrawal

The PBGC’s regulation on Duties of

Plan Sponsor Following Mass

Withdrawal (29 CFR part 4281)

prescribes the use of interest
26466 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 1999 / Notices

1New England Funds Trust I, et al., Investment

Company Act Release Nos. 22796 (Aug. 22, 1997)

(notice) and 22824 (Sept. 17, 1997) (order).

assumptions under the PBGC’s

regulation on Allocation of Assets in

Single-employer Plans (29 CFR part

4044). The interest assumptions

applicable to valuation dates in June

1999 under part 4044 are contained in

an amendment to part 4044 published

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register.

Tables showing the assumptions

applicable to prior periods are codified

in appendix B to 29 CFR part 4044.

Issued in Washington, DC, on this 10th day

of May 1999.

David M. Strauss,

Executive Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 99–12174 Filed 5–13–99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7708–01–P

PRESIDIO TRUST

Notice of Receipt of and Availability for

Public Comment on an Application for

Wireless Telecommunications

Facilities Site; The Presidio of San

Francisco, California

AGENCY: The Presidio Trust.

ACTION: Public notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

Presidio Trust’s receipt of and

availability for public comment on an

application from Bay Area Cellular

Telephone Company, dba Cellular One,

for a wireless telecommunications

facilities site in The Presidio of San

Francisco (the ‘‘Project’’). The proposed

location of the Project is in the vicinity

of Buildings 1211 and 1255, Armistead

and Hoffman Streets, San Francisco,

California (the ‘‘Project Site’’).

The Project involves placing two

wooden utility poles and a one-story

equipment building at the Project Site.

One of the wooden utility poles will be

approximately 50 feet tall and the other

will be approximately 40 feet tall. The

one-story equipment building will be 9

feet by 15 feet. Power for the Project will

be from underground coaxial cables

connected to existing power sources.

Connection to telephone lines will be

through existing telephone lines.

Comments: Comments on the

proposed Project must be sent to Devon

Danz, Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street,

P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA

94129–0052, and be received by June

14, 1999. A copy of Cellular One’s

application is available upon request to

the Presidio Trust.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Devon Danz, Presidio Trust, 34 Graham

Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco,

CA 94129–0052. Telephone: 415–561–

5300.

Dated: May 10, 1999.

Karen A. Cook,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 99–12317 Filed 5–13–99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–4R–U

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No.

23829; 812–11232]

New England Funds Trust I, et al,;

Notice of Application

May 10, 1999.

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘SEC’’).

ACTION: Notice of application for an

order under section 6(c) of the

Investment Company Act of 1940 (the

‘‘Act’’) to amend a prior order that

granted an exemption from section 15(a)

of the Act and rule 18f–2 Under the Act.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants

request an order amending a prior order

that permits them to enter into and

materially amend investment subadvisory contracts without receiving

shareholder approval (‘‘Prior Order’’).1

APPLICANTS: New England Funds Trust I,

New England Funds Trust II, New

England Funds Trust III, New England

Cash Management Trust, New England

Tax Exempt Money Market Trust (the

‘‘New England Funds’’), New England

Zenith Fund (the ‘‘Zenith Fund’’)

(together with the New England Funds,

the ‘‘Trusts’’) New England Funds

Management, L.P. (‘‘NEFEM’’), and TNE

Advisers, Inc. (‘‘TNE Advisers’’).

FILING DATES: The application was filed

on July 24, 1998, and amended on

December 2, 1998, and on March 4,

1999. Applicants have agreed to file an

amendment during the notice period,

the substance of which is included in

this notice.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An

order granting the requested relief will

be issued unless the SEC orders a

hearing. Interested persons may request

a hearing by writing to the SEC’s

Secretary and serving applicants with a

copy of the request, personally or by

mail. Hearing requests should be

received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on

June 3, 1999 and should be

accompanied by proof of service on the

applicants, in the form of an affidavit or,

for lawyers, a certificate of service.

Hearing requests should state the nature

of the writer’s interest, the reason for the

request. and the issues contested.

Persons may request notification of a

hearing by writing to the SEC’s

Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 5th

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549–

0609. Applicants, 399 Boylston Street,

4th Floor, Boston, MA 02116.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at (202)

942–0564 (Division of Investment

Management, Office of Investment

Company Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following is a summary of the

application. The complete application

may be obtained for a fee from the

SAC’s Public Reference Branch, 450 5th

Street, N.W., Washington, DC, 20549–

0102 (tel. 202–942–8090).

Applicants’ Representations

1. The Trusts are open-end

management investment companies

registered under the Act. The Zenith

Fund serves as a funding vehicle for

certain variable annuity and variable life

insurance products is sued by

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company,

and its subsidiary, New England Life

Insurance Company.

2. NEFM and TNE Advisers are

registered as investment advisers under

the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

NEFM serves as investment adviser to

each of the New England Funds, except

the New England Growth Fund Series.

TNE Advisers serves as investment

adviser for each series of the Zenith

Fund, except the Capital Growth Series.

3. Each series of each of the New

England Funds (except the New

England Growth Fund Series) and of the

Zenith Fund (except the Capital Growth

Series) (together, the ‘‘Series’’) utilizes

an adviser/sub-adviser management

structure. Under this structure, either

NEFM or TNE Advisers acts as each

Series’ investment adviser, delegating

the day-to-day portfolio management for

each Series to one or more sub-advisers.

4. On September 17, 1997, applicants

received the Prior Order permitting

NEFM and TNE Advisers to enter into

sub-advisory agreements for the Series

without obtaining shareholder approval.

Among other things, the Prior Order is

subject to a condition that requires that

a notice, in the form of an information

statement, be sent to shareholders

following the hiring of a new subadviser or the implementation of a

material change to a sub-advisory

agreement. Applicants seek to amend

the Prior Order to preserve the

requirement to provide notice to

shareholders regarding the hiring of a

new sub-adviser, but eliminate the