Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Notices 60477

the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/

ACRSACNW.

(g) Videoteleconferencing service is

available for observing open sessions of

ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use

this service for observing ACRS

meetings should contact Mr. Theron

Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician,

(301–415–8066) between 7:30 a.m. and

3:45 p.m. Eastern Time at least 10 days

before the meeting to ensure the

availability of this service. Individuals

or organizations requesting this service

will be responsible for telephone line

charges and for providing the

equipment and facilities that they use to

establish the videoteleconferencing link.

The availability of

videoteleconferencing services is not

guaranteed.

ACRS Subcommittee Meetings

ACRS Subcommittee meetings will

also be conducted in accordance with

the above procedures, as appropriate.

When Subcommittee meetings are held

at locations other than at NRC facilities,

reproduction facilities may not be

available at a reasonable cost.

Accordingly, 25 additional copies of the

materials to be used during the meeting

should be provided for distribution at

such meetings.

Special Provisions When Proprietary

Sessions Are To Be Held

If it is necessary to hold closed

sessions for the purpose of discussing

matters involving proprietary

information, persons with agreements

permitting access to such information

may attend those portions of the ACRS

meetings where this material is being

discussed upon confirmation that such

agreements are effective and related to

the material being discussed.

The Designated Federal Official

should be informed of such an

agreement at least five working days

prior to the meeting so that it can be

confirmed, and a determination can be

made regarding the applicability of the

agreement to the material that will be

discussed during the meeting. The

minimum information provided should

include information regarding the date

of the agreement, the scope of material

included in the agreement, the project

or projects involved, and the names and

titles of the persons signing the

agreement. Additional information may

be requested to identify the specific

agreement involved. A copy of the

executed agreement should be provided

to the Designated Federal Official prior

to the beginning of the meeting for

admittance to the closed session.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

Andrew L. Bates,

Advisory Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–26007 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Appointments to Recertification

Performance Review Boards for the

Senior Executive Service

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Appointment to Recertification

Performance Review Boards for the

Senior Executive Service.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has announced the

following appointments to NRC

Recertification Performance Review

Boards.

The following individuals are

appointed as members of the NRC

Recertification Performance Review

Board (PRB) responsible for making

recommendations to the appointing and

awarding authorities on recertification

for Senior Executives:

Appointees

Patricia G. Norry, Deputy Executive

Director for Management Services,

Chair

Ellis Merschoff, Regional Administrator,

Region IV

Stephen G. Burns, Deputy General

Counsel

The following individuals are

appointed as members of the NRC

Recertification PRB Panel responsible

for making recommendations to the

appointing and awarding authorities on

recertification of Recertification PRB

members:

Appointees

Jesse L. Funches, Chief Financial

Officer, Chair

Frank Miraglia, Deputy Executive

Director for Reactor Programs

Dennis Rathbun, Director, Office of

Congressional Affairs

All appointments are made pursuant

to section 4314 of chapter 43 of title 5

of the United States Code.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carolyn J. Swanson, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555 (301) 415–7530.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of September, 2000.

For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

Carolyn J. Swanson,

Secretary, Executive Resources Board

[FR Doc. 00–26008 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

PRESIDIO TRUST

The Presidio of San Francisco,

California; Amendment of Notice of

Intent and Extension of the Public

Comment Period for the Presidio Trust

Implementation Plan Supplemental

Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: The Presidio Trust.

ACTION: Amendment of initial Notice of

Intent to conduct public scoping and

prepare a Supplemental Environmental

Impact Statement and extension of

scoping period.

SUMMARY: The Presidio Trust (Trust) is

amending its Notice of Intent published

on June 30, 2000 (65 FR 40707) to add

a third public scoping meeting and

make factual corrections. The Trust is

also extending the previously

announced scoping period from

November 15, 2000 to December 8, 2000

to provide additional time for the public

to make views known regarding the

Presidio Trust Implementation Plan

(PTIP) Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS). The PTIP EIS is a supplement to

the 1994 Final General Management

Plan Amendment (GMPA) EIS for the

Presidio.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June

30, 2000, the Trust announced its

intention to prepare a Supplemental EIS

for PTIP and to hold two public scoping

meetings to determine the scope of

impact topics and alternatives to be

addressed in the Supplemental EIS (first

NOI; 65 FR 40707–08). The first public

workshop on July 12, 2000 addressed

scoping issues and solicited public

comment regarding the range of issues,

alternatives, and specific impacts to be

evaluated in the Supplemental EIS. A

second workshop, not originally

planned but widely announced through

a variety of media and held on

September 13, 2000, solicited comments

on financial planning concepts that will

help shape the alternatives to be

evaluated in the EIS. A third workshop,

previously planned for October 11, 2000

and now rescheduled for November 15,

2000 will present conceptual

alternatives to be addressed in the EIS

and visions for the Presidio’s future.

The extension of the scoping period

until December 8, 2000 will enable the

public to review and comment on the

60478 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Notices

1See Custody 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)].

alternatives prior to their being analyzed

in the EIS.

In addition to schedule changes, the

first NOI stated an intent to prepare an

‘‘amendment’’ to the 1994 GMPA. Due

to the term ‘‘amendment’’ causing

public confusion, the Trust is clarifying

that the comprehensive plan to be

prepared and analyzed through the

Supplemental EIS will update the 1994

GMPA for Area B (the area of the

Presidio under the Trust’s jurisdiction)

and be adopted by the Trust Board of

Directors as the governing

comprehensive plan for Area B. It will

retain many elements of the 1994

GMPA, but will update others that have

been affected by changes since the

GMPA was finalized. The GMPA will

remain the governing plan for Area A of

the Presidio under the jurisdiction of

the U.S. Department of the Interior,

National Park Service (NPS).

PUBLIC MEETING: The Trust will solicit

public comments on the conceptual

alternatives proposed for analysis in the

EIS and on visions for Area B of the

Presidio at the third of three public

scoping workshops on Wednesday,

November 15, 2000 from 6 to 9 p.m. at

the Log Cabin (Building 1299), Fort

Scott at the Presidio.

ADDRESSES: Written comments

concerning the content of the plan and

the scope of the Supplemental EIS

should be sent by December 8, 2000 to

John Pelka, NEPA Compliance

Coordinator, The Presidio Trust, 34

Graham Street, P.O. Box 29052, San

Francisco, CA 94129–0052. Fax: 415–

561–5315. E-mail:

ptip@presidiotrust.gov.

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.

Reference: 40 CFR 1508.22.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

Karen A. Cook,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–26004 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–4R–P

PRESIDIO TRUST

Notice of Receipt of and Availability for

Public Comment on an Application for

Wireless Telecommunications

Facilities Site; The Presidio of San

Francisco, California.

AGENCY: The Presidio Trust.

ACTION: Public notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

Presidio Trust’s receipt of and

availability for public comment on an

application from Bay Area Cellular

Telephone Company, Sprint PCS, for

colocation at an existing wireless

telecommunications facilities site (‘‘the

project’’) in the Presidio of San

Francisco. The proposed location of the

project is in the parking area located

directly below the Doyle Drive overpass

in the vicinity of the intersection of

Halleck and Vallejo Streets.

The project involves (i) replacing a

single existing utility pole (installed by

Cellular One) with a taller, slightly

broader pole to accommodate three

additional antenna panels, and (ii)

placing the associated radio equipment

within a nearby building. The utility

pole will be approximately 65 feet tall,

15 feet taller than the existing Cellular

One pole. Power for the project will be

provided through underground coaxial

cables connected to existing power

sources. Connection to telephone lines

will be through existing telephone lines.

COMMENTS: Comments on the proposed

project must be sent to Devon Danz,

Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street, P.O.

Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129–

0052, and be received by November 13,

2000. A copy of Sprint PCS’s

application is available upon request to

the Presidio Trust.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Devon Danz, Presidio Trust, 34 Graham

Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco,

CA 94129–0052. Email:

ddanz@presidiotrust.gov. Telephone:

415–561–5300.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

Karen A. Cook,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–26005 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–4R–U

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies

Available From: Securities and

Exchange Commission, Office of Filings

and Information Services, Washington,

DC 20549.

Extension: Rule 17f–6; SEC File No.

270–392; OMB Control No. 3235–0447.

Notice is hereby given that, under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and

Exchange Commission (the

‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget a

request for extension of the previously

approved collection of information

discussed below.

Rule 17f–6 under the Investment

Company Act of 1940 [17 CFR 270.17f–

6] 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.

Before the rule was adopted, funds

generally were required to maintain

such assets in special accounts with a

custodian bank.1

Rule 17f–6 permits funds to maintain

their assets with FCMs that are

registered under the Commodity

Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) and that are not

affiliated with the fund. The rule

requires that a written contract

containing the following provisions

govern the manner in which the FCM

maintains a fund’s assets:

• The PCM must comply with the

segregation requirements of section

4d(2) of the CEA [7 U.S.C. 6d(2)] and the

rules under that statute [17 CFR Chapter

I] or, if applicable, the secured amount

requirements of rule 30.7 under the CEA

[17 CFR 30.7];

• If the FCM places the fund’s margin

with another entity for clearing

purposes the FCM must obtain an

acknowledgement from the clearing

organization that the fund’s assets are

held on behalf of the FCM’s customers

in accordance with provisions under the

CEA; and

• Upon request the FCM must furnish

records about the fund’s assets to the

Commission or its staff.

The rule requires a written contract

that contains certain provisions to

ensure important safeguards and other

benefits relating to the custody of fund

assets by FCMs. For example, the

requirement that FCMs comply with the

segregation or secured amount

requirements of the CEA and the rules

under the statue is designed to protect

fund assets held by FCMs. The contract

requirement that an FCM obtain an

acknowledgement from an entity that

clears fund transactions that the fund’s

assets are held on behalf of the FCM’s

customers according to CEA provisions

seeks to accommodate the legitimate

needs of the participants in the

commodity settlement process,

consistent with the protection of fund

assets. 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 of funds.