Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Notices 71105 

Federal agency that owns the property. 

TIDA may address those needs either on 

or off base. TIDA, as the LRA, must 

prepare a redevelopment plan for the 

closing installation that considers the 

expressed needs of the homeless. DON 

has a role if and only if HUD determines 

that the redevelopment plan submitted 

by TIDA does not meet regulatory 

criteria set forth at 24 CFR part 586 and 

TIDA fails to revise the redevelopment 

plan in a manner that HUD determines 

meets those regulatory requirements. 

On November 1, 1995, the Treasure 

Island Homeless Development Initiative 

(TIHDI) submitted a Notice of Interest to 

the LRA for surplus property including 

homeless housing, support services, 

employment, and economic 

development programs and services. On 

November 26, 1996, HUD approved the 

San Francisco Office of Military Base 

Conversion’s homeless assistance 

submission including its proposed 

agreements with TIDHI. TIDA was not 

established as the LRA until the 1998, 

at which time they inherited the 

approved plan. Currently, TIHDI 

operates one of the most intensive San 

Francisco homeless provider initiatives 

at Treasure Island. In addition to a day 

care center, TIHDI manages 190 units 

housing formerly homeless individuals. 

DON has met the requirements of both 

NEPA and BCCRHA Act in its analysis 

of homeless requirements through the 

consideration of the 1996 Draft Reuse 

Plan. Under the requirements of DBCRA 

of 1990, as amended, any entity 

responsible for developing NSTI or 

implementing the redevelopment plan 

would be bound by the homeless 

assistance requirements set forth in the 

BCCRHA Act. 

The San Francisco Municipal Railway 

Service Planning (MUNI) staff 

commented that it currently provides 

bus service between the NSTI and 

Transbay Terminal in San Francisco for 

residents and visitors to the island. 

They concur that bus service may need 

to increase to meet demand under the 

proposed redevelopment plan for NSTI. 

MUNI also comments that they cannot 

commit to any service expansion to the 

East Bay without a concurrent 

commitment of funding from an 

identified source. Determining funding 

for increased bus service is beyond the 

scope of this FEIS and should be 

addressed by the city and county of San 

Francisco in a subsequent CEQA 

analysis to ensure the effectiveness of 

the transportation mitigation measures 

associated with the proposed maximum 

build-out scenario. MUNI requested a 

breakdown of bus service demands in 

the FEIS analysis by mode, direction, 

and time of day. The FEIS provided 

estimates of MUNI bus demand based 

on three different levels of development 

for NSTI. These development scenarios 

were designed to evaluate a range of 

potential environmental impacts, from 

low to high. The actual development 

(both land uses and quantities of land 

uses) that will be approved by the city 

and county of San Francisco may 

ultimately differ from those analyzed in 

the FEIS. Consequently, MUNI demand 

and transit usage patterns could be 

different from those presented in the 

FEIS. The Reuse Plan assumes that ferry 

services will be a travel mode between 

San Francisco and NSTI, in addition to 

bus services. Bus passenger estimates 

were made for bus trips to and from 

NSTI, not within NSTI. MUNI bus 

demand should be analyzed in depth 

when the city and county approve 

specific development plans for NSTI, 

based on the approved land use. This 

would include both trips to and from 

NSTI as well as internal shuttle bus 

demand. 

Conclusion: After considering the 

analysis contained in the FEIS, 

comments from Federal, State, and local 

agencies, and comments from the 

public, I conclude that Alternative 1 is 

the NEPA alternative that best meets 

DON’s purpose and need regarding 

disposal of the NSTI property while 

allowing TIDA to execute 

redevelopment that will provide the 

best opportunity for economic recovery 

from the closure of NSTI. While 

Alternative 1 presents the potential for 

significant impacts in several respects, 

especially traffic, reuse of the property 

in accordance with TIDA’s reuse plan 

can be accomplished without significant 

harm to the environment through 

implementation of the mitigation 

measures by TIDA or subsequent 

developers. 

Although the No Action alternative is 

the environmentally preferred 

alternative, it would not meet DON’s 

purpose and need regarding property 

disposal and would preclude the 

economic recovery intended by 

Congress when it enacted the DBCRA 

1990. The No Action alternative would 

result in continued caretaker activities; 

therefore, socioeconomic gains in terms 

of new jobs and increased revenue in 

the region from disposal and subsequent 

reuse of NSTI would not be realized. 

Dated: November 17, 2005. 

Eric Mcdonald, 

Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate 

General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register 

Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. E5–6507 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

Privacy Act of 1974; System of 

Records 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice to alter a system of 

records. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy 

proposes to alter a system of records 

notice in its existing inventory of 

records systems subject to the Privacy 

Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as 

amended. 

DATES: This proposed action will be 

effective without further notice on 

December 27, 2005 unless comments are 

received which result in a contrary 

determination. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the 

Department of the Navy, PA/FOIA 

Policy Branch, Chief of Naval 

Operations (DNS–36), 2000 Navy 

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20350–2000. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. 

Doris Lama at (202) 685–325–6545. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department of the Navy’s systems of 

records notices subject to the Privacy 

Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as 

amended, hve been published in the 

Federal Register and are available from 

the address above. 

The proposed system reports, as 

required by 5 U.S.C. 552a (r), of the 

Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, were 

submitted on November 18, 2005, to the 

House Committee on Government 

Reform, the Senate Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs, and the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) pursuant to 

paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB 

Circular No. A–130, ‘Federal Agency 

Responsibilities for Maintaining 

Records About Individuals,’ dated 

February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 

FR 6427). 

Dated: November 18, 2005. 

L.M. Bynum, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

NM05000–2 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Administrative Personnel 

Management System (November 16, 

2004, 69 FR 67128). 

CHANGES: 

* * * * * 

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

Delete entry and replace with: 

‘‘Records and correspondence needed to 

71106 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Notices 

manage personnel and projects, such as: 

Name; Social Security Number; date of 

birth; photo id; grade and series or rank/ 

rate; biographical data; security 

clearance; education; experience 

characteristics and training histories; 

qualifications; trade; hire/termination 

dates; type of appointment; leave; 

location; (assigned organization code 

and/or work center code); Military 

Occupational Series (MOS); labor code; 

payments for training, travel advances 

and claims; hours assigned and worked; 

routine and emergency assignments; 

functional responsibilities; access to 

secure spaces and issuance of keys; 

travel; retention group; vehicle parking; 

disaster control; community relations 

(blood donor, etc); employee recreation 

programs; retirement category; awards; 

property custody; personnel actions/ 

dates; violations of rules; physical 

handicaps and health/safety data; 

veterans preference; postal address; 

location of dependents and next of kin 

and their addresses; mutual aid 

association memberships; union 

memberships; and other data needed for 

personnel, financial, line, safety and 

security management, as appropriate.’’

* * * * * 

PURPOSE(S): 

Delete entry and replace with: ‘‘To 

manage, supervise, and administer 

programs for all Department of the Navy 

civilian, military, and contractor 

personnel such as preparing rosters/ 

locators; contacting appropriate 

personnel in emergencies; training; 

identifying routine and special work 

assignments; determining clearance for 

access control; record handlers of 

hazardous materials; record rental of 

welfare and recreational equipment; 

track beneficial suggestions and awards; 

controlling the budget; travel claims; 

manpower and grades; maintaining 

statistics for minorities; employment; 

labor costing; watch bill preparation; 

projection of retirement losses; verifying 

employment to requesting banking; 

rental and credit organizations; name 

change location; checklist prior to 

leaving activity; payment of mutual aid 

benefits; safety reporting/monitoring; 

and, similar administrative uses 

requiring personnel data. For use by 

arbitrators and hearing examiners in 

civilian personnel matters relating to 

civilian grievances and appeals.’’

* * * * * 

RETRIEVABILITY: 

Delete entry and replace with: ‘‘Name, 

Social Security Number, employee 

badge number, case number, 

organization, work center and/or job 

order, and supervisor’s shop and code.’’

* * * * * 

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: 

Delete entry and replace with: 

‘‘Individual; Defense Manpower Data 

Center; employment papers; records of 

the organization; official personnel 

jackets; supervisors; official travel 

orders; educational institutions; 

applications; duty officer; 

investigations; OPM officials; and/or 

members of the American Red Cross.’’

* * * * * 

NM05000–2 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Administrative Personnel 

Management System. 

SYSTEM LOCATION: 

Organizational elements of the 

Department of the Navy. Official 

mailing addresses are published in the 

Standard Navy Distribution List that is 

available at http://neds.daps.dla.mil/ 

sndl.htm. 

Commander, U.S. Joint Forces 

Command, 1562 Mitscher Avenue, Suite 

200, Norfolk, VA 23551–2488. 

Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, 

P.O. Box 64028, Camp H.M. Smith, HI 

96861–4028. 

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE

SYSTEM: 

All civilian, (including former 

members and applicants for civilian 

employment), military and contract 

employees. 

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

Records and correspondence needed 

to manage personnel and projects, such 

as: Name; Social Security Number; date 

of birth; photo id; grade and series or 

rank/rate; biographical data; training 

histories; qualifications; trade; hire/ 

termination dates; type of appointment; 

leave; location; (assigned organization 

code and/or work center code); Military 

Occupational Series (MOS); labor code; 

payments for training, travel advances 

and claims; hours assigned and worked; 

routine and emergency assignments; 

functional responsibilities; access to 

secure spaces and issuance of keys; 

travel; retention group; vehicle parking; 

disaster control; community relations 

(blood donor, etc); employee recreation 

programs; retirement category; awards; 

property custody; personnel actions/ 

dates; violations of rules; physical 

handicaps and health/safety data; 

veterans preference; postal address; 

location of dependents and next of kin 

and their addresses; mutual aid 

association memberships; union 

memberships; and other data needed for 

personnel, financial, line, safety and 

security management, as appropriate. 

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 

10 U.S.C. 5013, Secretary of the Navy; 

10 U.S.C. 5041, Headquarters, Marine 

Corps; and E.O. 9397 (SSN). 

PURPOSE(S): 

To manage, supervise, and administer 

programs for all Department of the Navy 

civilian, military, and contractor 

personnel such as preparing rosters/ 

locators, contacting appropriate 

personnel in emergencies, training, 

identifying routine and special work 

assignments; determining clearance for 

access control; record handlers of 

hazardous materials; record rental of 

welfare and recreational equipment; 

track beneficial suggestions and awards; 

controlling the budget; travel claims; 

manpower and grades; maintaining 

statistics for minorities; employment; 

labor costing; watch bill preparation; 

projection of retirement losses; verifying 

employment to requesting banking; 

rental and credit organizations; name 

change location; checklist prior to 

leaving activity; payment of mutual aid 

benefits; safety reporting/monitoring; 

and, similar administrative uses 

requiring personnel data. For use by 

arbitrators and hearing examiners in 

civilian personnel matters relating to 

civilian grievances and appeals. 

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE

SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND

THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: 

In addition to those disclosures 

generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 

55a(b) of the Privacy Act, these records 

or information contained therein may 

specially be disclosed outside the DoD 

as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

55a(b)(3) as follows: 

The DoD ‘‘Blanket Routine Uses’’ that 

appear at the beginning of the Navy’s 

compilation of systems of records 

notices apply to this system. 

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, 

RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND

DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

STORAGE: 

Paper and automated records. 

RETRIEVABILITY: 

Name, Social Security Number, 

employee badge number, case number, 

organization, work center and/or job 

order, and supervisor’s shop and code. 

SAFEGUARDS: 

Password controlled system, file, and 

element access based on predefined 

need-to-know. Physical access to 

terminals, terminal rooms, buildings 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Notices 71107 

and activities; grounds are controlled by 

locked terminals and rooms, guards, 

personnel screening and visitor 

registers. 

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: 

Destroy when no longer needed or 

after two years, whichever is later. 

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: 

Commanding officer of the activity in 

question. Official mailing addresses are 

published in the Standard Navy 

Distribution List that is available at 

http://neds.daps.dla.mil/sndl.htm. 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Individuals seeking to determine 

whether this system of records contains 

information about themselves should 

address written inquiries to the 

commanding officer of the activity in 

question. Official mailing addresses are 

published in the Standard Navy 

Distribution List that is available at 

http://neds.daps.dla.mil/sndl.htm. 

The request should include full name, 

Social Security Number, and address of 

the individual concerned and should be 

signed. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

Individuals seeking access to records 

about themselves contained in this 

system of records should address 

written inquiries to the commanding 

officer of the activity in question. 

Official mailing addresses are published 

in the Standard Navy Distribution List 

that is available at http:// 

neds.daps.dla.mil/sndl.htm. 

The request should include full name, 

Social Security Number, and address of 

the individual concerned and should be 

signed. 

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: 

The Navy’s rules for accessing 

records, and for contesting contents and 

appealing initial agency determinations 

are published in Secretary of the Navy 

Instruction 5211.5; 32 CFR part 701; or 

may be obtained from the system 

manager. 

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: 

Individual; Defense Manpower Data 

Center; employment papers; records of 

the organization; official personnel 

jackets; supervisors; official travel 

orders; educational institutions; 

applications; duty officer; 

investigations; OPM officials; and/or 

members of the American Red Cross. 

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: 

None. 

[FR Doc. 05–23267 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–M 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Standby Support for Certain Advanced 

Nuclear Facilities 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of inquiry, request for 

comments and public workshop. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy is 

seeking comment and information from 

the public to assist the Department in 

deciding how to implement section 638 

of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. That 

section authorizes the Secretary of 

Energy to enter into standby support 

contracts with sponsors of advanced 

nuclear power facilities to provide risk 

insurance for certain delays attributed to 

facility licensing or litigation. 

DATES: Interested persons must submit 

written comments by December 23, 

2005. Comments may be mailed to the 

address given in the ADDRESSES section 

below. Comments also may be 

submitted electronically by e-mailing 

them to: 

StandbySupport@Nuclear.Energy.gov. 

We note that e-mail submissions will 

avoid delay currently associated with 

security screening of U.S. Postal Service 

mail. A public workshop will be held on 

December 15, 2005 from 8:30 a.m. to 12 

p.m. and from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Requests 

to speak at the workshop should be 

made through the http:// 

www.Nuclear.gov Web site at least one 

week before the workshop. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be addressed to Kenneth Wade, Office of 

Nuclear Energy, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. The Department 

requires, in hard copy, a signed original 

and three copies of all comments. 

Copies of the public workshop 

transcripts, written comments received, 

and any other docket material may be 

reviewed on the Web site specifically 

established for this proceeding. The 

Internet Web site is http:// 

www.Nuclear.gov. 

The public workshop will be held at 

the Marriot Residence Inn, 7335 

Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814 

on December 15, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Wade, Project Manager, Office 

of Nuclear Energy, NE–30, U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585 (202) 586–1889 

or Marvin Shaw, Attorney-Advisor, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, GC–52, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585 (202) 585–2906. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview and Purpose of the Statute 

No new nuclear power electric 

generation facility has been ordered or 

licensed in the United States in almost 

30 years. Some utilities attribute their 

reluctance to invest in such facilities to 

potential or anticipated delays resulting 

from the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) licensing 

process or delays attributable to 

potential litigation. Recognizing the 

reluctance of utilities or other potential 

investors to order and construct new 

facilities, Congress, the Department of 

Energy (‘‘Department’’), the Commission 

and other governmental entities have 

attempted to facilitate and encourage 

the licensing and full power operation 

of new nuclear facilities. 

In 1989, the Commission promulgated 

10 CFR part 52 in order to establish the 

early site permit, design certification, 

and combined license processes to 

enhance the efficiency and effectiveness 

of the regulatory approval process for 

siting and licensing new plants. In the 

Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Title XXVIII 

of Pub. L. 102–486), Congress amended 

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA) to 

further facilitate the standardization and 

streamlining of nuclear power plant 

licensing by providing explicit authority 

to the Commission for the issuance of 

combined construction and operating 

licenses (COL). An integral part of the 

COL process is the use of ‘‘Inspections, 

Tests, Analyses and Acceptance 

Criteria’’ (ITAAC) to serve as a basis for 

ascertaining, during plant construction, 

whether the licensee is meeting the 

requirements of the COL so that plant 

operations can commence predictably 

upon construction completion. 

However, since there has not been any 

application for a COL in the 16 years 

since the Commission published 10 CFR 

part 52, the efficiency and effectiveness 

of these processes have neither been 

demonstrated in actual practice nor 

tested in court. 

In February 2002, the Department 

established the Nuclear Power 2010 

program, a joint government/industry 

cost-shared effort to identify sites for 

new nuclear power plants, to develop 

and bring to market advanced nuclear 

plant technologies, evaluate the 

business case for building new nuclear 

power plants, and demonstrate untested 

regulatory processes leading to an 

industry decision in the next few years 

to seek Commission approval to build 

and operate at least one new advanced 

nuclear power plant in the United 

States. In 2003, as part of the Nuclear 

Power 2010 program, the Department 

funded a report titled, The Business 

Case for New Nuclear Power Plants (July