41980 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Notices

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 was

enacted for the purpose of minimizing

the paperwork burden on the public

and, in particular, on the regulated

community. The Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 was also enacted to

maximize the utility of information

created, collected, maintained, used,

shared and disseminated by or for the

Federal Government. The National

Indian Gaming Commission received

clearance from the Office of

Management and Budget for the

collection of information necessary to

implement the Indian Gaming

Regulatory Act. The purpose of this

notice is to inform the public that the

National Indian Gaming Commission

currently seeks renewal of this

clearance.

DATES: Comments must be received by

October 3, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Copies of this information can be

obtained from Cindy Altimus, National

Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L

Street, NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC

20005; Telephone 202/632–7003; Fax

202/632–7066 (these are not toll-free

numbers).

ABSTRACT: The Indian Gaming

Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.,

102 Stat. 2467, Pub. L. 100–497) (the

Act) established the National Indian

Gaming Commission which is charged

with, among other things, regulating

class II gaming on Indian lands. The Act

establishes the National Indian Gaming

Commission (NIGC, or the Commission)

as an independent federal regulatory

agency. 25 CFR part 514, in accordance

with the Act, authorizes the National

Indian Gaming Commission (the

Commission) to establish a schedule of

fees to be paid to the Commission by

each Class II gaming operation regulated

by the Act. Fees are computed using

rates set by the Commission and the

assessable gross revenues of each

gaming operation. The total of all fees

assessed annually cannot exceed

$1,500,000. The required information is

needed for the Commission to both set

and adjust rates and to support the

computations of fees paid by each

gaming operation.

Respondents: Class II gaming

operations.

Number of Respondents: 201.

Estimate of Burden: An average of 5

hours.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 1,005 hours. Send

comments regarding the accuracy of the

burden estimates, ways to minimize the

burden or any other aspect of this

collection of information to: Cindy

Altimus, National Indian Gaming

Commission, 1441 L Street NW, Suite

9100, Wsahington, DC 20005.

Tom Foley,

Vice Chairman, National Indian Gaming

Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–20443 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7565–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 5–269, 50–270, and 50–287]

In the Matter of Duke Power Company

(Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2, and

3)

Exemption

I

Duke Power Company (the licensee) is

the holder of Facility Operating License

Nos. DPR–38, DPR–47, and DPR–55, for

the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2,

and 3, respectively. The licenses

provide, among other things, that the

licensee is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission now or hereafter in effect.

These facilities consist of three

pressurized water reactors located at the

licensee’s site in Oconee County, South

Carolina.

II

Title 10 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (10 CFR) at subsection (a) of

10 CFR 70.24, ‘‘Criticality Accident

Requirements,’’ requires that each

licensee authorized to possess special

nuclear material shall maintain in each

area where such material is handled,

used, or stored, a criticality accident

monitoring system ‘‘using gamma-or

neutron-sensitive radiation detectors

which will energize clearly audible

alarm signals if accidental criticality

occurs.’’ Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) of

10 CFR 70.24 specify the detection,

sensitivity, and coverage capabilities of

the monitors required by 10 CFR

70.24(a). Subsection (a)(3) of 10 CFR

70.24 requires that the licensee shall

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored and provides (1) that the

procedures ensure that all personnel

withdraw to an area of safety upon the

sounding of a criticality monitor alarm,

(2) that the procedures must include

drills to familiarize personnel with the

evacuation plan, and (3) that the

procedures designate responsible

individuals for determining the cause of

the alarm and placement of radiation

survey instruments in accessible

locations for use in such an emergency.

Subsection (b)(1) requires licensees to

have a means to quickly identify

personnel who have received a dose of

10 rads or more. Subsection (b)(2)

requires licensees to maintain personnel

decontamination facilities, to maintain

arrangements for a physician and other

medical personnel qualified to handle

radiation emergencies, and to maintain

arrangements for the transportation of

contaminated individuals to treatment

facilities outside the site boundary.

Subsection (c) exempts Part 50 licensees

(such as Oconee) from the requirements

of paragraph (b). Subsection (d) states

that any licensee who believes that there

is good cause why he should be granted

an exemption from all or part of 10 CFR

70.24 may apply to the Commission for

such an exemption and shall specify the

reasons for the relief requested.

By letter dated February 4, 1997, as

supplemented March 19, 1997, the

licensee requested an exemption for all

the Duke Power Company nuclear

plants from the requirements of 10 CFR

70.24. The staff has reviewed the

licensee’s submittal, and documented

its detailed review in a Safety

Evaluation. The staff found that existing

procedures and training, as well as

design features and radiation

monitoring instrumentation required by

the Technical Specifications make an

inadvertent criticality in special nuclear

materials handling or storage at Oconee

unlikely. The licensee has thus met the

intent of 10 CFR 70.24(d) by the low

probability of an inadvertent criticality

in areas where fresh fuel could be

present, by the licensee’s adherence to

General Design Criterion 63 regarding

radiation monitoring, by maintenance of

appropriate procedures, and by

provisions for personnel training and

evacuation.

III

Section 70.14 of 10 CFR, ‘‘Specific

exemptions,’’ states that

The Commission may, upon application by

any interested person or upon its own

initiative, grant such exemptions from the

requirements of the regulations in this part as

it determines are authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the common

defense and security and are otherwise in the

public interest.

Section 70.24(d) of 10 CFR states that

Any licensee who believes that good cause

exists why he should be granted an

exemption in whole or in part from the

requirements of this section may apply to the

Commission for such exemption.

Accordingly, the Commission has

determined that good cause is present as

defined in 10 CFR 70.24(d). The
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Notices 41981

Commission has further determined

that, pursuant to 10 CFR 70.14, the

exemption is authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the

common defense and security and is

otherwise in the public interest. The

Commission hereby grants the licensee

an exemption from the requirements of

10 CFR 70.24(a)(1), (2), and (3), on the

bases as stated in Section II above.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that

granting of this exemption will have no

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment (62 FR 40122).

This exemption is effective upon

issuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of July 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel J. Collins,

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–20451 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–413 and 50–414]

In the Matter of Duke Power Company,

et al. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units

1 and 2)

Exemption

I

The Duke Power Company, et al. (the

licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License Nos. NPF–35 and

NPF–52, for the Catawba Nuclear

Station, Units 1 and 2. The licenses

provide, among other things, that the

licensee is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission now or hereafter in effect.

These facilities consist of two

pressurized water reactors located at the

licensee’s site in York County, South

Carolina.

II

Title 10 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (10 CFR) at subsection (a) of

10 CFR 70.24, ‘‘Criticality Accident

Requirements,’’ requires that each

licensee authorized to possess special

nuclear material shall maintain in each

area where such material is handled,

used, or stored, a criticality accident

monitoring system ‘‘using gamma- or

neutron-sensitive radiation detectors

which will energize clearly audible

alarm signals if accidental criticality

occurs.’’ Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) of

10 CFR 70.24 specify the detection,

sensitivity, and coverage capabilities of

the monitors required by 10 CFR

70.24(a). Subsection (a)(3) of 10 CFR

70.24 requires that the licensee shall

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored and provides (1) that the

procedures ensure that all personnel

withdraw to an area of safety upon the

sounding of a criticality monitor alarm,

(2) that the procedures must include

drills to familiarize personnel with the

evacuation plan, and (3) that the

procedures designate responsible

individuals for determining the cause of

the alarm and placement of radiation

survey instruments in accessible

locations for use in such an emergency.

Subsection (b)(1) requires licensees to

have a means to quickly identify

personnel who have received a dose of

10 rads or more. Subsection (b)(2)

requires licensees to maintain personnel

decontamination facilities, to maintain

arrangements for a physician and other

medical personnel qualified to handle

radiation emergencies, and to maintain

arrangements for the transportation of

contaminated individuals to treatment

facilities outside the site boundary.

Subsection (c) exempts Part 50 licensees

(such as Catawba) from the

requirements of paragraph (b).

Subsection (d) states that any licensee

who believes that there is good cause

why he should be granted an exemption

from all or part of 10 CFR 70.24 may

apply to the Commission for such an

exemption and shall specify the reasons

for the relief requested.

By letter dated February 4, 1997, as

supplemented March 19, 1997, Duke

Power Company requested an

exemption for its two nuclear plants

from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24.

The staff has reviewed the submittal in

regard to Catawba, and documented its

detailed review in a Safety Evaluation.

The staff found that Catawba’s existing

procedures and design features make an

inadvertent criticality in special nuclear

materials handling or storage at Catawba

unlikely. The licensee has thus met the

intent of 10 CFR 70.24(a) (1), (2), and (3)

by the low probability of an inadvertent

criticality in areas where fresh fuel

could be present, by the licensee’s

adherence to General Design Criterion

63 regarding radiation monitoring, and

by provisions for personnel training and

evacuation.

III

Section 70.14 of 10 CFR, ‘‘Specific

exemptions,’’ states that

The Commission may, upon application by

any interested person or upon its own

initiative, grant such exemptions from the

requirements of the regulations in this part as

it determines are authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the common

defense and security and are otherwise in the

public interest.

Section 70.24(d) of 10 CFR states that

Any licensee who believes that good cause

exists why he should be granted an

exemption in whole or in part from the

requirements of this section may apply to the

Commission for such exemption.

Accordingly, the Commission has

determined that good cause is present as

defined in 10 CFR 70.24(d). The

Commission has further determined

that, pursuant to 10 CFR 70.14, the

exemption is authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the

common defense and security and is

otherwise in the public interest.

Therefore, the Commission hereby

grants Duke Power Company an

exemption from the requirements of 10

CFR 70.24(a) (1), (2), and (3) for

Catawba, Units 1 and 2, on the bases as

stated in Section II above.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that

granting of this exemption will have no

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment (62 FR 40553).

This exemption is effective upon issuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of July 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel J. Collins,

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–20452 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–38882; File No. SR–CHX–

97–15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and

Amendments Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Thereto

by the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.,

Relating to a Specialist’s DeRegistration in an Issue

July 28, 1997.

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is

hereby given that on June 4, 1997, the

Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’ or

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule

change, and on July 3, 1997, July 22,

1997, and July 28, 1997, filed

Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3,