Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Notices 62307

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–263] 

Nuclear Management Company, LLC; 

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, 

Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an exemption from the 

requirements of title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR), part 50, 

Appendix R, Section III.G.2.b for 

Facility Operating License No. DPR–22, 

issued to Nuclear Management 

Company, LLC (NMC), for operation of 

the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 

(MNGP), located in Wright County, 

Minnesota. Therefore, as required by 10 

CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would authorize 

a permanent exemption from the 

requirements of 10 CFR part 50, 

Appendix R, Section III.G.2.b, as it 

applies to Fire Area IX/Fire Zone 23A, 

the intake structure pump room at 

MNGP. The proposed action is in 

accordance with NMC’s exemption 

request of November 17, 2003, as 

supplemented July 16, 2004. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

NMC requested this exemption from 

the requirement to separate cables and 

equipment and associated non-safety 

circuits of redundant trains by a 

horizontal distance of more than 20 feet 

with no intervening combustibles or fire 

hazards. NMC indicated that although 

redundant safe shutdown components 

and cables within this fire zone are 

separated by more than 20 feet, 

permanent intervening combustibles or 

fire hazards exist within the separating 

space. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC staff reviewed NMC’s 

exemption request and will issue a 

safety evaluation documenting its 

review. The NRC staff analyzed the 

following items in the intake structure 

pump room at MNGP to satisfy the 

requirements of 10 CFR 50.12 for 

granting the exemption from the 

automatic suppression system 

requirements of Appendix R, Section 

III.G.2.b: 

• Safe shutdown equipment. 

• Fixed and transient combustibles. 

• Chemical hazards. 

• Existing fire protection features. 

• Intervening combustibles. 

• Impact of Regulatory Issue 

Summary 2004–03, ‘‘Risk-Informed 

Approach for Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown 

Associated Circuit Inspections,’’ dated 

March 2, 2004. 

The following attributes of the intake 

structure pump room at MNGP 

supported the NRC staff’s basis for 

approval of the requested exemption: 

• Greater than 20 feet of separation 

exists between redundant safe 

shutdown components and cables. 

• Early-warning ionization detection, 

installed above the residual heat 

removal service water (SW) and SW 

pumps, provides an alarm to the control 

room. 

• Activation of the pre-action valve 

via the thermal detectors results in a 

‘‘system actuated’’ signal to the control 

room. 

• Transient combustibles and hot 

work in the area are administratively 

controlled. 

• The fire load in the zone satisfies 

the criteria for a low fire load 

designation. 

The NRC staff concluded that the 

requested exemption for Fire Area IX/

Fire Zone 23A provided reasonable 

assurance that one train of redundant 

safe shutdown equipment would remain 

free of fire damage. This is the 

equivalent of meeting the requirements 

of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Section 

III.G.2.b, since the underlying purpose 

of Section III.G.2.b is to assure that one 

train of redundant safe shutdown 

equipment will be maintained free of 

fire damage. 

The details of the NRC staff’s safety 

evaluation will be provided in the 

exemption that will be issued as part of 

the letter to NMC approving the 

exemption to the regulation. 

The proposed action will not 

significantly increase the probability or 

consequences of accidents. No changes 

are being made in the types of effluents 

that may be released off site. There is no 

significant increase in the amount of 

effluent being released offsite. There is 

no significant increase in occupational 

or public radiation exposure. Therefore, 

there are no significant radiological 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. 

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 

action does not have a potential to affect 

any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 

other environmental impact. Therefore, 

there are no significant non-radiological 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

action, the staff considered denial of the 

proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’

alternative). Denial of the application 

would result in no change in current 

environmental impacts. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action and the alternative action are 

similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resource than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for Monticello 

dated November 1972. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

On October 15, 2004, the staff 

consulted with the Minnesota State 

official, Nancy Campbell of the 

Department of Commerce, regarding the 

environmental impact of the proposed 

action. The State official had no 

comments. 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the environmental 

assessment, the NRC concludes that the 

proposed action will not have a 

significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment. Accordingly, the 

NRC has determined not to prepare an 

environmental impact statement for the 

proposed action. 

For further details with respect to the 

proposed action, see NMC’s exemption 

request of November 17, 2003, as 

supplemented July 16, 2004. Documents 

may be examined, and/or copied for a 

fee, at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 

North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. Publicly available records 

will be accessible electronically from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–

397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or by e-mail 

to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day 

of October 2004.

62308 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Notices 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3See Letter from Bill Floyd-Jones, Counsel, 

Exchange, to Nancy Sanow, Assistant Director, 

Division of Market Regulation (‘‘Division’’), 

Commission, dated May 7, 2004 (‘‘Amendment No. 

1’’). In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified 

the proposed rule language, and provided 

additional explanation in the purpose section of the 

proposed rule change.

4See Letter from Bill Floyd-Jones, Counsel, 

Exchange, to Nancy Sanow, Assistant Director, 

Division, Commission, dated June 7, 2004 

(‘‘Amendment No. 2’’). In Amendment No. 2, the 

Exchange added a definition of ‘‘bona fide hedge’’

to the text of the proposed rule change. In 

Amendment No. 2, the Exchange also reprinted 

pages 33–35 of Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

15533 (January 29, 1979) as proposed Commentary 

.13 to the text of the proposed rule change.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

L. Raghavan, 

Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate III, 

Division of Licensing Project Management, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 04–23790 Filed 10–22–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–50552; File No. SR–Amex–

2004–25] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice 

of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change 

and Amendments No. 1 and No. 2 

Thereto by the American Stock 

Exchange LLC Relating to Revisions to 

Amex Rule 111

October 15, 2004. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on April 28, 

2004, the American Stock Exchange LLC 

(‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed 

rule change described in Items I, II, and 

III below, which Items have been 

prepared by the Exchange. On May 10, 

2004, the Exchange submitted 

Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule 

change.3 On June 8, 2004, the Exchange 

submitted Amendment No. 2 to the 

proposed rule change.4 The Commission 

is publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change, 

as amended, from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Amex Rule 111. The text of the 

proposed rule change appears below. 

Proposed new language is in italics.

* * * * *

Restrictions on Registered Traders 

Rule 111. (a) Registered Traders who 

wish to initiate purchases or sales while 

on the Floor for accounts in which they 

have an interest shall not: 

(1) Congregate in a particular stock; or 

(2) Individually or as a group, 

intentionally or unintentionally, 

dominate the market in a particular 

stock; or 

(3) Effect such purchases or sales 

except in a reasonable and orderly 

manner; or 

(4) Be conspicuous in the general 

market or in the market in a particular 

stock. 

(b) No Registered Trader shall effect, 

on the Floor of the Exchange, for an 

account in which he has an interest, 

‘‘long’’ purchases of stock above the 

previous day’s closing price on ‘‘plus’’

or ‘‘zero plus’’ ticks, except for ‘‘zero 

plus’’ tick purchases on the bid. 

(c) No Registered Trader shall effect, 

on the Floor of the Exchange, a 

transaction for an account in which he 

has an interest and execute as broker an 

off-Floor order in the same stock during 

the same trading session. 

(d) No Registered Trader shall, in 

establishing or increasing a position for 

an account in which he has an interest, 

while on the Floor of the Exchange, 

retain priority over an off-Floor order. 

(e) Registered Traders shall meet the 

following stabilization tests, to be 

computed on a monthly basis: 

(1) 75 percent measured by the tick 

test on the acquisition side. 

(2) 75 percent measured by the tick 

test on the liquidation side except 

where the liquidating transaction is at a 

loss of not less than the minimum price 

variation calculated on a ‘‘first in, first 

out’’ (FIFO) basis. Transactions, which 

are non-stabilizing, effected at such a 

loss, will not be counted in computing 

the stabilizing percentage. 

(3) Under the tick test, purchases on 

‘‘minus’’ and ‘‘zero minus’’ ticks and 

sales on ‘‘plus’’ and ‘‘zero plus’’ ticks 

are stabilizing. 

(f) The provisions of the foregoing 

paragraphs of this Rule and of Rule 110 

shall not apply to: 

(1) Any transaction by a registered 

specialist in a security in which he is so 

registered; or 

(2) Any transaction for the account of 

an odd-lot dealer in a security in which 

he is so registered; or 

(3) Any stabilizing transaction 

effected in compliance with Rule 10b-7 

under the Securities Exchange Act of 

1934 to facilitate a distribution of a 

security in which a member is 

participating; or 

(4) Any bona fide arbitrage 

transaction; or

(5) Any transaction, other than a 

transaction for an account in which a 

Registered Trader has an interest, made 

with the prior approval of a Floor 

Official to permit a member to 

contribute to the maintenance of a fair 

and orderly market in a security, or any 

purchase or sale to reverse any such 

transaction; or 

(6) Any transaction to offset a 

transaction made in error. 

(g) Members may initiate transactions 

in bonds while on the Floor, and the 

provisions of Rule 110 and of 

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this Rule 

shall not apply to such transactions. 

(h) Specialists registered in rights 

may, while on the Floor, initiate 

transactions in a security which is the 

subject of the rights for the purpose of 

acquiring or liquidating a bona fide 

hedge position against the rights, and 

the provisions of Rule 110 and of 

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this Rule 

shall not apply to such transactions. 

(i) Subject to Rule 175, equity 

specialists may, while on the Floor, 

initiate transactions in any security 

overlying a security in which they are 

registered for the purpose of acquiring 

or liquidating a bona fide hedge 

position, and the provisions of Rules 

110 and 111(a) through (e) (as made 

applicable to options by Rule 950(a) and 

(c)) and Rule 958 shall not apply to such 

transactions. Option specialists may, 

while on the Floor, initiate transactions 

in any security underlying a security in 

which they are registered for the 

purpose of acquiring or liquidating a 

bona fide hedge position, and the 

provisions of Rule 110 and of 

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this Rule 

shall not apply to such transactions. 

Registered Options Traders may, while 

on the Floor, initiate transactions in any 

security underlying a security in which 

they are acting as a market maker 

pursuant to Rule 958 for the purpose of 

acquiring or liquidating a bona fide 

hedge position, and the provisions of 

Rule 110 and of paragraphs (a) through 

(e) of this Rule shall not apply to such 

transactions. The term ‘‘bona fide 

hedge’’ shall have the meaning ascribed 

to it in Securities Exchange Act Rule 

11a1–3(T) and pages 33–35 of Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 15533 

(January 29, 1979). Pages 33–35 of 

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

15533 are reprinted in Commentary .13 

to this Rule.

* * * Commentary 

.01–.12—no change. 

.13 The following is a reprint of pages 

33 through 35 of Securities Exchange 

Act Release No. 15533 (January 29, 

1979):