54584 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Notices 

for LEP persons to the recipient’s 

programs and activities. 

While all recipients must work 

toward building systems that will 

ensure access for LEP individuals, the 

Endowment acknowledges that the 

implementation of a comprehensive 

system to serve LEP individuals is a 

process and that a system will evolve 

over time as it is implemented and 

periodically reevaluated. As recipients 

take reasonable steps to provide 

meaningful access to federally assisted 

programs and activities for LEP persons, 

the Endowment will look favorably on 

intermediate steps recipients take that 

are consistent with this Guidance, and 

that, as part of a broader 

implementation plan or schedule, move 

their service delivery system toward 

providing full access to LEP persons. 

This does not excuse noncompliance 

but instead recognizes that full 

compliance in all areas of a recipient’s 

activities and for all potential language 

minority groups may reasonably require 

a series of implementing actions over a 

period of time. However, in developing 

any phased implementation schedule, 

recipients should ensure that the 

provision of appropriate assistance for 

significant LEP populations or with 

respect to activities having a significant 

impact on the health, safety, legal rights, 

or livelihood of beneficiaries is 

addressed first. Recipients are 

encouraged to document their efforts to 

provide LEP persons with meaningful 

access to federally assisted programs 

and activities. 

In cases where a recipient of federal 

financial assistance from the 

Endowment also receives assistance 

from one or more other federal agencies, 

there is no obligation to conduct and 

document separate but identical 

analyses and language assistance plans. 

The Endowment, in discharging its 

compliance and enforcement obligations 

under Title VI, will look to analyses 

performed and plans developed in 

response to similar detailed LEP 

guidance issued by other federal 

agencies. Accordingly, as an adjunct to 

this Guidance, recipients may, where 

appropriate, also rely on guidance 

issued by other agencies in discharging 

their Title VI LEP obligations. 

In determining a recipient entity’s 

compliance with Title VI, the 

Endowment’s primary concern is to 

ensure that the entity’s policies and 

procedures overcome barriers resulting 

from language differences that would 

deny LEP persons a meaningful 

opportunity to participate in and access 

programs, services, and benefits. A 

recipient entity’s appropriate use of the 

methods and options discussed in this 

policy guidance is viewed by the 

Endowment as evidence of that entity’s 

willingness to comply voluntarily with 

its Title VI obligations. 

Dated: August 22, 2005. 

Murray Welsh, 

Director of Administrative Services, National 

Endowment for the Arts. 

[FR Doc. 05–18320 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7537–01–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans 

to request clearance of this collection. In 

accordance with the requirement of 

Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13), 

we are providing opportunity for public 

comment on this action. After obtaining 

and considering public comment, NSF 

will prepare the submission requesting 

that OMB approve clearance of this 

collection for no longer than 1 year. 

DATES: Written comments on this notice 

must be received by November 14, 2005 

to be assured of consideration. 

Comments received after that date will 

be considered to the extent practicable. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance 

Officer, National Science Foundation, 

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295, 

Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone 

(703) 292–7556; or sent e-mail to 

splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who use 

a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–

800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 

p.m., eastern time, Monday through 

Friday. You may obtain a copy of the 

data collection instrument and 

instructions from Ms. Plimpton. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title of Collection: Follow-on Study: 

Evaluation of the Research Experiences 

for Teachers (RET) Program, 

Participants in FY 2004 and FY 2005 

Awards. 

OMB Number: 3145–0198. 

Expiration Date of Approval: July 31, 

2007. 

Type of request: Renewal. 

Abstract: Proposed Project: The 

Directorate for Engineering (ENG) 

initiated the Research Experiences for 

Teachers (RET) Supplements activity in 

FY 2001 to be add-ons to active awards 

funded by ENG programs. The intent 

was to build on the popular NSF-wide 

Research Experiences for 

Undergraduates (REU) Supplements 

activity by providing opportunities for 

K–12 teachers to conduct hands-on 

experiences in the laboratories/facilities 

of ENG-funded researchers. The 

assumption was that, like 

undergraduates, the teachers could 

benefit from involvement in research 

and direct exposure to the scientific 

method, and they could transfer what 

they learned into classroom activities. 

Typically the supplements supported 

one or two teachers. Beginning in FY 

2002, ENG has also funded RET Site 

awards, which are similar to REU Sites 

in that NSF awards fund groups of 

teachers to work with faculty members 

at the same institution and to engage in 

group activities related to the research. 

In 2003, community college faculty 

became eligible as participants in RET 

awards. By design, all RET awards are 

made to the university in whose 

research the teachers participate. 

The initial study of the program just 

concluded focused on participants in 

ENG-funded RET Supplement and Site 

awards in 2001 through 2003. That 

study resulted in modifications to the 

RET program announcement for the FY 

200 competition. The proposed followup study will be very similar to the 

initial study and focus on teachers who 

participated in RET during 2004 and 

2005. The follow-on study will examine 

how RET experiences have affected 

participating teachers’ subsequent 

teaching techniques, attitudes about 

teaching, and professional development 

activities. Outcomes and impacts 

beyond the teachers’ own classrooms, 

such as knowledge transfer activities, 

formal partnerships formed between the 

RET Principal Investigators (PIs)—the 

awardees—and the teachers’ school 

system/district will also be examined. 

The first survey found that follow-up 

interaction between PIs and teachers 

were strongly related to reported 

positive effects. Accordingly, the followup study will explore this aspect of the 

experience in somewhat greater detail 

that was done in the first survey. The 

survey data collection will be done on 

the World Wide Web as before. 

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting 

burden for this collection of information 

is estimated to average 40 minutes per 

response. 

Respondents: Individuals. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Form: 600. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 400 hours (600 

respondents at 40 minutes per 

response). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Notices 54585 

Frequency of Response: One time. 

Dated: September 9, 2005. 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation. 

[FR Doc. 05–18298 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–219] 

American Energy Company, LLC 

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station; Notice of Acceptance for 

Docketing of the Application and 

Notice of Opportunity for Hearing 

Regarding Renewal of Facility 

Operating License No. DRP–16 for an 

Additional 20-Year Period 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC or the Commission) 

is considering application for the 

renewal of Operating License No. DPR–

16, which authorizes the AmerGen 

Energy Company, LLC, to operate the 

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 

at 1930 megawatts (MWt) thermal. The 

renewed license would authorize the 

applicant to operate the Oyster Creek 

Nuclear Generating Station for an 

additional 20 years beyond the period 

specified in the current license. The 

current Operating License for the Oyster 

Creek Nuclear Generating Station 

expires on April 9, 2009. 

The Commission’s staff has received 

an application dated July 22, 2005, from 

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, 

pursuant to 10 CFR Part 54, to renew the 

operating license number DPR–16 for 

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station. A Notice of Receipt and 

Availability of the license renewal 

application, ‘‘AmerGen Energy 

Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear 

Generating Station; Notice of Receipt 

and Availability of Application for 

Renewal Facility Operating License No. 

DPR–16 for an Additional 20-Year 

Period,’’ was published in the Federal 

Register on August 4, 2005 (70 FR 

44940). 

The Commission’s staff has 

determined that AmerGen Energy 

Company, LLC has submitted sufficient 

information in accordance with 10 CFR 

54.19, 54.21, 54.22, 54.23, and 51.53(c) 

that is acceptable for docketing. The 

current Docket No. 50–219 for Operating 

License No. DPR–16 will be retained. 

The docketing of the renewal 

application does not preclude 

requesting additional information as the 

review proceeds, nor does it predict 

whether the Commission will grant or 

deny the application. 

Before issuance of each requested 

renewed license, the NRC will have 

made the findings required by the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), and the Commission’s rules 

and regulations. In accordance with 10 

CFR 54.29, the NRC will issue a 

renewed license on the basis of its 

review if it finds that actions have been 

identified and have been or will be 

taken with respect to: (1) Managing the 

effects of aging during the period of 

extended operation on the functionality 

of structures and components that have 

been identified as requiring aging 

management review, and (2) timelimited aging analyses that have been 

identified as requiring review, such that 

there is reasonable assurance that the 

activities authorized by the renewed 

license will continue to be conducted in 

accordance with the current licensing 

basis (CLB), and that any changes made 

to the plant’s CLB comply with the Act 

and the Commission’s regulations. 

Additionally, in accordance with 10 

CFR 51.95(c), the NRC will prepare an 

environmental impact statement that is 

a supplement to the Commission’s 

NUREG–1437, ‘‘Generic Environmental 

Impact Statement for License Renewal 

of Nuclear Power Plants,’’ dated May 

1996. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.26, and as 

part of the environmental scoping 

process, the staff intends to hold a 

public scoping meeting. Detailed 

information regarding this meeting will 

be the subject of a separate Federal 

Register notice. 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this Federal Register 

Notice, the applicant may file a request 

for a hearing, and any person whose 

interest may be affected by this 

proceeding and who wishes to 

participate as a party in the proceeding 

must file a written request for a hearing 

and a petition for leave to intervene 

with respect to the renewal of the 

licenses. Requests for a hearing and a 

petition for leave to intervene shall be 

filed in accordance with the 

Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for 

Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 

CFR part 2. Interested persons should 

consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, 

which is available at the Commission’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, First Floor, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852 and is accessible from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS should contact the 

NRC’s PDR reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209, or by e-mail at 

pdr@nrc.gov. If a request for a hearing/ 

petition for leave to intervene is filed 

within the 60-day period, the 

Commission or a presiding officer 

designated by the Commission or by the 

Chief Administrative Judge of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel will rule on the request/petition; 

and the Secretary or the Chief 

Administrative Judge of the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board will issue a 

notice of a hearing or an appropriate 

order. In the event that no request for a 

hearing/petition for leave to intervene is 

filed within the 60-day period, the NRC 

may, upon completion of its evaluations 

and upon making the findings required 

under 10 CFR parts 51 and 54, renew 

the license without further notice. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a 

petition for leave to intervene shall set 

forth with particularity the interest of 

the petitioner in the proceeding, and 

how that interest may be affected by the 

results of the proceeding, taking into 

consideration the limited scope of 

matters that may be considered 

pursuant to 10 CFR parts 51 and 54. The 

petition must specifically explain the 

reasons why intervention should be 

permitted with particular reference to 

the following factors: (1) The nature of 

the requestor’s/petitioner’s right under 

the Act to be made a party to the 

proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of 

the requestor’s/petitioner’s property, 

financial, or other interest in the 

proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of 

any decision or order which may be 

entered in the proceeding on the 

requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The 

petition must also set forth the specific 

contentions which the petitioner/ 

requestor seeks to have litigated at the 

proceeding. 

Each contention must consist of a 

specific statement of the issue of law or 

fact to be raised or controverted. In 

addition, the requestor/petitioner shall 

provide a brief explanation of the bases 

of each contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or the 

expert opinion that supports the 

contention on which the requestor/ 

petitioner intends to rely in proving the 

contention at the hearing. The 

requestor/petitioner must also provide 

references to those specific sources and 

documents of which the requestor/ 

petitioner is aware and on which the 

requestor/petitioner intends to rely to 

establish those facts or expert opinion. 

The requestor/petitioner must provide 

sufficient information to show that a 

genuine dispute exists with the