64182 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 1995 / Notices

vote on the question, whether the

requirement for a seven calendar notice

should be waived, are:

The Hon. Mel R. Jiganti, Chairperson—

Yes

The Hon. John B. Farmakides—Yes

The Hon. Ronald P. Wertheim—Yes

The arbitrators voted to suspend the

notice requirement for several reasons.

First, all parties to the proceeding had

received notice of the proposed

schedule approximately two weeks

prior to the initiation of the proceeding.

Second, the present schedule, which

was fine tuned at the meeting on

December 4, 1995, did not significantly

alter the schedule initially proposed by

the parties. Third, the meeting on

December 4, 1995, which marks the

commencement of the proceeding, was

announced in a Federal Register notice

seven calendar days before the meeting.

And finally, the arbitrators and the

parties anticipate the proceeding will

require the full 180 days for hearing the

testimony and preparing the decision.

For the foregoing reasons, the arbitrators

hereby waive the notice requirement,

but comply with all substantive

requirements of the rule.

Dated: December 11, 1995.

Marilyn Kretsinger,

Acting General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 95–30499 Filed 12–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–33–P

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS

ADMINISTRATION

Record Schedules; Availability and

Request for Comments

AGENCY: National Archives and Records

Administration, Office of Records

Administration.

ACTION: Notice of availability of

proposed records schedules; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The National Archives and

Records Administration (NARA)

publishes notice at least once monthly

of certain Federal agency requests for

records disposition authority (records

schedules). Records schedules identify

records of sufficient value to warrant

preservation in the National Archives of

the United States. Schedules also

authorize agencies after a specified

period to dispose of records lacking

administrative, legal, research, or other

value. Notice is published for records

schedules that (1) propose the

destruction of records not previously

authorized for disposal, or (2) reduce

the retention period for records already

authorized for disposal. NARA invites

public comments on such schedules, as

required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a).

DATES: Request for copies must be

received in writing on or before January

29, 1996. Once the appraisal of the

records is completed, NARA will send

a copy of the schedule. The requester

will be given 30 days to submit

comments.

ADDRESSES: Address requests for single

copies of schedules identified in this

notice to the Records Appraisal and

Disposition Division (NIR), National

Archives and Records Administration,

College Park, MD 20740. Requesters

must cite the control number assigned

to each schedule when requesting a

copy. The control number appears in

the parentheses immediately after the

name of the requesting agency.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year

U.S. Government agencies create

billions of records on paper, film,

magnetic tape, and other media. In order

to control this accumulation, agency

records managers prepare records

schedules specifying when the agency

no longer needs the records and what

happens to the records after this period.

Some schedules are comprehensive and

cover all the records of an agency or one

of its major subdivisions. These

comprehensive schedules provide for

the eventual transfer to the National

Archives of historically valuable records

and authorize the disposal of all other

records. Most schedules, however, cover

records of only one office or program or

a few series of records, and many are

updates of previously approved

schedules. Such schedules also may

include records that are designated for

permanent retention.

Destruction of records requires the

approval of the Archivist of the United

States. This approval is granted after a

thorough study of the records that takes

into account their administrative use by

the agency of origin, the rights of the

Government and of private persons

directly affected by the Government’s

activities, and historical or other value.

This public notice identifies the

Federal agencies and their subdivisions

requesting disposition authority,

includes the control number assigned to

each schedule, and briefly describes the

records proposed for disposal. The

records schedule contains additional

information about the records and their

disposition. Further information about

the disposition process will be

furnished to each requester.

Schedules Pending

1. Department of the Air Force (N1–

AFU–96–1). Routine criminal

investigative records.

2. Department of Education,

President’s Commission on Foreign

Language and International Studies

(N1–12–95–2). Administrative

correspondence and reference files.

3. Department of State (N1–59–95–

14). Routine, facilitative, and

duplicative records from the Bureau of

Economic Affairs, the Legal Adviser, the

Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian

Affairs, and the Bureau of Security and

Consular Affairs.

4. Department of the Treasury, Office

of Thrift Supervision (N1–483–93–12).

System activity and ad hoc reports

created by the Holding Company

Universe System.

5. Administration for Health Care

Policy and Research (N1–510–94–1).

Comprehensive records schedule.

6. Air Coordinating Committee (N1–

220–94–8). Questionnaires, tabulations,

and subcommittee records duplicating

information in retained ACC records.

7. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and

Firearms (N1–436–95–1). Certificate of

Label Approval output records.

8. Federal Trade Commission (N1–

122–95–3). Bureau of Economics

Fertilizer Investigation Working Files,

1938–80.

9. Social Security Administration

(N1–47–96–1). Reduction in retention

period for employer reports of wages

paid.

10. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–94–3). Records created by the

Internal Energy Management Program.

11. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–95–11). TVA Form 13037,

Acceptance of indemnification coverage

and waiver of claims.

12. The White House Conference on

Small Business (N1–220–95–16).

Routine correspondence, working

papers to publications, anonymous

voting ballots, and press coverage

documents.

13. United States Information Agency,

Office of the General Counsel (N1–306–

95–7). Reduction in retention period for

records already approved for

destruction.

14. United States Information Agency,

Bureau of Management (N1–306–95–8).

Routine records of the Office of

Technology.

Dated: December 5, 1995.

James W. Moore,

Assistant Archivist for Records

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–30471 Filed 12–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7515–01–M
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 240 / Thursday, December 14, 1995 / Notices 64183

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–302]

Florida Power Company, Crystal River

Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3;

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. DPR–

72 issued to Florida Power Compant

(the licensee) for operation of Crystal

River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3,

located in Citrus County, Florida.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed amendment would

include provisions in Technical

Specifications (TS) Section 3.7 which

allow for the storage of fuel with an

enrichment not to exceed 5.0 w/o U–235

in the new and spent fuel storage racks.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

amendment dated January 26, 1995, as

supplemented March 9, 1995, and May

24, 1995.

The Need for Proposed Action

The proposed changes are needed so

that the licensee can use higher fuel

enrichment to provide the flexibility of

extending the fuel irradiation and to

permit operation for longer fuel cycles.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed revisions to

the TS. The proposed revisions would

permit use of fuel enriched to a nominal

5.0 weight percent Uranium 235. The

safety considerations associated with

reactor operation with higher

enrichment and extended irradiation

have been evaluated by the NRC staff.

The staff has concluded that such

changes would not adversely affect

plant safety. The proposed changes have

no adverse effect on the probability of

any accident. The higher enrichment,

with fuel burnup to 60,000 megawatt

days per metric ton uranium, may

slightly change the mix of fission

products that might be released in the

event of a serious accident, but such

small changes would not significantly

affect the consequences of serious

accidents. No changes are being made in

the types or amounts of any radiological

effluents that may be released offsite.

There is no significant increase in the

allowable individual or cumulative

occupational radiation exposure.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts of reactor

operation with higher enrichment and

extended irradiation, the proposed

changes to the TS involve systems

located within the restricted area, as

defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not

affect nonradiological plant effluents

and have no other environmental

impact.

The environmental impacts of

transportation resulting from the use of

higher enrichment fuel and extended

irradiation were published and

discussed in the staff assessment

entitled, ‘‘NRC Assessment of the

Environmental Effects of Transportation

Resulting from Extended Fuel

Enrichment and Irradiation,’’ dated July

7, 1988, and published in the Federal

Register (53 FR 30355) on August 11,

1988. As indicated therein, the

environmental cost contribution of the

proposed increase in the fuel

enrichment and irradiation limits are

either unchanged or may, in fact, be

reduced from those summarized in

Table S–4 as set forth in 10 CFR

51.52(c). Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

radiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed

amendment.

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed

action does involve features located

entirely within the restricted area as

defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not

affect non-radiological 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.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission concluded that

there are no significant environmental

effects that would result from the

proposed action, any other alternative

would have equal or greater

environmental impacts and need not be

evaluated.

The principal alternative would be to

deny the requested amendments. This

would not reduce the environmental

impact of plant operations and would

result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement related to operation of the

Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant,

Unit 3.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on November 16, 1995, the NRC staff

consulted with the Florida State official,

Dr. Lyle Jerrett of the State Office of

Radiation Control, regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The Commission has determined not

to prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed license

amendments.

Based upon the foregoing

environmental assessment, we conclude

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated January 26, 1995, and

supplements to the application dated

March 9, 1995, and May 24, 1995. These

documents are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, The Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC

20555, and at the local public document

room for the Crystal River Nuclear

Generating Station, Unit 3, located at

the Coastal Region Library, 8619 W.

Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida

32629.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day

of December 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David B. Matthews,

Director, Project Directorate II–1, Division of

Reactor Projects I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–30457 Filed 12–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316]

Indiana Michigan Power Company

Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit

Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of 10 CFR

73.55 for Facility Operating License

Nos. DPR–58 and DPR–74, issued to

Indiana Michigan Power Company, (the

licensee), for operation of the D.C. Cook

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in

Berrien County, Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

the licensee from certain requirements