Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 1995 / Notices 11123

[FR Doc. 95–5030 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

[NAFTA–00307]

H. Grabell & Sons, Inc., Paterson, NJ;

Notice of Revised Determination on

Reopening

On February 21, 1995, the

Department, on its own motion,

reopened its investigation for the former

workers of the subject firm. The initial

investigation resulted in a negative

determination on January 20, 1995

because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’

test of the Group Eligibility

Requirements of the Trade Act was not

met and there was no shift in

production to Mexico or Canada. The

denial notice will soon be published in

the Federal Register.

An investigation for trade adjustment

assistance under petition TA–W–30,565

resulted in a certification for workers of

H. Grabell & Sons, Inc., in Paterson,

New Jersey. The certification was issued

on February 11, 1995 and will soon be

published in the Federal Register. The

investigation revealed that the subject

firm imported lamp shades and

increased its reliance on imported lamp

shades while discontinuing lamp shade

production at Paterson, New Jersey.

Other findings show that sales and

production decreased in the relevant

periods and substantial worker

separations occurred in 1994.

Conclusion

After careful consideration of the new

facts obtained on reopening, it is

concluded that increased imports of

articles like or directly competitive with

lamp shades produced by the subject

firm contributed importantly to the

decline in production and to the total or

partial separation of workers at the

subject firm. In accordance with the

provisions of the Trade Act of 1974, I

make the following revised

determination:

All workers and former workers of H.

Grabell & Sons, Inc., Paterson, New Jersey

who became totally or partially separated

from employment on or after December 8,

1993 are eligible to apply for NAFTA-TAA

under Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of

February 1995.

Victor J. Trunzo;

Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment

Services, Office of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 95–5006 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

NAFTA—00302; Washington Public

Power Supply Systems Nuclear

Project; Amended Certification

Regarding Eligibility To Apply for

NAFTA Transitional Adjustment

Assistance

NAFTA—00302 WPN–2 Richland,

Washington

NAFTA—00302A WPN–1 Richland,

Washington

NAFTA—00302B WPN–3 Satsop,

Washington

In accordance with Section 250(a),

Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the

Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC

2273), the Department of Labor issued a

Certification for NAFTA Transitional

Adjustment Assistance on January 13,

1995, applicable to all workers of the

Washington Public Power System

(WPN–2) in Richland, Washington. The

notice will soon be published in the

Federal Register.

At the request of the company and the

workers the Department reviewed the

certification for workers of the subject

firm. New findings show that the worker

group for the Washington Public Power

Supply System Nuclear Project, WPN–2

plant, in Richland, Washington should

include workers at the WPN–1 in

Richland as well as the WPN–3 plant in

Satsop, Washington. The workers are

rotated among the three plants.

The investigation revealed that sales

declined and significant worker

separations occurred at all three plants.

A Departmental survey of Washington

Public Power’s customers showed that

the respondents decreased their

purchases for Washington Public Power

and increased their imports of electrical

energy from Canada.

The intent of the Department’s

certification is to include all workers

who were adversely affected by

increased imports. Accordingly, the

Department is amending the

certification to include Washington

Public Power’s plants in Satsop,

Washington and Richland, Washington.

The amended notice applicable to

NAFTA—00302 is hereby issued as

follows:

‘‘All workers of the Washington Public Power

Supply System Nuclear Project at the WPN–

2 plant in Richland Washington; WPN–1

plant in Richland, Washington and the

WPN–3 plant in Satsop, Washington who

became totally or partially separated from

employment on or after December 8, 1993 are

eligible to apply for NAFTA–TAA under

Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 21st day

of February 1995.

Victor J. Trunzo,

Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment

Services, Office of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 95–5005 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LITERACY

National Institute for Literacy Advisory

Board; Meeting

AGENCY: National Institute for Literacy

Advisory Board, National Institute for

Literacy.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This Notice sets forth the

schedule and proposed agenda of a

forthcoming meeting of the National

Institute for Literacy Advisory Board

(Board). This notice also describes the

function of the Board. Notice of this

meeting is required under Section

10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act. This document is

intended to notify the general public of

their opportunity to attend the meeting.

DATE AND TIME: March 14, 1995, 10:00

am to 4:00 pm.

ADDRESSES: National Institute for

Literacy, 800 Connecticut Avenue NW.,

Suite 200, Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharyn M. Abbott, Acting Executive

Officer, National Institute for Literacy,

800 Connecticut Avenue NW., Suite

200, Washington, DC 2006. Telephone

(202) 632–1500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board

is established under Section 384 of the

Adult Education Act, as amended by

Title I of Pub. L. 102–73, the National

Literacy Act of 1991. The Board consists

of ten individuals appointed by the

President with the advice and consent

of the Senate. The Board is established

to advise and make recommendations to

the Interagency Group, composed of the

Secretaries of Education, Labor, and

Health and Human Services, which

administers the National Institute for

Literacy (Institute). The Interagency

Group considers the Board’s

recommendations in planning the goals

of the Institute and in the

implementation of any programs to

achieve the goals of the Institute.

Specifically, the Board performs the

following functions: (a) makes

recommendations concerning the

appointment of the Director and the

staff of the Institute; (b) provides

independent advice on operation of the

Institute; and (c) receives reports from
11124 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 1995 / Notices

the Interagency Group and the Director

of the Institute. In addition, the Institute

consults with the Board on the award of

fellowships.

The Board will meet in Washington,

DC on March 14, 1995 from 10 am to 4

pm. The meeting of the Board is open

to the public. The agenda includes a

review of 1994 activities, preliminary

discussions of potential 1995–1996

NIFL activities, and a discussion on the

status of the reauthorization.

Records are kept of all Board

proceedings and are available for public

inspection at the National Institute for

Literacy, 800 Connecticut Avenue NW.,

Suite 200, Washington, DC 20006 from

8:30 a.m. to 5:00 pm.

Andrew J. Hartman,

Executive Director, National Institute for

Literacy.

[FR Doc. 95–4955 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6055–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–213

Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power

Company; Haddam Neck Plant;

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–

61, issued to Connecticut Yankee

Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO, the

licensee), for operation of the Haddam

Neck Plant, located in Middlesex

County, Connecticut.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

By amendment request dated

December 22, 1993, CYAPCO has

proposed to revise Technical

Specification (TS) 3/4.4.10, ‘‘Structural

Integrity,’’ Surveillance Requirement

4.4.10. The licensee has proposed an

alternate Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP)

flywheel inspection frequency and

examination methods. The staff has

extended the RCP flywheel inspection

frequency for RCPs 1 and 2 for one

refueling outage until the staff can

complete the review for a permanent

change.

The Need for the Proposed Action

CYAPCO has determined that the

existing RCP flywheel inspection

program as discussed in Regulatory

Guide (RG) 1.14, ‘‘Reactor Coolant

Pump Flywheel Integrity,’’ can be

optimized by revising the RCP flywheel

inspection frequency and examination

methods. By optimizing the RCP

flywheel inspection program, the

licensee will alleviate current testing

requirements that are overly restrictive

for predicting RCP flywheel integrity

and gain increased flexibility in

utilizing personnel during subsequent

RCP flywheel examinations. This TS

change reflects the licensee’s proposed

alternate RCP flywheel inspection

frequency and examination methods.

The staff has determined additional

information is needed to complete this

review, however, the staff has

concluded that the request has sufficient

merit to extend the TS required

inspections for RCPs 1 and 2 for one

Cycle.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has reviewed the

proposed revision to the TS. The staff

has concluded that additional

information regarding the proposed

inservice examination methods, flaw

acceptance criteria, and the supporting

fracture mechanics analysis are needed

to complete the review. However, the

staff has concluded that the proposed

TS change involving the changes in TS

3/4.4.10, ‘‘Structural Integrity,’’

Surveillance Requirement 4.4.10, can be

implemented for Cycle 18 refueling

outage as the change would only affect

one of the five inspection criteria and

two of the four RCPs. In particular, the

ultrasonic volumetric inspection

frequency for the areas of higher stress

concentration for RCPs 1 and 2 be

extended for one cycle until the staff

can complete the review of the

licensee’s proposed increased

inspection frequency and alternative

examination methods for the RCP

flywheels. These changes will not affect

the desired margins of safety for the two

affected accidents: (1) RCP locked rotor

event, and (2) adequacy of missile

protection inside containment and,

therefore, the extension of the

inspection interval by one refueling

cycle is acceptable. This conclusion is

based on the flaw history of the RCP

flywheels and the likelihood that the

most recent inspections would have

detected any flaws of structural

significance.

The proposed TS change will 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 this proposed

TS amendment.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

amendment does involve features

located entirely within the restricted

area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It

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 amendment.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

radiological or nonradiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed amendment.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

there is no measurable environmental

impact associated with the proposed

amendment, any alternatives with equal

or greater environmental impact need

not be evaluated. As an alternative to

the proposed action, the staff considered

denial of the proposed action. Denial of

the application 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 resources not considered previously

in the Final Environmental Statement

for the Haddam Neck Plant.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

the staff consulted with the Connecticut

State official 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 amendment.

For further details with respect to this

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated December 22, 1993, 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, Connecticut 06547.