Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices 13741

the name, address and telephone

number of the employer, and provide a

copy of this order to the employer.

IV

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 81,

161b, 161i, 182 and 186 of the Atomic

Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and

the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR

2.202, 10 CFR 30.10, and 10 CFR 150.20,

it is hereby ordered that:

1. Forrest L. Roudebush is prohibited

until October 17, 1996 from engaging in

any NRC-licensed activities. NRClicensed activities are those activities

that are conducted pursuant to a

specific or general license issued by the

NRC, including, but not limited to,

those activities of Agreement State

licensees conducted pursuant to the

authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20.

2. For a period of five years, beginning

October 17, 1996, after the five-year

period of prohibition has expired,

Forrest L. Roudebush shall, within 20

days of his acceptance of each

employment offer involving NRClicensed activities or his becoming

involved in NRC-licensed activities, as

defined in Paragraph IV.1 above,

provide notice to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555,

of the name, address, and telephone

number of the employer or the entity

where he is, or will be, involved in the

NRC-licensed activities. In the first such

notification, Forrest L. Roudebush shall

include a statement of his commitment

to compliance with regulatory

requirements and the basis why the

Commission should have confidence

that he will now comply with

applicable NRC requirements.

3. If Forrest L. Roudebush is currently

involved with any NRC licensee or

Agreement State licensee engaging in

NRC-licensed activities, then Forrest L.

Roudebush must, as of the effective date

of this Order, cease such activities and

inform the NRC of the name, address

and telephone number of the licensee,

and provide a copy of this Order to the

licensee.

The Director, Office of Enforcement,

may, in writing, relax or rescind any of

the above conditions upon

demonstration by Mr. Roudebush of

good cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202,

Forrest L. Roudebush must, and any

other person adversely affected by this

Order may, submit an answer to this

Order, and may request a hearing on

this Order, within 20 days of the date of

this Order. The answer may consent to

this Order. Unless the answer consents

to this Order, the answer shall, in

writing and under oath or affirmation,

specifically admit or deny each

allegation or charge made in this Order

and shall set forth the matters of fact

and law on which Mr. Roudebush or

other person adversely affected relies

and the reasons as to why the Order

should not have been issued. Any

answer or request for a hearing shall be

submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Chief,

Docketing and Service Section,

Washington, DC 20555. Copies also

shall be sent to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to

the Assistant General Counsel for

Hearings and Enforcement at the same

address, and to the Regional

Administrator, NRC Region III, 801

Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532–

4531 if the answer or hearing request is

by a person other than Mr. Roudebush.

If a person other then Mr. Roudebush

requests a hearing, that person shall set

forth with particularity the manner in

which his or her interest is adversely

affected by this Order and shall address

the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d).

If a hearing is requested by Mr.

Roudebush or a person whose interest is

adversely affected, the Commission will

issue an Order designating the time and

place of any hearing. If a hearing is held,

the issue to be considered at such

hearing shall be whether, on the basis of

the matters described in: (1) this Order;

(2) EA 91–136; (3) EA 92–054; and (4)

LBP–92–25, 36 NRC 156 (1992), this

Order should be sustained.

In the absence of any request for

hearing, the provisions specified in

Section IV above shall be final 20 days

from the date of this Order without

further order or proceedings.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 3rd day

of March 1995.

From the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.,

Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear

Materials Safety, Safeguards and Operations

Support.

[FR Doc. 95–6206 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL

REVIEW BOARD

Board Meeting: Waste Isolation

Strategy, Thermal Management

Strategy, The Engineered Barrier

System

Pursuant to its authority under

section 5051 of Public Law 100–203, the

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act

of 1987, the Nuclear Waste Technical

Review Board will hold its spring

meeting on April 19–20, 1995, in Las

Vegas, Nevada. The meeting will be

held at the Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza,

4255 S. Paradise Road, Las Vegas,

Nevada 89109; Tel. (702) 369–4400; Fax

(702) 369–3770. The meeting is open to

the public and will begin at 8:30 a.m.

both days. Presentations during the

meeting will address three main topics:

The Department of Energy’s (DOE)

emerging waste isolation strategy; the

DOE’s thermal management strategy,

including thermal testing planned or

being conducted for the Yucca

Mountain project; and engineered

barrier system research, development,

design, and analysis. Additional

presentations also will provide updates

on the DOE’s perspectives concerning

current legislative issues (fiscal year

1996 budget and initiatives to amend or

replace the Nuclear Waste Policy Act).

Topics that will be covered on

Wednesday, April 19, include the

current status of the DOE’s waste

management program and its evolving

waste isolation strategy, the linkage

between the waste isolation strategy and

site suitability, the fiscal year 1996 DOE

budget, and thermal management

strategy. An afternoon panel discussion

will explore the integration of these

topics. Prior to recessing for the day,

those attending the meeting will be

invited to direct questions or comments

to the Board and the discussion panel

members.

On Thursday, April 20, the meeting

will focus on the engineered barrier

system and include repository

subsurface operations concepts,

multipurpose container (MPC) interface

with a potential repository, waste

package design, engineered barrier

system performance assessment,

corrosion research, in-repository

criticality, potential use of backfill, and

in-repository shielding. Following a

time for public questions and

comments, a panel discussion will

address the compatibility of waste

package and engineered barrier designs

with the DOE’s concept of repository

operations and thermal management

strategies. A final period for public

comment will end the meeting’s

activities.

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review

Board was created by Congress in the

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act

of 1987 to evaluate the technical and

scientific validity of activities

undertaken by the DOE in its program

to manage the disposal of the nation’s

spent nuclear fuel and defense highlevel waste. In that same legislation,

Congress directed the DOE to

characterize a site at Yucca Mountain,
13742 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices

1See Exchange Act Release No. 34231 (June 17,

1994), 59 FR 32722 (approving File No. SR–NYSE–

90–10).

Nevada, for its suitability as a potential

location for a permanent repository for

the disposal of that waste.

Transcripts of the meeting will be

available on computer disk or on a

library-loan basis in paper format from

Victoria Reich, Board librarian,

beginning June 2, 1995. For further

information, contact Frank Randall,

External Affairs, 1100 Wilson

Boulevard, Suite 910, Arlington,

Virginia 22209; Tel: 703–235–4473; Fax

703–235–4495.

Dated: March 9, 1995.

William Barnard,

Executive Director, Nuclear Waste Technical

Review Board.

[FR Doc. 95–6234 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–AM–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–35451; File No. SR–Amex–

95–10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the American Stock Exchange, Inc.

Relating to Amendments Updating

Various Exchange Rules

March 7, 1995.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is

hereby given that on February 22, 1995,

the American Stock Exchange, Inc.

(‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the

Securities and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule

change as described in Items I, II, and

III below, which Items have been

prepared by the self-regulatory

organization. The Commission is

publishing this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change

from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to amend

several of its rules to reflect current

practices and to update various rules

that have become obsolete. The text of

the proposed rule change is as follows

[new text is italicized; deleted text is

bracketed]:

Over-the-Counter Execution of Equity

Securities Transactions

Rule 5.

(d)

[viii any acquisition of a security by

a member organization as principal in

anticipation of making an immediate

special offering or exchange distribution

on the Exchange under Rule 560 or Rule

570;]

[ix] viii

[x] ix

[xi] x

Precedence Accorded to Orders

Entrusted to Specialists

Rule 155.

Commentary .01 [When a broker

inquiries of a specialist as to the price

at which a block of stock may be sold,

the specialist may not specify the

amount that would be purchased by the

book and the amount he would take as

dealer.]

If [the] a block is to be sold at a ‘‘clean

up’’ price the specialist should execute

at the ‘‘clean-up’’ price all of the

executable buy orders on his book. The

report of the block transaction on the

tape is to be accompanied by a reprint

of the last prior transaction in the

regular-way market in the security.

However, if the block is sold at

different price limits and the specialist

buys part of the block for his own

account he should to the extent

practicable, buy round lots for his own

account at each price limit at which buy

orders on the book are executed, and in

doing so, he should divide the stock

purchased for his own account into

round lots of approximately equal size

among the price limits at which he

participates.

The same principles apply in the case

of a purchase of a block of stock.

Cancellations Must Be Written

Rule 181. A cancellation of an order

given to a specialist on the Floor of the

Exchange personally by a Regular

member or member representative shall

not be deemed effective unless in

writing [and signed].

Specialist Registration Fee

Rule 183. Each regular specialist

registered with the Exchange shall pay

to the Exchange each year a registration

fee [of $400.000 per year] as imposed by

the Exchange, [which fee shall be]

payable [in equal quarterly installments

in each year] as directed by the

Exchange during [which] the year such

specialist remains so registered.

Specialist Clerks

Rule 184. (a) A specialist or specialist

unit may regularly employ, subject to

such rules and regulations as the Board

of Governors may adopt, one or more

clerks, to aid such specialist or

specialist unit on the floor of the

Exchange, provided each such clerk

receives the approval of the Exchange.

A yearly fee [of $180.00 per year,] as

imposed by the Exchange and payable

as directed by the Exchange [in equal

quarterly installments,] shall be charged

the specialist or specialist unit for each

clerk. No rebate shall be given with

respect to the [quarterly] fee in the event

that a specialist or specialist unit

discontinues the services of such a clerk

during any [quarterly] period.

Normal Buy-Ins

Rule 783.

(d) The Buy-in Desk will deliver a

copy of the Floor report to the booth of

the member or member organization

which initiated the order. The executing

broker will have the responsibility of

notifying promptly as to the details of

the execution, the member or member

organization listed on the order as being

in default. [The member executing the

order shall be entitled to receive a Floor

brokerage commission.]

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission, the

self-regulatory organization included

statements concerning the purpose of

and basis for the proposed rule change

and discussed any comments it received

on the proposed rule change. The text

of these statements may be examined at

the places specified in Item IV below.

The self-regulatory organization has

prepared summaries, set forth in

Sections A, B, and C below, of the most

significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

1. Purpose

The Exchange proposes a rule change

that would conform its rule to a

comparable New York Stock Exchange

(‘‘NYSE’’) rule, which recently has been

amended. The Exchange proposes to

amend Commentary .01 to Rule 155

(Precedence Accorded to Orders

Entrusted to Specialists) to delete the

prohibition that a specialist may not

disclose the amount of stock that the

specialist and the book would be buying

or selling in cleaning up the block. This

proposed rule change is similar to the

NYSE amendment to its Rule 104.10(7),

which has been approved by the

Commission.1

The Exchange is also updating other

rules to eliminate obsolete references

and reflect accurately current Exchange

practices. The references in Rule