5700 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices

foregoing statutes, constitute the

minimum wages payable on Federal and

federally assisted construction projects

to laborers and mechanics of the

specified classes engaged on contract

work of the character and in the

localities described therein.

Good cause is hereby found for not

utilizing notice and public comment

procedure thereon prior to the issuance

of these determinations as prescribed in

5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay

in the effective date as prescribed in that

section, because the necessity to issue

current construction industry wage

determinations frequently and in large

volume causes procedures to be

impractical and contrary to the public

interest.

General wage determination

decisions, and modifications and

supersedes decisions thereto, contain no

expiration dates and are effective from

their date of notice in the Federal

Register, or on the date written notice

is received by the agency, whichever is

earlier. These decisions are to be used

in accordance with the provisions of 29

CFR Parts 1 and 5. Accordingly, the

applicable decision, together with any

modifications issued, must be made a

part of every contract for performance of

the described work within the

geographic area indicated as required by

an applicable Federal prevailing wage

law and 29 CFR Part 5. The wage rates

and fringe benefits, notice of which is

published herein, and which are

contained in the Government Printing

Office (GPO) document entitled

‘‘General Wage Determinations Issued

Under The Davis-Bacon And Related

Acts,’’ shall be the minimum paid by

contractors and subcontractors to

laborers and mechanics.

Any person, organization, or

governmental agency having an interest

in the rates determined as prevailing is

encouraged to submit wage rate and

fringe benefit information and selfexplanatory forms for the purpose of

submitting this data may be obtained by

writing to the U.S. Department of Labor,

Employment Standards Administration,

Wage and Hour Division, Division of

Wage Determinations, 200 Constitution

Avenue, NW, Room S–3014,

Washington, DC 20210.

Modifications to General Wage

Determination Decisions

The number of decisions listed in the

Government Printing Office document

entitled ‘‘General Wage Determinations

Issued Under the Davis-Bacon and

Related Acts’’ being modified are listed

by Volume and State. Dates of

publication in the Federal Register are

in parentheses following the decisions

being modified.

VOLUME I

None.

VOLUME II

None.

VOLUME III

None.

VOLUME IV

None.

VOLUME V

None.

VOLUME VI

None.

VOLUME VII

None.

General Wage Determination Publication

General wage determinations issued under

the Davis-Bacon and related Acts, including

those noted above, may be found in the

Government Printing Office (GPO) document

entitled ‘‘General Wage Determinations

Issued Under The Davis-Bacon and Related

Acts.’’ This publication is available at each

of the 50 Regional Government Depository

Libraries and many of the 1,400 Government

Depository Libraries across the country.

The general wage determinations issued

under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts are

available electronically by subscription to the

FedWorld Bulletin Board System of the

National Technical Information Service

(NTIS) of the U.S. Department of Commerce

at 1–800–363–2068.

Hard-copy subscriptions may be purchased

from: Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

20402, (202) 512–1800.

When ordering hard-copy subscription(s),

be sure to specify the State(s) of interest,

since subscriptions may be ordered for any

or all of the seven separate volumes, arranged

by State. Subscriptions include an annual

edition (issued in January or February) which

includes all current general wage

determinations for the States covered by each

volume. Throughout the remainder of the

year, regular weekly updates are distributed

to subscribers.

Signed at Washington, DC this 27th day of

January 2000.

Carl J. Poleskey,

Chief, Branch of Construction Wage

Determinations.

[FR Doc. 00–02053 Filed 2–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–27–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

Petitions for Modification

The following parties have filed

petitions to modify the application of

mandatory safety standards under

section 101(c) of the Federal Mine

Safety and Health Act of 1977.

1. CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc.

[Docket No. M–1999–143–C]

CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc., Consol

Plaza, 1800 Washington Road,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.701 (grounding

metallic frames, casings, and other

enclosures of electric equipment) to its

Rhoades Branch H–4 Mine (I.D. No. 15–

18212) located in Lechter County,

Kentucky. The petitioner proposes to

use a diesel-generated source of low and

medium voltage, three-phase electrical

power during transportation of certain

mobile equipment underground. The

petitioner has listed in this petition

specific terms and conditions for using

the generator system. The petitioner

asserts that the proposed alternative

method would provide at least the same

measure of protection as the mandatory

standard.

2. CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc.

[Docket No. M–1999–144–C]

CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc., Consol

Plaza, 1800 Washington Road,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.901(a)

(protection of low- and medium-voltage

three-phase circuits used underground)

to its Rhoades Branch H–4 Mine (I.D.

No. 15–18212) located in Lechter

County, Kentucky. The petitioner

proposes to use a diesel-generated

source of low- and medium-voltage,

three-phase electrical power during

transportation of certain mobile

equipment underground. The petitioner

proposes to derive a low-and mediumvoltage, three-phase, alternating current

for use underground from a portable,

diesel-driven generator. The petitioner

asserts that the proposed alternative

method would provide at least the same

measure of protection as the mandatory

standard.

3. CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc.

[Docket No. M–1999–145–C]

CONSOL of Kentucky, Inc., Consol

Plaza, 1800 Washington Road,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1101–8 (water

sprinkler systems; arrangement of

sprinklers) to its Rhoades Branch H–4

Mine (I.D. No. 15–18212) located in

Lechter County, Kentucky. The

petitioner proposes to use a single line

of automatic sprinklers for its fire

protection system on main and

secondary belt conveyors. The

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices 5701

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard.

4. Old Ben Coal Company

[Docket No. M–1999–146–C]

Old Ben Coal Company, P.O. Box 397,

13101 Zeigler Road, Coulterville,

Illinois 62237 has filed a petition to

modify the application of 30 CFR 75.902

(low- and medium-voltage ground check

monitor circuits) to its Zeigler #11 Mine

(I.D. No. 11–02408) located in Randolph

County, Illinois. The petitioner requests

a modification of the mandatory safety

standard to permit the use of an

alternative method for ground check

monitoring. The petitioner proposes that

the ground monitor would open a

vacuum contactor instead of a circuit

breaker in all combination stationary

belt starters at the Zeigler #11 Mine. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard.

5. Old Ben Coal Company

[Docket No. M–1999–147–C]

Old Ben Coal Company, P.O. Box 397,

13101 Zeigler Road, Coulterville,

Illinois 62237 has filed a petition to

modify the application of 30 CFR 75.900

(low- and medium-voltage circuits

serving three-phase alternating current

equipment; circuit breakers) to its

Zeigler #11 Mine (I.D. No. 11–02408)

located in Randolph County, Illinois.

The petitioner requests that Item #1 of

its previous petition for modification,

docket number M–96–147–C, be

amended to read as follows: The

petition for modification shall apply to

the requirement for under-voltage

protection and grounded phase

protection for three-phase circuits

supplying stationary belt drive

installations presently in use or

installed in the future. The petitioner

asserts that this amendment would

provide at least the same measure of

protection as the previous petition.

6. Consolidation Coal Company

[Docket No. M–1999–148–C]

Consolidation Coal Company, Consol

Plaza, 1800 Washington Road,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.364(b)(2)

(weekly examination) to its Shoemaker

Mine (I.D. No. 46–01436) located in

Marshall County, West Virginia. Due to

deteroriating roof conditions in certain

areas of the return air course, the

petitioner proposes to establish two

check points that will be maintained in

safe condition at all times, and to have

a certified person test for methane and

the quantity of air at both check points

on a weekly basis. The petitioner asserts

that the proposed alternative method

would provide at least the same

measure of protection as the mandatory

standard.

7. Fork Creek Mining Company

[Docket No. M–1999–149–C]

Fork Creek Mining Company, Fork

Creek Mine Road, P.O. Box 24, Alum

Creek, West Virginia 25003 has filed a

petition to modify the application of 30

CFR 75.350 (air courses and belt haulage

entries) to its Fork Creek No. 1 Mine

(I.D. No. 48–08763) located in Kanawha

County, West Virginia. The petitioner

proposes to use air coursed through the

belt haulage entry to ventilate active

working places. The petitioner proposes

to install a carbon monoxide monitoring

system as an early warning fire

detection system in all belt entries used

to carry intake air to a working place.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard.

8. Perry County Mining Company

[Docket No. M–1999–150–C]

Perry County Mining Company, P.O.

Box 5002, Hazard, Kentucky 41701 has

filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.364(b)(1)

(weekly examination) to its Eas #1 Mine

(I.D. No. 15–02085) located in Perry

County, Kentucky. Due to deteriorating

roof conditions in certain areas of the

intake air course, the petitioner

proposes to establish four check points

as air measurement stations. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard.

9. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–021–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its West Fork Mine (I.D. No.

23–01787) located in Reynolds County,

Missouri. The petitioner requests a

modification of the mandatory safety

standard to permit an alternative

method of compliance with the

requirements for refuge chambers. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

10. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–022–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its Fletcher Mine and Mill (I.D.

No. 23–00409) located in Reynolds

County, Missouri. The petitioner

requests a modification of the

mandatory safety standard to permit an

alternative method of compliance with

the requirements for refuge chambers.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

11. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–023–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

(I.D. No. 23–00499) located in Reynolds

County, Missouri. The petitioner

requests a modification of the

mandatory safety standard to permit an

alternative method of compliance with

the requirements for refuge chambers.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

12. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–024–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its Buick Mine/Mill (I.D. No.

23–00457) located in Reynolds County,

Missouri. The petitioner requests a

modification of the mandatory safety

standard to permit an alternative

method of compliance with the

requirements for refuge chambers. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

5702 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices

13. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–025–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its Sweetwater Mine/Mill (I.D.

No. 23–00458) located in Reynolds

County, Missouri. The petitioner

requests a modification of the

mandatory safety standard to permit an

alternative method of compliance with

the requirements for refuge chambers.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

14. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–026–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its No. 35 Mine (Casteel) (I.D.

No. 23–01800) located in Iron County,

Missouri. The petitioner requests a

modification of the mandatory safety

standard to permit an alternative

method of compliance with the

requirements for refuge chambers. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

15. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–027–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its No. 28 Mine/Mill (I.D. No.

23–00494) located in Iron County,

Missouri. The petitioner requests a

modification of the mandatory safety

standard to permit an alternative

method of compliance with the

requirements for refuge chambers. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

the mandatory standard and that

application of the existing standard will

result in a diminution of safety.

16. The DOE Run Company

[Docket No. M–1999–028–M]

The DOE Run Company, One Oxford

Centre, 301 Grant Street, 20th Floor,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–1410

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 57.11052 (refuge

areas) to its No. 29 Mine (I.D. No. 23–

00495) located in Iron County, Missouri.

The petitioner requests a modification

of the mandatory safety standard to

permit an alternative method of

compliance with the requirements for

refuge chambers. The petitioner asserts

that the proposed alternative method

would provide at least the same

measure of protection as the mandatory

standard and that application of the

existing standard will result in a

diminution of safety.

Request for Comments

Persons interested in these petitions

are encouraged to submit comments via

e-mail to ‘‘comments@msha.gov,’’ or on

a computer disk along with an original

hard copy to the Office of Standards,

Regulations, and Variances, Mine Safety

and Health Administration, 4015

Wilson Boulevard, Room 627,

Arlington, Virginia 22203. All

comments must be postmarked or

received in that office on or before

March 6, 2000. Copies of these petitions

are available for inspection at that

address.

Dated: January 27, 2000.

Carol J. Jones,

Acting Director, Office of Standards,

Regulations, and Variances.

[FR Doc. 00–2516 Filed 2–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–254 and 50–265]

Commonwealth Edison Company and

Midamerican Energy Company Quad

Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1

and 2 Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is considering

issuance of an exemption from certain

requirements of Title 10 of the Code of

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50,

Section 50.60(a) for Facility Operating

Licenses Nos. DPR–29 and DPR–30,

issued to Commonwealth Edison

Company (ComEd, or the licensee) for

operation of the Quad Cities Nuclear

Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (Quad

Cities), located in Cordova, Illinois.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, requires

that pressure-temperature (P–T) limits

be established for reactor pressure

vessels (RPVs) during normal operating

and hydrostatic or leak rate testing

conditions. Specifically, 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix G, states, ‘‘The appropriate

requirements on both the pressuretemperature limits and the minimum

permissible temperature must be met for

all conditions.’’ Appendix G of 10 CFR

Part 50 specifies that the requirements

for these limits are the American

Society of Mechanical Engineers

(ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code

(Code), Section XI, Appendix G Limits.

To address provisions of amendments

to the technical specifications (TS) P–T

limits, the licensee requested in its

submittal dated November 12, 1999, that

the staff exempt Quad Cities from

application of specific requirements of

10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.60(a) and

Appendix G, and substitute use of

ASME Code Cases N–588 and N–640.

Code Case N–588 permits the

postulation of a circumferentiallyoriented flaw (in lieu of an axiallyoriented flaw) for the evaluation of the

circumferential welds in RPV P–T limit

curves. Code Case N–640 permits the

use of an alternate reference fracture

toughness (KIC fracture toughness curve

instead of KIa fracture toughness curve)

for reactor vessel materials in

determining the P–T limits. Since the

pressure stresses on a circumferentiallyoriented flaw are lower than the

pressure stresses on an axially-oriented

flaw by a factor of 2, using Code Case

N–588 for establishing the P–T limits

would be less conservative than the

methodology currently endorsed by 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix G and, therefore,

an exemption to apply the Code Case

would be required by 10 CFR 50.60.

Likewise, since the KIC fracture

toughness curve shown in ASME

Section XI, Appendix A, Figure A–

2200–1 (the KIC fracture toughness

curve) provides greater allowable

fracture toughness than the

corresponding KIa fracture toughness

curve of ASME Section XI, Appendix G,

Figure G–2210–1 (the KIa fracture

toughness curve), using Code Case N–

640 for establishing the P–T limits

would be less conservative than the

methodology currently endorsed by 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix G and, therefore,

an exemption to apply the Code Case

would also be required by 10 CFR 50.60.

It should be noted that, although Code

Case N–640 was incorporated into the

ASME Code recently, an exemption is

still needed because the proposed P–T

limits (excluding Code Cases N–588 and

N–640) are based on the 1989 edition of

the ASME Code.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated November 12, 1999.