Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 /Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Notices 31535

R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant issued

in connection with the absence of a

continuous fire-rated barrier at the

common boundary between Fire Areas

ABBM and ABI at the Refueling Water

Storage Tank (RWST) is no longer

required. The licensee indicated that the

barrier has now been sealed by insertion

of a 12-inch minimum depth of kaowool

into a 6-inch gap around the

circumference of the tank and closure of

the gap by a 3⁄4-inch thick steel plate.

Therefore, a continuous fire-rated

barrier is not absent at this location.

The proposed action is in response to

the licensee’s letter dated January 13,

1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is needed

because there no longer is a basis or

underlying need for the exemption since

the barrier at the common boundary

between Fire Areas ABBM and ABI at

the RWST has been sealed.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there is no significant

environmental impact if the subject

exemption is revoked.

The proposed revocation is an

administrative action that reflects that

there no longer is a need or basis for the

exemption in light of the licensee’s

corrective action. Therefore, the

proposed action would not increase the

probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in

the types of any effluents that may be

released offsite, and there is no

significant increase in the allowable

individual or cumulative occupational

radiation exposure. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

action does not affect nonradiological

plant effluents and has no other

environmental impact. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant nonradiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

that there is no significant

environmental impact associated with

the proposed action, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact need not be evaluated. As an

alternative to the proposed action, the

staff considered not revoking the

exemption. Not revoking the exemption

would result in no change in current

environmental impacts. The

environmental impacts of the proposed

action and the alternative action are

similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the ‘‘Final Environmental

Statement For the R.E. Ginna Nuclear

Power Plant dated December 1973.’’

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on May 4, 1998, the staff consulted with

the Ms. Hide Volt of the New York State

Energy Research and Development

Authority, regarding the environmental

impact of the proposed action. The State

official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon the environmental

assessment, the Commission concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated January 13,1998, which is

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

which is located at The Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, D. C., and at the local

public document room located at the

Rochester Public Library, 115 South

Avenue, Rochester, New York.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of June 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

S. Singh Bajwa,

Director, Project Directorate I–1, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–15269 Filed 6–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Public Meeting on NRC Regulatory

Oversight of DOE Facilities

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission and the Department of

Energy.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) and the U.S.

Department of Energy (DOE) will hold a

public meeting on Thursday, June 25,

1998, in Aiken, South Carolina, to

address issues related to pilot program

for NRC’s external regulation of certain

DOE facilities. The Receiving Basin for

Offsite Fuels (RBOF) at DOE’s Savannah

River Site (SRS) has been selected at the

third pilot project within the program.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Department of Energy and the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission will hold a joint

public meeting to provide information

on this pilot project on Thursday, June

25, 1998, at 6:30 p.m. at the City of

Aiken Conference Center, City

Municipal Building, 215 The Alley,

Aiken, South Carolina.

In June 1997, DOE and NRC agreed to

pursue NRC external regulation of

certain DOE facilities on a pilot program

basis. A pilot program of NRC simulated

regulation has been established to

collect information on the desirability of

NRC oversight and on whether to seek

legislation to authorize such oversight.

The DOE and the NRC expect to

evaluate six to ten DOE facilities during

the two year pilot program which began

in November 1997. The RBOF at the

SRS has been chosen as one of the pilot

facilities.

The major areas of discussion at this

meeting will be:

• The overall pilot program and

background information.

• The RBOF Work Plan.

• Major issues affecting NRC

oversight (generic and site-specific).

One of the main purposes of the

meeting is to describe the process

through which stakeholders may

participate in the pilot program.

Stakeholders will be invited to ask

questions and submit comments

relevant to the objectives of the pilot

program and the process by which those

objectives are proposed to be addressed

at the RBOF. Issues raised by

stakeholders will be addressed in the

final report following the pilot

evaluation at RBOF.

Since 1994, DOE has been considering

whether there are advantages to be

gained from external regulation of

existing DOE facilities. Two advisory

groups recommended that the NRC be

considered as the external regulator of

nuclear and radiological safety at DOE

sites. External regulation by the NRC

may improve the efficiency and

effectiveness of DOE’s radiological

safety programs. DOE facilities would be

regulated consistent with other facilities

of the same type engaged in similar

activities, and the NRC could maintain

complete independence because it has

no responsibility for operating the

facilities.

A number of background documents

pertaining to the issue of NRC oversight
31536 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 /Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Notices

of DOE facilities are available or will be

made available prior to the meeting.

These include:

• A draft Pilot Program Work Plan for

the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel at

the Savannah River Site.

• A Memorandum of Understanding

between NRC and DOE, dated

November 21, 1997.

• An NRC Commission Paper

entitled, ‘‘Status Report of the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission Task Force On

Oversight of the Department of Energy,

In Response to COMSECY–96–053—DSI

2 (SECY–98–080) dated April 14, 1998.

• NRC Staff Requirements

Memorandum: COMSECY–96–053,

‘‘Oversight of the Department of Energy

(DSI 2),’’ dated March 28, 1997.

• NRC Direction Setting Issue Paper

‘‘Oversight of the Department of

Energy’’ (DSI 2) dated September 16,

1996.

• Report of the DOE Working Group

on External Regulation, dated December

1996.

• Report of the DOE Advisory

Committee on External Regulation of

DOE Nuclear Safety, dated December

1995.

You may obtain copies of these

documents by contacting Jim Giusti at

(803) 725–2889. These documents are

also available on the joint DOE/NRC

Web Site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/

NMSS/doepilot.html. As additional

documents are completed, they will be

added to the web site. If you would like

more information about this meeting, or

need special accommodations to attend,

please contact Jim Giusti at (802) 725–

2889.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of June, 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Malcolm R. Knapp,

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 98–15266 Filed 6–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

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:

Reg. 12B, SEC File No. 270–70, OMB Control

No. 3235–0062

Reg. D, SEC File No. 270–72, OMB Control

No. 3235–0076

Reg. A, SEC File No. 270–110, OMB Control

No. 3235–0286

Form 12b–25, SEC File No. 270–71, OMB

Control No. 3235–0058

Form 3, SEC File No. 270–125, OMB Control

No. 3235–0104

Form 4, SEC File No. 270–126, OMB Control

No. 3235–0287

Form 5, SEC File No. 270–323, OMB Control

No. 3235–0362

Form 15, SEC File No. 270–170, OMB

Control No. 3235–0167

Form S–4, SEC File No. 270–287, OMB

Control No. 3235–0324

Form F–4, SEC File No. 270–288, OMB

Control No. 3235–0325

Reg. S, SEC File No. 270–315, OMB Control

No. 3235–0357

Rule 135d, SEC File No. 270–403, OMB

Control No. 3235–046

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments

on the collections of information

summarized below. The Commission

plans to submit these existing

collections of information to the Office

of Management and Budget for

extension and approval.

Regulation 12B governs all

registration statements filed pursuant to

Sections 12(b) and 12(g) under the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Exchange Act’’) and all reports filed

pursuant to Sections 13 and 15(d) of the

Exchange Act, including amendments

thereto. The information is needed to

provide guidance on how to prepare

these filings. Public companies are the

likely respondents. Regulation 12B does

not directly impose any information

collection burdens on respondents and

is assigned one burden hour for

administrative convenience.

Regulations A and D provide

exemptions from the registration

requirements of the Securities Act of

1933 (‘‘Securities Act’’). Regulation A

provides a conditional small issues

exemption and Regulation D sets forth

rules governing the limited offer and

sale of securities without Securities Act

registration. Those relying on

Regulation A must file a Form 1–A and

those relying on Regulation D file a

Form D. Issuers of securities are the

likely respondents. Approximately 186

respondents file Regulation A annually

for a total annual burden of 115,506

hours. Approximately 8,065

respondents file Regulation D annually

for a total annual burden of 137,680

hours.

Form 12b–25 is filed pursuant to the

Exchange Act Rule 12b–25 by issuers

who are unable to timely file all or any

required portion of an annual, quarterly

or transition report. Approximately

4,474 respondents file Form 12b–25

annually for a total annual burden of

11,185 hours.

Exchange Act Forms 3, 4 and 5 are

filed by insiders of public companies

that have a class of securities registered

under Section 12 of the Exchange Act.

Form 3 is an initial statement of

beneficial ownership of securities, Form

4 is a statement of changes in beneficial

ownership of securities and Form 5 is

an annual statement of beneficial

ownership of securities.

Approximately 7,538 respondents file

Form 3 annually for a total annual

burden of 3,769 hours. Approximately

62,704 respondents file Form 5 annually

for a total annual burden of 31,352

hours. Approximately 37,075

respondents file Form 5 annually for a

total annual burden of 37,075 hours.

Form 15 is filed by public companies

subject to the Exchange Act reporting

requirements to certify termination of

registration of a class of security under

Section 12(g) or notice of suspension of

duty to file report pursuant to Sections

13 and 15(d) of the Exchange Act.

Approximately 1,644 respondents file

Form 15 annually for a total annual

burden of 1,644 hours.

Forms S–4 and F–4 are filed by

companies to register securities issued

in business combination and exchange

transactions under the Securities Act.

Approximately 505 registrants file Form

S–4 annually for a total annual burden

of 622,665 hours. Approximately 2

respondents file Form F–4 annually for

a total annual burden of 2,616 hours.

Regulation S is a set of rules

governing offers and sales made outside

the United States without Securities Act

registration. It does not directly impose

any information collection burdens and

therefore is assigned only one burden

hour for administrative convenience.

Securities Act Rule 135(d) requires

notices given by issuers that they

propose to make certain unregistered

offerings to be filed with the

Commission. Approximately 30

respondents file such notices annually

for a total annual burden of 30 hours.

Written comments are invited on: (a)

whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate

of the burden of the collection of

information; (c) ways to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on respondents, including

through the use of automated collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology. Consideration will be given