Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 105 / Wednesday, May 31, 2000 / Notices 34755

interest may be affected by this

proceeding and who wishes to

participate as a party in the proceeding

must file a written request for a hearing

and a petition for leave to intervene.

Requests for a hearing and a petition for

leave to intervene shall be filed in

accordance with the Commission’s

‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic

Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR part

2. Interested persons should consult a

current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is

available at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC and

electronically from the ADAMS Public

Library component on the NRC Web

site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic

Reading Room). If a request for a hearing

or petition for leave to intervene is filed

by the above date, the Commission or an

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board,

designated by the Commission or by the

Chairman of the Atomic Safety and

Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the

request and/or petition; and the

Secretary or the designated Atomic

Safety and Licensing Board will issue a

notice of a hearing or an appropriate

order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a

petition for leave to intervene shall set

forth with particularity the interest of

the petitioner in the proceeding, and

how that interest may be affected by the

results of the proceeding. The petition

should specifically explain the reasons

why intervention should be permitted

with particular reference to the

following factors: (1) The nature of the

petitioner’s right under the Act to be

made a party to the proceeding; (2) the

nature and extent of the petitioner’s

property, financial, or other interest in

the proceeding; and (3) the possible

effect of any order which may be

entered in the proceeding on the

petitioner’s interest. The petition should

also identify the specific aspect(s) of the

subject matter of the proceeding as to

which petitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person who has filed a petition for

leave to intervene or who has been

admitted as a party may amend the

petition without requesting leave of the

Board up to 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, but such an amended

petition must satisfy the specificity

requirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, a petitioner shall file a

supplement to the petition to intervene

which must include a list of the

contentions which are sought to be

litigated in the matter. Each contention

must consist of a specific statement of

the issue of law or fact to be raised or

controverted. In addition, the petitioner

shall provide a brief explanation of the

bases of the contention and a concise

statement of the alleged facts or expert

opinion which support the contention

and on which the petitioner intends to

rely in proving the contention at the

hearing. The petitioner must also

provide references to those specific

sources and documents of which the

petitioner is aware and on which the

petitioner intends to rely to establish

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner

must provide sufficient information to

show that a genuine dispute exists with

the applicant on a material issue of law

or fact. Contentions shall be limited to

matters within the scope of the

amendment under consideration. The

contention must be one which, if

proven, would entitle the petitioner to

relief. A petitioner who fails to file such

a supplement which satisfies these

requirements with respect to at least one

contention will not be permitted to

participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become

parties to the proceeding, subject to any

limitations in the order granting leave to

intervene, and have the opportunity to

participate fully in the conduct of the

hearing, including the opportunity to

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses. Since the Commission has

made a final determination that the

amendment involves no significant

hazards consideration, if a hearing is

requested, it will not stay the

effectiveness of the amendment. Any

hearing held would take place while the

amendment is in effect.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff or

may be delivered to the Commission’s

Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, by the above date. A

copy of the petition should also be sent

to the Office of the General Counsel,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and to the

attorney for the licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for a hearing will not be entertained

absent a determination by the

Commission, the presiding officer or the

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that

the petition and/or request should be

granted based upon a balancing of the

factors specified in 10 CFR

2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

Detroit Edison Company, Docket No.

50–341, Fermi 2, Monroe County,

Michigan

Date of amendment request: May 8,

2000.

Description of amendment request:

The amendment revises Technical

Specification Surveillance Requirement

3.8.1.9 to increase the limit for the peak

transient voltage measured following a

full-load rejection by the emergency

diesel generator that is being tested.

Date of issuance: May 9, 2000.

Effective date: As of its date of

issuance and shall be implemented

within 2 days.

Amendment No.: 140.

Facility Operating License No. NPF–43:

Amendment revises the Technical

Specifications. Public comments

requested as to proposed no significant

hazards consideration: No. The

Commission’s related evaluation of the

amendment, finding of emergency

circumstances, and final determination

of no significant hazards consideration

are contained in a Safety Evaluation

dated May 9, 2000.

Attorney for licensee: John Flynn,

Esq., Detroit Edison Company, 2000

Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan,

48226.

NRC Section Chief: Claudia M. Craig.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of May 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John A. Zwolinski,

Director, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–13518 Filed 5–30–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND

HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request; Evaluation of the

‘‘E–Z Trial’’

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: As part of its effort to reduce

paperwork and the burden placed on

survey recipients, the Occupational

Safety and Health Review Commission

(OSHRC) is conducting a preclearance

consultation to provide the general

public and Federal agencies with an

opportunity to comment on a proposed

collection of information in accordance

with the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1965, Public Law 104–13. OSHRC is

soliciting comment concerning an

information collection required to

evaluate the Review Commission’s ‘‘E–

Z–Trial’’ program.

34756 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 105 / Wednesday, May 31, 2000 / Notices

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted by July 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments are to be

submitted to Ledia Esther Bernal,

OSHRC Clearance Officer, Occupational

Safety and Health Review Commission,

1120 20th Street, N.W., Ninth Floor,

Washington, DC 20036–3419. They may

also be sent by facsimile to (202) 606–

5390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Copies of the information collection are

available for inspection at the address

above. They will be mailed to persons

who request copies by telephoning

Ledia Esther Bernal at (202) 606–5390.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Occupational Safety and Health

Review Commission (OSHRC)

published a rule in the Federal Register

dated August 14, 1995 establishing the

‘‘E–Z Trial’’ program. The rule was

subsequently amended to eliminate the

sunset provisions in the original rule

and to revise the procedural rules

governing the ‘‘E–Z Trial’’ program

effective July 31, 1997. We are

evaluating the program as modified

effective July 31, 1997. The evaluation

will involve surveying employers and

employer representatives regarding their

satisfaction with the fairness and

efficiency of the process. The evaluation

will also analyze data on the rate at

which ‘‘E–Z Trial’’ cases go to a hearing,

and on the length and cost of hearings.

Finally, the evaluation will study the

cycle times of these cases as compared

to those of conventional cases.

Information will also be gathered from

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) staff and from

the Solicitor of Labor.

II. Current Action

This notice requests comment on the

proposed instruments to be used in

connection with the evaluation.

Type of Review: Regular Submission

(new).

Title: Evaluation of ‘‘E–Z Trial.

OMB Number: New.

Affected Public: Employers and/or

their representatives, labor

organizations and staff of the Office of

the Solicitor of Labor who have been

involved in cases with the Review

Commission.

Frequency: Once.

Total Respondents: 100.

Average Time per Response: 45

minutes.

Estimated Total Reporting burden: 75

hours.

Total Annualized capital/startup

costs: 0.

Total Operation and Maintenance

costs: 0.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and

included in the request for Office of

Management and Budget approval of the

information collection request.

Comments will become a matter of

public record.

Patricia A. Randle,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 00–13558 Filed 5–30–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7600–01–U

PRESIDIO TRUST

Letterman Complex, The Presidio of

San Francisco, Notice of approval of

Record of Decision for the Final

Environmental Impact Statement and

Planning Guidelines

AGENCY: The Presidio Trust.

ACTION: Notice of Approval of Record of

Decision.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C)

of the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91–90 as amended),

and the regulations promulgated by the

Council on Environmental Quality (40

CFR 1505.2), the Presidio Trust (Trust)

has prepared and approved a Record of

Decision (ROD) for the Final

Environmental Impact Statement and

Planning Guidelines for New

Development and Uses on 23 Acres

within the Letterman Complex (FEIS),

The Presidio of San Francisco, San

Francisco, California (Presidio). The

FEIS is a supplement to the 1994 Final

General Management Plan Amendment

(GMPA) EIS for the Presidio. The ROD

documents the decision and rationale

for selecting a development alternative

for the 23-acre site in compliance with

the mandates of the Presidio Trust Act

and as guided by the GMPA. The ROD

is a concise statement of the decision,

alternatives considered, the nature of

public involvement, and mitigating

measures developed to avoid or

minimize environmental impacts.

Comments received on the FEIS and

responses are also attached to the ROD.

DATES: The Trust has selected for

implementation Alternative 5, the

Digital Arts Center (identified as the

proposed action in the FEIS), as the

development alternative for the 23-acre

site, and will implement the selected

proposal as soon as practicable. This

alternative and five other alternatives

were fully examined in the Draft EIS

that was publicly circulated and filed

with the United States Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) on April 23,

1999 (64 FR 23296–97) and the FEIS

that was publicly circulated and filed

with the EPA on March 17, 2000 (65 FR

14558). The Presidio Trust Board of

Directors reviewed and considered the

ROD after an extended no-action period,

and authorized the Trust’s Executive

Director to finalize and approve the

ROD, which was signed on May 24,

2000.

MATERIALS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC: The

approved ROD is available for viewing

on the Internet by clicking on ‘‘Library’’

and then ‘‘Postings’’ at the following

website: http://www.presidiotrust.gov.

Additionally, copies of the ROD are

available by writing or calling: The

Presidio Trust, P.O. Box 29052, San

Francisco, CA 94129–0052, Phone: 415–

561–5300; Fax: 415–561–5315.

The ROD is also available for review

at:

The Presidio Trust Library, 34 Graham

Street, San Francisco, CA 94129,

Phone: 415–561–5300.

William Penn Mott, Jr. Visitor Center

(Presidio) (open 7 days), Montgomery

Street, Main Post, San Francisco, CA

94129, Phone: 415–561–4323.

GGNRA Park Headquarters, Building

201, Fort Mason, San Francisco, CA

94123, Phone: 415–561–4720.

San Francisco Main Library,

Government Information Center, Civic

Center, San Francisco, CA 94102,

Phone: 415–557–4500.

San Francisco Library, Presidio Branch,

3150 Sacramento Street, San

Francisco, CA 94115, Phone: 415–

292–2155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Pelka, NEPA Compliance Coordinator,

The Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street,

P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA

94129–0052. Telephone 415–561–5300.

Dated: May 24, 2000.

Karen A. Cook,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–13508 Filed 5–30–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–4R–U

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available

From: Securities and Exchange Commission,

Office of Filings and Information Services,

Washington, DC 20549.

Extension: Rule 206(4)–3, SEC File No.

270–218, OMB Control No. 3235–0242; Rule

206(4)–4, SEC File No. 270–304, OMB

Control No. 3235–0345.

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995