Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 1995 / Notices 25749

1The NASD initially submitted the proposed rule

change on February 6, 1995. Amendment No. 1,

submitted on March 22, 1995, replaced the initial

submission in its entirety.

2 15 U.S.C. 73s(b)(1).

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

4NASD Manual, Rules of Fair Practice, Art. III,

Sec. 1 (CCH) ¶ 2151.05.

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

The Commission hereby provides

notice that this is a proceeding on an

application for a license amendment

falling within the scope of section 134

of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

(NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10154. Under

section 134 of NWPA, the Commission,

at the request of any party to the

proceeding must use hybrid hearing

procedures with respect to ‘‘any matter

which the Commission determines to be

in controversy among the parties.’’ The

hybrid procedures in section 134

provide for oral argument on matters in

controversy, proceeded by discovery

under the Commission’s rules, and the

designation, following argument, of only

those factual issues that involve a

genuine and substantial dispute,

together with any remaining questions

of law, to be resolved in an adjudicatory

hearing. Actual adjudicatory hearings

are to be held on those issues found to

meet the criteria of section 134 and set

for hearing after oral argument.

The Commission’s rules

implementing section 134 of the NWPA

are found in 10 CFR part 2, subpart K,

‘‘Hybrid Hearing Procedures for

Expansion of Spent Nuclear Fuel

Storage Capacity at Civilian Nuclear

Power Reactors’’ (published at 50 FR

41670, October 15, 1985) to 10 CFR

2.1101 et seq. Under those rules, any

party to the proceeding may invoke the

hybrid hearing procedures by filing with

the presiding officer a written request

for oral argument under 10 CFR 2.1109.

To be timely, the request must be filed

within 10 days of an order granting a

request for hearing or petition to

intervene. (As outlined above, the

Commission’s rules in 10 CFR part 2,

subpart G, and 2.714 in particular,

continue to govern the filing of requests

for a hearing or petitions to intervene,

as well as the admission of contentions.)

The presiding officer shall grant a

timely request for oral argument. The

presiding officer may grant untimely

request for oral argument only upon

showing of good cause by the requesting

party for the failure to file on time and

after providing the other parties an

opportunity to respond to the untimely

request. If the presiding officer grants a

request for oral argument, any hearing

held on the application shall be

conducted in accordance with hybrid

hearing procedures. In essence, those

procedures limit the time available for

discovery and require that an oral

argument be held to determine whether

any contentions must be resolved in

adjudicatory hearing. If no party to the

proceedings requests oral argument, or

if all untimely requests for oral

argument are denied, then the usual

procedures in 10 CFR part 2, subpart G,

apply.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated March 31, 1995,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the

local public document room located at

the Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,

Middletown, CT 06457.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 5th day of

May 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Alan B. Wang,

Project Manager, Project Directorate I–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–11758 Filed 5–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Requests Under Review by Office of

Management and Budget

Agency Clearance Officer: Michael E.

Bartell, (202) 942–8800

Upon written request copies available

from: Securities and Exchange

Commission, Office of Filings and

Information Services, 450 Fifth Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20549

Extension:

Rule 19d–3—File No. 270–245

Rule 19h–1—File No. 270–247

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

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

and Exchange Commission

(Commission ) has submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget

requests for approval of extension on

previously approved collections for the

following:

Rule 19d–3 prescribes the form and

content of application to the

Commission for review of final

disciplinary sanctions, denials of

membership, participation or

association with a member or

prohibitions or limitations of access to

services imposed by self-regulatory

organizations. it is estimated that

approximately 50 respondents will

incur an average burden of 18 hours per

year to comply with this rule, for a total

annual burden of 900 hours.

Rule 19h–1 prescribes the form and

content of notices and applications by

self-regulatory organizations regarding

proposed admissions to, or

continuances in, membership,

participation or association with a

member of any person subject to a

statutory disqualification. It is estimated

that approximately 70 respondents will

incur an average burden of 4.5 hours per

year to comply with this rule, for a total

annual burden of 315 hours.

Direct general comments to the

Clearance Officer for the Securities and

Exchange Commission at the address

below. Direct any comments concerning

the accuracy of the estimated average

burden hours for compliance with the

Commission rules and forms to Michael

E. Bartell, Associate Executive Director,

Office of Information Technology,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

450 Fifth Street NW., Washington, DC

20549 and the Clearance Officer for the

Securities and Exchange Commission,

Office of Management and Budget,

Project numbers 3235–0204 (Rule 19d–

3) and 3235–0259 (Rule 19h–1), Room

3208, New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC 20503.

Dated: May 1, 1995.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–11771 Filed 5–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35681; File No. SR–NASD–

95–06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order

Approving Proposed Rule Change by

National Association of Securities

Dealers, Inc. Relating to Interpretation

of the Board of Governors—

Forwarding of Proxy and Other

Material Under Article III, Section 1 of

the NASD Rules of Fair Practice

May 5, 1995.

On March 22, 1995,1 the National

Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.

(‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’) filed with

the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)

a proposed rule change pursuant to

Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),2 and

Rule 19b–4 thereunder.3 The proposed

rule change amends its Interpretation of

the Board of Governors—Forwarding of

Proxy and Other Material under Article

III, Section 1 of the NASD Rules of Fair

Practice 4 (‘‘Interpretation’’) to allow a