43170 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices 

June 9, 2009, as supplemented by letter 

dated July 31, 2009. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is needed to 

provide the licensee with additional 

time to perform the required upgrades to 

the FNP security system due to resource 

and logistical impacts of the spring 2010 

Unit 2 and fall 2010 Unit 1 refueling 

outages and other factors. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC has completed its 

environmental assessment of the 

proposed exemption. The staff has 

concluded that the proposed action to 

extend the implementation deadline 

would not significantly affect plant 

safety and would not have a significant 

adverse effect on the probability of an 

accident occurring. The proposed action 

would not result in an increased 

radiological hazard beyond those 

previously analyzed. There will be no 

change to radioactive effluents that 

effect radiation exposures to plant 

workers and members of the public. The 

proposed action does not involve a 

change to plant buildings or land areas 

on the FNP site. Therefore, no changes 

or different types of radiological impacts 

are expected as a result of the proposed 

exemption. 

The proposed action does not result 

in changes to land use or water use, or 

result in changes to the quality or 

quantity of non-radiological effluents. 

No changes to the National Pollution 

Discharge Elimination System permit 

are needed. No effects on the aquatic or 

terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the 

plant, or to threatened, endangered, or 

protected species under the Endangered 

Species Act, or impacts to essential fish 

habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no 

impacts to the air or ambient air quality. 

There are no impacts to historical and 

cultural resources. There would be no 

impact to socioeconomic resources. 

Therefore, no changes to or different 

types of non-radiological environmental 

impacts are expected as a result of the 

proposed exemption. Accordingly, the 

NRC concludes that there are no 

significant environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed action. 

With its request to extend the 

implementation deadline, the licensee 

has proposed compensatory measures to 

be taken in lieu of full compliance with 

the new requirements specified in 10 

CFR part 73. The licensee currently 

maintains a security system acceptable 

to the NRC and the proposed 

compensatory measures will continue to 

provide acceptable physical protection 

of the FNP in lieu of the new 

requirements in 10 CFR part 73. 

Therefore, the extension of the 

implementation date of the new 

requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to 

December 15, 2010, would not have any 

significant environmental impacts. 

The NRC staff’s safety evaluation will 

be provided in the exemption that will 

be issued as part of the letter to the 

licensee approving the exemption to the 

regulation. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

actions, the NRC staff considered denial 

of the proposed actions (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the 

exemption request would result in no 

change in current environmental 

impacts. The environmental impacts of 

the proposed exemption and technical 

specification change and the ‘‘no 

action’’ alternative are similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

considered in the Final Environmental 

Statement for the FNP, as supplemented 

through the ‘‘Generic Environmental 

Impact Statement for License Renewal 

of Nuclear Plants: Joseph M. Farley 

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2—Final 

Report (NUREG—1437, Supplement 

18).’’ 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on August 13, 2009, the NRC staff 

consulted with the Alabama State 

official, Mr. Kirk Whatley of the 

Alabama Department of Public Health, 

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 the licensee’s 

letters dated June 9 and July 31, 2009. 

The June 9, 2009, letter and certain parts 

of the July 31, 2009, submittal contain 

proprietary and safeguards information 

and, accordingly, are not available to the 

public. Other parts of these documents 

may be examined, and/or copied for a 

fee, at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. Publicly available 

records will be accessible electronically 

from the Agencywide Document 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 send an 

e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day 

of August 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Robert E. Martin, 

Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 

II, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E9–20586 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Advisory Committee on Reactor 

Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the 

Materials, Metallurgy, and Reactor 

Fuels Subcommittee; Notice of 

Meeting 

The ACRS Subcommittee on the 

Materials, Metallurgy and Reactor Fuels 

will hold a meeting on September 23, 

2009, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Commissioner’s Conference Room 

O1F16, One White Flint North, 

Rockville, Maryland. 

The entire meeting will be open to 

public attendance. The agenda for the 

subject meeting shall be as follows: 

Wednesday, September 23, 2009— 

8:30 a.m.–5 p.m. 

The Subcommittee will discuss the 

‘‘three-dimensional’’ finite element 

analysis of the Oyster Creek drywell 

shell. The Subcommittee will hear 

presentations by and hold discussions 

with representatives of the NRC staff 

and other interested persons regarding 

this matter. The Subcommittee will 

gather information, analyze relevant 

issues and facts, and formulate 

proposed positions and actions, as 

appropriate, for deliberation by the full 

Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to 

provide oral statements and/or written 

comments should notify the Designated 

Federal Official, Peter Wen, telephone: 

301–415–2832, e-mail: 

Peter.Wen@nrc.gov, five days prior to 

the meeting, if possible, so that 

appropriate arrangements can be made. 

Thirty-five hard copies of each 

presentation or handout should be 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices 43171 

1Custody of Investment Company Assets With 

Futures Commission Merchants and Commodity 

Clearing Organizations, Investment Company Act 

Release No. 22389 (Dec. 11, 1996) [61 FR 66207 

(Dec. 17, 1996)]. 

2This estimate is based on information 

conversations with representatives of the fund 

industry. 

3The rule requires a contract with the FCM to 

contain three provisions. Two of the provisions 

require the FCM to comply with existing 

requirements under the CEA and rules adopted 

under that Act. Thus, to the extent these provisions 

could be considered collections of information, the 

hours required for compliance would be included 

in the collection of information burden hours 

submitted by the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission for its rules. The third contract 

provision requires that the FCM produce records or 

other information requested by the Commission or 

its staff. Commission staff has requested this type 

of information from an FCM so infrequently in the 

past that the annual burden hours are de minimis. 

provided to the Designated Federal 

Official 30 minutes before the meeting. 

In addition, one electronic copy of each 

presentation should be e-mailed to the 

Designated Federal Official 1 day before 

meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be 

provided within this timeframe, 

presenters should provide the 

Designated Federal Official with a CD 

containing each presentation at least 30 

minutes before the meeting. Electronic 

recordings will be permitted. Detailed 

procedures for the conduct of and 

participation in ACRS meetings were 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268–58269). 

Further information regarding this 

meeting can be obtained by contacting 

the Designated Federal Official between 

7:30 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. (ET). Persons 

planning to attend this meeting are 

urged to contact the above named 

individual at least two working days 

prior to the meeting to be advised of any 

potential changes to the agenda. 

Dated: August 19, 2009. 

Antonio F. Dias, 

Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory 

Committee on Reactor Safeguards. 

[FR Doc. E9–20588 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

Upon written request, copies available 

from: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 

Education and Advocacy, 

Washington, DC 20549–0213. 

Extension: Rule 17f–6, SEC File No. 270–392, 

OMB Control No. 3235–0447. 

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments 

on the collection of information 

summarized below. The Commission 

plans to submit this existing collection 

of information to the Office of 

Management and Budget for extension 

and approval. 

Rule 17f–6 (17 CFR 270.17f-6) under 

the Investment Company Act of 1940 

(15 U.S.C. 80a) permits registered 

investment companies (‘‘funds’’) to 

maintain assets (i.e., margin) with 

futures commission merchants 

(‘‘FCMs’’) in connection with 

commodity transactions effected on 

both domestic and foreign exchanges.1

Prior to the rule’s adoption, funds 

generally were required to maintain 

these assets in special accounts with a 

custodian bank. 

The rule requires a written contract 

that contains certain provisions 

designed to ensure important safeguards 

and other benefits relating to the 

custody of fund assets by FCMs. To 

protect fund assets, the contract must 

require that FCMs comply with the 

segregation or secured amount 

requirements of the Commodity 

Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) and the rules 

under that statute. The contract also 

must contain a requirement that FCMs 

obtain an acknowledgment from any 

clearing organization that the fund’s 

assets are held on behalf of the FCM’s 

customers according to CEA provisions. 

Finally, FCMs are required to furnish to 

the Commission or its staff on request 

information concerning the fund’s assets 

in order to facilitate Commission 

inspections. 

The Commission estimates that 

approximately 2270 funds effect 

commodities transactions and could 

deposit margin with FCMs under Rule 

17f-6 in connection with those 

transactions. Commission staff estimates 

that each fund uses and deposits margin 

with two different FCMs in connection 

with its commodity transactions.2

The Commission estimates that each 

of the 2270 funds spends an average of 

1 hour annually complying with the 

contract requirements of the rule (i.e., 

executing contracts that contain the 

requisite provisions with additional 

FCMs), for a total of 2270 annual burden 

hours. The estimate does not include 

the time required by an FCM to comply 

with the rule’s contract requirements 

because, to the extent that complying 

with the contract provisions could be 

considered ‘‘collections of information,’’ 

the burden hours for compliance are 

already included in other PRA 

submissions or are de minimis.3 The 

estimate of average burden hours is 

made solely for the purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not 

derived from a comprehensive or even 

a representative survey or study of the 

costs of Commission rules and forms. 

Compliance with the collection of 

information requirements of the rule is 

necessary to obtain the benefit of relying 

on the rule. If an FCM furnishes records 

pertaining to a fund’s assets at the 

request of the Commission or its staff, 

the records will be kept confidential to 

the extent permitted by relevant 

statutory or regulatory provisions. The 

rule does not require these records be 

retained for any specific period of time. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. 

Written comments are invited on: (a) 

Whether the collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the Commission, 

including whether the information has 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

Commission’s estimate of the burden of 

the collection of information; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Consideration will be given to 

comments and suggestions submitted in 

writing within 60 days after this 

publication. 

Please direct your written comments 

to Charles Boucher, Director/CIO, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General 

Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or 

send an e-mail to: 

PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: August 19, 2009. 

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–20527 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

Upon written request, copies available 

from: U.S. Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES