13156 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 47 / Friday, March 10, 1995 / Notices

Amended Notices

EIS No. 940501, Draft EIS, AFS, ID,

Stibnite Gold Mine Expansion Project,

Construction and Operation, Plan of

Operation Approval, NPDES Permit

and COE Section 404 Permit, Payette

National Forest, Krassel Ranger

District, Valley County, ID, Due:

February 28, 1995, Contact: Jane

Wurster (206) 634–0614.

Published FR 12–16–94—Officially

Withdrawn by Preparing Agency.

EIS No. 950041, Draft EIS, SFW, NV,

Desert Tortoises (Gopherus Agassizii)

Habitat, Issuance of Permit to Allow

Incidental Take, Federal Land and

Non-Federal Land, Clark County, NV,

Due: April 11, 1995, Contact: Sherry

Barrett (702) 784–5227.

Published FR—02–10–95 Due Date

Correction

Dated: March 7, 1995.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 95–5998 Filed 3–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

[ER–FRL–4721–1]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared February 6, 1995 Through

February 10, 1995 pursuant to the

Environmental Review Process (ERP),

under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act

and Section 102(2)(c) of the National

Environmental Policy Act as amended.

Requests for copies of EPA comments

can be directed to the Office of Federal

Activities at (202) 260–5076.

An explanation of the ratings assigned

to draft environmental impact

statements (EISs) was published in FR

dated April 10, 1994 (59 FR 16807).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–AFS–K65166–CA Rating

EO2, Cottonwood Fire Restoration

Project, Implementation, Tahoe National

Forest, Sierraville Ranger District, Sierra

County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental objections over the

potential adverse impacts to soil

productivity, hydrology, and water

quality from the proposed extensive use

of ground-based logging systems, the

associated road creation, and proposed

harvesting within the stream

management zones (SMZs). EPA

suggested modifications to the preferred

alternative which would reduce the use

of ground-based logging systems in the

most damaged or vulnerable

watersheds, minimize entrance into the

sensitive SMZ areas, and implement

riparian rehabilitation activities and

road obliterations as soon as possible.

ERP No. D–COE–E32193–GA Rating

EC2, Savannah Harbor Navigation

Project, Operation and Maintenance,

Long Term Management Strategy Study,

Chatham County, GA and Jasper

County, SC.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns over the longterm environmental consequences of

implementation of the management

plan. EPA requested additional

information to more precisely define the

uncertainties associated with the

proposed operational changes.

ERP No. D–FRC–K02023–00 Rating

EC2, Tuscarora Natural Gas Pipeline

Project, Construction and Operation,

Right-of-Way Grant, Special-Use-Permit,

NPDES Permit and COE Section 404

Permit, Lassen County, CA; Washoe and

Storey Counties, NV and Klamath

County, OR.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns over the

proposed project, and requested

additional information on impacts to air

quality, wetlands, and cultural

resources.

ERP No. D–IBR–K39037–CA Rating

EC2, Cachuma Water Supply Project,

Implementation, Long-term Contract

Renewal, Santa Ynez Valley, Bradbury

Dam, Santa Barbara, CA.

Summary: EPA commented that the

draft EIS present a good examination of

a wide range of alternative, but also

expressed concern that more

information was needed regarding water

conservation, groundwater injections

and socio-economic impacts.

ERP No. D–NPS–K60100–AZ Rating

EC2, Programmatic EIS—Juan Bautista

de Anza National Historic Trail

Comprehensive Management Plan,

Implementation, several counties, AZ

and CA.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns and requested

that the final EIS include a ‘‘no action’’

alternative analysis, a conformity

determination, analysis of potential trail

carrying capacity, and address issues

related to environmental justice,

threatened and endangered species and

wetlands.

ERP No. D–NRC–K01008–00 Rating

EO2, Crownpoint Uranium Solution

Mining Project, Construction and

Operation, Leasing and Licensing,

McKinley County, NM.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental objections to the

proposed project based on its proximity

to domestic supply wells and residences

and insufficient hydrogeologic

modelling and field testing to ensure a

completely closed system. Additional

information is needed in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)

regarding the results of hydrogeologic

modelling and field tests, including the

potential for, and environmental

impacts of, contaminated groundwater

migrating off-site as a results of injection

activities; aquifer restoration; and effects

of drawdown of supply wells for the

City of Crownpoint. The final EIS

should also include additional

information on permitting, spill

response, management of sludge and

process wastes, and Radionuclude

National Emissions Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants.

ERP No. DS–FAA–C51013–NJ Rating

EC2, Expanded East Coast Plan, Changes

in Aircraft Flight Patterns over the State

of New Jersey, Updated Information,

Implementation, NJ.

Summary: EPA continued to have

environmental concerns about the noise

impacts of the proposed project.

Additional information is needed to

address the ‘‘conflict points’’ that were

the basis for rejecting the Ocean Routing

Proposal, to characterize noise levels in

specific towns, and to justify the use of

an unverified noise model.

Dated: March 7, 1995.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 95–5997 Filed 3–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

Information Collection Submitted to

OMB for Review

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of information collection

submitted to OMB for review and

approval under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980.

SUMMARY: In accordance with

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35), the FDIC hereby gives

notice that it has submitted to the Office

of Management and Budget a request for

OMB review of the information

collection system described below.

Type of Review: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Title: Transfer Agent Registration and

Amendment Form.

Form Number: Form TA–1.

OMB Number: 3064–0026.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 47 / Friday, March 10, 1995 / Notices 13157

Expiration Date of OMB Clearance:

November 30, 1996.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Respondents: Insured nonmember

banks wishing to register with the FDIC

as transfer agents.

Number of Respondents: 37.

Number of Responses Per

Respondent: 1.

Total Annual Responses: 37.

Average Number of Hours Per

Response: 0.52.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 19.25.

OMB Reviewer: Milo Sunderhauf,

(202) 395–7340, Office of Management

and Budget, Paperwork Reduction

Project 3064–0026, Washington, DC

20503.

FDIC Contact: Steven F. Hanft, (202)

898–3907, Office of the Executive

Secretary, Room F–400, Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street

NW., Washington, DC 20429.

Comments: Comments on this

collection of information are welcome

and should be submitted before May 9,

1995.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the submission

may be obtained by calling or writing

the FDIC contact listed above.

Comments regarding the submission

should be addressed to both the OMB

reviewer and the FDIC contact listed

above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

17A(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act

of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78q) requires a bank

to register with the appropriate federal

regulator prior to performing any

transfer agent function. Under FDIC

regulation 12 CFR 341, an insured

nonmember bank uses Form TA–1 to

register with the FDIC.

Dated: March 6, 1995.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5831 Filed 3–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–M

Information Collection Submitted to

OMB for Review

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of information collection

submitted to OMB for review and

approval under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980.

SUMMARY: In accordance with

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35), the FDIC hereby gives

notice that it has submitted to the Office

of Management and Budget a request for

OMB review of the information

collection system described below.

Type of Review: Extension of the

expiration date of a currently approved

collection without any change in the

substance or method of collection.

TItle: Unsafe and Unsound

Practices—Extension of Credit to

Executive Officers.

Form Number: N/A.

OMB Number: 3064–0108.

Expiration Date of OMB Clearance:

May 31, 1995.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Respondents: Executive officers of

insured nonmember banks.

Number of Respondents: 4,000.

Annual Hours Per Recordkeeper: 2.0.

Total Recordkeeping Hours: 8,000.

OMB Reviewer: Milo Sunderhauf,

(202) 395–7316, Office of Management

and Budget, Paperwork Reduction

Project (3064–0108), Washington, D.C.

20503.

FDIC Contact: Steven F. Hanft, (202)

898–3907, Office of the Executive

Secretary, Room F–400, Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20429.

Comments: Comments on this

collection of information are welcome

and should be submitted before April

10, 1995.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the submission

may be obtained by calling or writing

the FDIC contact listed above.

Comments regarding the submission

should be addressed to both the OMB

reviewer and the FDIC contact listed

above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive

officers of insured nonmember banks

must file a report with their bank’s

Board of Directors within ten days of

incurring any indebtedness to any other

bank in an amount in excess of the

amount the insured nonmember bank

could lend to the officer.

Dated: March 6, 1995.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robeft E. Feldman,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5942 Filed 3–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–M

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[Docket No. FEMA–1044–DR]

California; Amendment to Notice of a

Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice

of a major disaster for the State of

California, (FEMA–1044–DR), dated

January 10, 1995, and related

determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 27, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pauline C. Campbell, Response and

Recovery Directorate, Federal

Emergency Management Agency,

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice

of a major disaster for the State of

California dated January 10, 1995, is

hereby amended to include the

following area among those areas

determined to have been adversely

affected by the catastrophe declared a

major disaster by the President in his

declaration of January 10, 1995:

Kings County for Individual Assistance

and Public Assistance.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.516, Disaster Assistance)

Richard W. Krimm,

Associate Director, Response and Recovery

Directorate.

[FR Doc. 95–5975 Filed 3–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Cass Commercial Corporation, et al.;

Acquisitions of Companies Engaged in

Permissible Nonbanking Activities

The organizations listed in this notice

have applied under § 225.23(a)(2) or (f)

of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR

225.23(a)(2) or (f)) for the Board’s

approval under section 4(c)(8) of the

Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.

1843(c)(8)) and § 225.21(a) of Regulation

Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to acquire or

control voting securities or assets of a

company engaged in a nonbanking

activity that is listed in § 225.25 of

Regulation Y as closely related to

banking and permissible for bank

holding companies. Unless otherwise

noted, such activities will be conducted

throughout the United States.

Each application is available for

immediate inspection at the Federal

Reserve Bank indicated. Once the

application has been accepted for

processing, it will also be available for

inspection at the offices of the Board of

Governors. Interested persons may

express their views in writing on the

question whether consummation of the

proposal can ‘‘reasonably be expected to

produce benefits to the public, such as

greater convenience, increased

competition, or gains in efficiency, that

outweigh possible adverse effects, such

as undue concentration of resources,

decreased or unfair competition,

conflicts of interests, or unsound