63894 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

CLF will monitor, as necessary, the

frequency and duration of a credit union’s

CLF borrowings to make certain that the

credit union is taking appropriate measures

to diminish reliance on CLF advances and

verify that a more serious liquidity problem

does not exist. Borrowers are expected to

initiate appropriate actions to restore

adequate liquidity within a reasonable period

of time. Facility loan officers, at their

discretion, may require a borrowing credit

union to prepare a liquidity restoration plan

to detail the action and time required to

restore its net funds position to the point

where it is no longer dependent on CLF

advances.

[FR Doc. 00–27362 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION

ADMINISTRATION

Notice of Change in Subject of

Meeting; Sunshine Act Meeting

The National Credit Union

Administration Board determined that

its business required the deletion of the

following item from the previously

announced closed meeting (Federal

Register, Vol. 65, No. 201, page 61364–

61365, October 17, 2000) scheduled for

Thursday, October 20, 2000.

2. One (1) Personnel Matter. Closed

pursuant to exemptions (2) and (6).

The Board voted unanimously that

agency business required that this item

be removed from the closed agenda. The

item has been resolved by notation vote.

Earlier announcement of this change

was not possible.

The previously announced items

were:

1. Budget Reprogramming. Closed

pursuant to exemptions (4) and (6).

2. Two (2) Personnel Matters. Closed

pursuant to exemptions (2) and (6).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board,

Telephone (703) 518–6304.

Becky Baker,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00–27587 Filed 10–23–00; 2:11 pm]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–M

NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING

COMMISSION

Paperwork Reduction Act

AGENCY: National Indian Gaming

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The National Indian Gaming

Commission (NIGC), in accordance with

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

intends to submit to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) a

request to review and extend approval

for the following information collection

activities: (1) Compliance and

Enforcement under the Indian Gaming

Regulatory Act (IGRA); (2) Privacy Act

regulations; (3) Approval of Class II and

Class III Gaming Ordinances; and (4)

National Environmental Policy Act

Procedures. The NIGC intends also to

submit a request for reinstatement of the

approval for collection of information

related to its review and approval of

management contracts for the operation

of tribal gaming facilities. OMB

previously approved this information

collection requirement but the approval

has expired. As to each information

collection activity, the NIGC solicits

public comment on: The need for the

information, the practical utility of the

information and whether the

information is necessary for the proper

performance of NIGC functions; the

accuracy of the burden estimate; and

ways that the NIGC might minimize this

burden including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology. When

providing comment, a respondent

should specify the particular collection

activity to which the comment pertains.

DATES AND ADDRESSES: Comments for

the NIGC’s evaluation of the information

collection activities and its request to

OMB to extend or approve the

information collections must be

received by December 30, 2000. Send

comments to Ms. Juanita Mendoza,

National Indian Gaming Commission,

1441 L Street, NW., Suite 9100,

Washington, DC 20005. The NIGC

regulations to which the information

collections pertain are available on the

NIGC website, www.nigc.gov. A copy of

the NEPA procedures for the NIGC are

available on request by providing a

mailing address to the point of contact

for questions and comments listed on

the website. Both the regulations and

the NEPA procedures are also available

by written request to the NIGC (Attn:

Ms. Juanita Mendoza), 1441 L Street

NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC,

20005, or by telephone request at (202)

632–7003. There are no toll-free

numbers. All other requests for

information should be submitted to Ms.

Mendoza at the above address for the

NIGC.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Compliance and Enforcement

under the Indian Gaming Regulatory

Act.

OMB Number: 3141–0001.

Abstract: The Indian Gaming

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

[IGRA] governs the regulation of gaming

on Indian lands. Although the IGRA

places primary responsibility with the

tribes for regulating gaming, Section

2706 (b) of the Act directs the NIGC to

monitor gaming conducted on Indian

lands on a continuing basis. The IGRA

authorizes the NIGC to access and

inspect all papers, books and records

relating to gaming conducted on Indian

lands. In accordance with this statutory

responsibility, 25 CFR 571.7 requires

Indian gaming operations to keep

permanent financial records. 25 CFR

571.12 and 571.13 require, respectively,

an annual independent audit of a tribe’s

gaming operations and submission of

this audit to the NIGC. The NIGC uses

this information to fulfill its statutory

responsibility to monitor Indian gaming.

Section 2710 of the IGRA requires tribes

to conduct background investigations on

key employees and primary

management officials involved in class

II and class III gaming. 25 CFR 556 and

558 require tribes to perform each

investigation using information such as

name, address, previous employment

records, previous relationships with

either Indian tribes or the gaming

industry, and licensing relating to those

relationships, any convictions and any

other information a tribe feels is

relevant to the employment of the

individuals being investigated. Tribes

are then required to submit to the NIGC

a copy of the completed employment

applications and investigative reports

and licensing eligibility determinations

on key employees or primary

management officials before issuing

gaming licenses to those persons. The

NIGC will use this information in

conducting its review of the suitability

determinations and will advise the tribe

if it disagrees with any particular

determination.

Estimated Burden: The reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to be 40 hours per response

for access and inspection of records, 100

hours for the preparation and

submission of an annual audit, and 400

hours annually, on the average, for each

tribe for submission of matters related to

background information and licensing.

Respondents: Indian tribes

conducting gaming operations.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

220.

Estimated Annual Responses: 30,640.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 127,800 hours.

Title: Privacy Act Procedures.

OMB Number: 3141–0002.

Abstract: To implement the IGRA, it

is necessary for the NIGC to collect,

maintain and use personal information

gathered on certain individuals. Under

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices 63895

25 CFR §§ 556 and 558, tribes must

submit to the NIGC information

regarding key employees and

management officials employed at a

tribal gaming operation. The NIGC

compiles and stores this information in

a system of records. Pursuant to the

Privacy Act of 1974 [5 U.S.C. 552a]

agencies must promulgate regulations

regarding the collection, maintenance,

use and dissemination of records within

a system. Under 25 CFR 515.3,

individuals can request information on

whether they are subject to any record.

Individuals may also request access to

those records and may ask the NIGC to

make corrections or amendments if the

information is not accurate. The NIGC

will use the information submitted by

the responder in making this

determination.

Estimated Burden: The reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to be 1 hour per response.

Respondents: Individuals requesting

access to records.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 5.

Estimated Annual Responses: 5.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 5 hours.

Title: Approval of Class II and Class

III Ordinances.

OMB Number: 3141–000–3.

Abstract: The IGRA establishes the

National Indian Gaming Commission as

an independent regulatory agency to

oversee Indian gaming. The Act sets

standards for the regulation of gaming

including requirements for approval or

disapproval of tribal gaming ordinances.

IGRA section 2705(a)(3) requires the

Chairman to review all class II and class

III tribal gaming ordinances. In

accordance with this provision, 25 CFR

552.2 of the NIGC’s regulations requires

tribes to submit to the NIGC: (1) A copy

of the gaming ordinance to be approved,

a copy of the authorizing resolution by

which it was enacted by the tribal

government and a request for approval

of the ordinance or resolution; (2) a

description of procedures the tribe will

employ in conducting background

investigations on key employees or

primary management officials; (3) a

description of procedures the tribe will

use to issue licenses to primary

management officials and key

employees; (4) copies of all gaming

regulations; (5) a copy of any applicable

tribal-state compact; (6) a description of

dispute resolution procedures for

disputes arising between the gaming

public and the tribe or management

contractor; (7) identification of the law

enforcement agent that will take

fingerprints and a description of the

procedures for conducting criminal

history checks; and (8) designation of an

agent for service of process. Under 25

CFR § 522.3, tribes must submit any

amendment to the ordinance or

resolution for approval by the

Chairman. In this instance, the tribe

must provide a copy of the authorizing

resolution. The NIGC will use the

information collected to approve or

disapprove the ordinance or

amendment.

Estimated Burden: The reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to be 80 hours per response

for approval of an initial gaming

ordinance, and 5 hours per response for

an amendment.

Respondents: Indian tribes

conducting gaming operations.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

220.

Estimated Annual Responses: Initial

ordinance review requests: 10;

ordinance amendment review requests:

50.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 1,050 hours.

Title: National Environmental Policy

Act Procedures.

OMB Number: 3141–006.

Abstract: The National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

seq.) was enacted to encourage a

national policy of protecting, enhancing,

and restoring the quality of the human

environment. The Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ),

established pursuant to the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),

promulgated implementing regulations

at 40 CFR 1501 et seq. NEPA and CEQ’s

regulations require every Federal agency

to establish procedures and strategies

that consider the environmental

consequences of Federal agency actions.

Under NEPA, Federal agencies are

required to prepare or cause to be

prepared environmental documents

relating to actions by the agency that

may have significant impact on the

environment. The NEPA process will be

triggered when a tribe and management

contractor seek approval of a

management contract under 25 CFR 533

which involves the construction of or

significant modification to a gaming

facility. NIGC procedures discuss the

submission of an environmental

assessment for consideration incident to

that approval process. NIGC will use the

environmental assessment in

determining whether there is significant

impact on the environment as a result

of the construction or significant facility

modification and may require

mitigations described in the assessment

to minimize any impact.

Respondents: Indian tribes seeking

approval of a management contract for

tribal gaming operations and/or a

management contactor.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

50.

Estimated Annual Responses: 15.

Estimated Annual Burden Hours:

7,500.

Estimated Burden Hours per

Response: 500.

Title: Approval of Management

Contracts.

OMB Number: 3141–0004 (expired).

Abstract: Under Sections 2710(e) and

2711 of the IGRA, subject to the

approval of the NIGC Chairman, an

Indian tribe may enter into a

management contract for the operation

and management of a tribal gaming

activity. In approving a management

contract, by the terms of the statute, the

Chairman shall require and obtain the

name, address, and other pertinent

background information on each person

or entity having a direct financial

interest in, or management

responsibility for such contract, and in

the case of a corporation those

individuals who serve on the board of

directors of such corporation and each

of its stockholders who hold 10 percent

or more of its shares; a description of

previous experience that each person

has had with other Indian gaming

contracts or with the gaming industry

including any gaming licenses which

the person holds; and a complete

financial statement of each person

listed. Under 25 CFR part 533, the

Chairman requires the submission of the

contract with original signatures, any

collateral agreements to the contract, a

tribal ordinance or resolution

authorizing the submission and

supporting documentation, a three-year

business plan which sets forth the

parties’ goals, objectives, budgets,

financial plans, and related matters and

income statements and sources and use

of funds statements for the previous

three years, and, for any contract

exceeding five years or which includes

a management fee of more than 30

percent, justification that the capital

investment required and income

projections for the gaming operation

require the longer duration or the

additional fee. Under 25 CFR part 535,

the Chairman may approve a

modification to a management contract

or an assignment of that management

contract based on information similar to

that required under part 533. The part

also specifies that the Chairman may

void a previous management contract

approval and allows the parties the

opportunity to submit information

relevant to that determination. 25 CFR

part 537 specifies the requirements for

submission of background information

63896 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

in amplification of the statutory

requirement for obtaining information

on persons and entities having a direct

financial interest in or management

responsibility for a management

contract. Finally, 25 CFR part 539

permits appeals to the Commission from

a decision of the Chairman to

disapprove a management contract and

allows the Indian tribe and the

management company an opportunity to

provide information relevant to that

appeal. The NIGC will use the

information collected to either approve

or disapprove the contract or, in the

case of an appeal, to grant or deny the

appeal.

Estimated Burden: The reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to be 500 hours per

response.

Respondents: Indian tribes

conducting gaming and management

contractors for tribal gaming operations.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

100.

Estimated Annual Responses: 15.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 7,500.

Montie R. Deer,

Chairman, National Indian Gaming

Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–27408 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to

submit an information collection

request to OMB and solicitation of

public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a

submittal to OMB for review of

continued approval of information

collections under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Information pertaining to the

requirement to be submitted:

1. The title of the information

collection: 10 CFR Part 25—Access

Authorization for Licensee Personnel.

2. Current OMB approval number:

3150–0046.

3. How often the collection is

required: On occasion.

4. Who is required or asked to report:

NRC-regulated facilities and other

organizations requiring access to NRCclassified information.

5. The number of annual respondents:

20.

6. The number of hours needed

annually to complete the requirement or

request: 257 hours (197 hours reporting

and 60 hours recordkeeping) or 3.8

hours per response.

7. Abstract: NRC-regulated facilities

and other organizations are required to

provide information and maintain

records to ensure that an adequate level

of protection is provided NRC-classified

information and material.

Submit, by December 26, 2000,

comments that address the following

questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the NRC to

properly perform its functions? Does the

information have practical utility?

2. Is the burden estimate accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the

information collection be minimized,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology?

A copy of the draft supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room, One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville

Pike, Room O–1F23, Rockville, MD

20852. OMB clearance requests are

available at the NRC worldwide web

site: http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/

OMB/index.html. The document will be

available on the NRC home page site for

60 days after the signature date of this

notice.

Comments and questions about the

information collection requirements

may be directed to the NRC Clearance

Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, T–6 E6,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, by

telephone at 301–415–7233, or by

Internet electronic mail at

BJS1@NRC.GOV.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day

of October, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–27385 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–U

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–269, 50–270, and 60–287]

Duke Energy Corporation; Notice of

Consideration of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination,

and Opportunity for a Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

38, DPR–47, and DPR–55 issued to the

Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee)

for operation of the Oconee Nuclear

Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 located in

Seneca, South Carolina.

By letter dated June 6, 2000, the

Commission approved Amendment Nos.

312, 312, and 312 to add Technical

Specification (TS) Surveillance

Requirement 3.8.1.17 to verify

operability of the Keowee Hydro Units

(KHUs) out-of-tolerance logic trip and

closure blockage relays associated with

the overhead and underground power

path breakers. The amendments

specified that the TS change would be

implemented by November 30, 2000.

Subsequently, by application dated

October 18, 2000, the licensee submitted

a proposed amendment to change the

implementation date. The proposed new

date would be based on an engineering

study that is being conducted to

evaluate the appropriate KHU OOT

surveillance criteria and resolve

overshoot concerns. These overshoot

concerns are described in Amendment

Nos. 316, 316 and 316 that were issued

on October 4, 2000, which also added a

note that requires an amendment, based

on the results of this evaluation, be

submitted by April 5, 2001.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendment, the Commission

will have made findings required by the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(the Act) and the Commission’s

regulations.

The Commission has made a

proposed determination that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration. Under

the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR

50.92, this means that operation of the

facility in accordance with the proposed

amendment would not: (1) Involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated; or

(3) involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its