Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 18, 1995 / Notices 19421

2. On-site review of Mr. Jones’ field

activities, and interviews and

observations of any selected authorized

users (other than Mr. Jones) working at

various locations.

D. Mr. Jones shall provide notice to

the NRC seven days prior to working in

areas of NRC jurisdiction under the

provisions of 10 CFR 150.20.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr.

Jones 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 set forth the matters of fact and law

on which Mr. Jones 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 Services Section, Washington, D.C.

20555. Copies also shall be sent to the

Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20555, to the

Assistant General Counsel for Hearings

and Enforcement at the same address, to

the Regional Administrator, NRC Region

IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400,

Arlington, Texas 76011–8064, and to

Mr. Jones, if the answer or hearing

request is by a person other than Mr.

Jones. If a person other than Mr. Jones

requests a hearing, that person shall set

forth with particularity the manner in

which his 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. Jones

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 this Order should be

sustained.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), Mr.

Otho Jones, Jones Inspection Services,

or any other person adversely affected

by this Order, may, in addition to

demanding a hearing, at the time the

answer is filed or sooner, move the

presiding officer to set aside the

immediate effectiveness of the Order on

the ground that the Order, including the

need for immediate effectiveness, is not

based on adequate evidence but on mere

suspicion, unfounded allegations, or

error.

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. An answer

or a request for hearing shall not stay

the immediate effectiveness of this

order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 11th day

of April 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.,

Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear

Materials Safety, Safeguards, and Operations

Support.

[FR Doc. 95–9506 Filed 4–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL

REVIEW BOARD

Joint Panel Meeting on Perceived

Risks and Socioeconomic Impacts

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’s (the Board) Panel on the

Environment & Public Health and Panel

on Risk & Performance Analysis will

hold a joint meeting May 23–24, 1995,

in Las Vegas, Nevada. The meeting,

which is open to the public, will be held

at the St. Tropez Hotel, 455 East

Harmon, Las Vegas, Nevada 89109; Tel

(702) 369–5400; Fax (702) 369–1150.

The meeting will begin at 1:00 P.M. on

Tuesday, May 23, recess at

approximately 5:00 P.M., and continue

on Wednesday, May 24, from 8:30 A.M.

to noon.

The meeting will consist of a panel

discussion by a diverse group of social

scientists. The topic for discussion is

peoples’ beliefs about the risks

associated with a potential high-level

radioactive waste repository at Yucca

Mountain, Nevada, and how those

beliefs might result in significant

socioeconomic impacts. The Board is

looking at this issue because

socioeconomic impacts are addressed as

part of the Department of Energy’s sitesuitability guidelines, 10 CFR 960.

As with all the Board’s meetings, time

is set aside on the agenda for comments

and questions from the public. In order

to ensure that everyone wishing to

speak is offered time to do so, the Board

encourages those who have comments

to sign the Public Comment Register

located at the sign-in table. Written

comments for the record also may be

submitted to the Board staff at the signin table.

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

high-level radioactive waste and spent

nuclear fuel. In that same legislation,

Congress directed the DOE to

characterize a site at Yucca Mountain,

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

Davonya Barnes, Board staff, beginning

July 10, 1995. For further information,

contact Frank Randall, External Affairs,

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board,

1100 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 910,

Arlington, Virginia 22209; (703) 235–

4473.

Dated: April 13, 1995.

William Barnard,

Executive Director, Nuclear Waste Technical

Review Board.

[FR Doc. 95–9510 Filed 4–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–AM–M

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND

BUDGET

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Office of Management and

Budget.

ACTION: National Industrial Security

Program Policy Advisory Committee

(NISPPAC) meeting; notice of meeting

and invitation for public comments.

SUMMARY: The National Industrial

Security Program Policy Advisory

Committee will hold a meeting that

shall serve as a forum to discuss

National Industrial Security Program

(NISP) policy issues in dispute, and to

advise the Chairman on these issues.

The agenda will include a discussion of

the status of the NISP, the NISP

Operating Manual, and accounting for

security costs within industry. Written

statements from the public will be

accepted in lieu of an opportunity for

comment at the meeting.

The Information Security Oversight

Office (ISOO) will host the meeting.

ISOO is part of OMB’s Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs.

DATES: The meeting will be held on

Thursday, April 20, 1995, at 10 a.m., at

the Information Security Oversight

Office in Washington, DC. The meeting

is open to the public; however, due to

access procedures, the names and
19422 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 18, 1995 / Notices

telephone numbers of those planning to

attend must be submitted to the

Information Security Oversight Office

no later than April 18, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Information Security Oversight

Office, Suite 530, 750 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20006.

Written statements may be forwarded

by mail to the above address, or faxed

to (202) 395–7460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For additional information about the

meeting or to submit the names of those

planning to attend, contact Mrs. Neala

Enfinger of the Information Security

Oversight Office at (202) 395–7442.

Sally Katzen,

Administrator, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs.

[FR Doc. 95–9488 Filed 4–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3110–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings

Concerning Reformulated and

Conventional Gasoline

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 127(b)(1)

of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act

(URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), the

Office of the United States Trade

Representative (USTR) is providing

notice that a dispute settlement panel

convened under the Agreement

Establishing the World Trade

Organization (WTO) at the request of

Venezuela will examine an

Environmental Protection Agency

regulation concerning reformulated and

conventional gasoline. USTR also

invites written comments from the

public concerning the issues raised in

the dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any

comments received during the course of

the dispute settlement proceedings,

comments should be submitted on or

before May 16, 1995 in order to be

assured of timely consideration by

USTR in preparing its first written

submission to the panel.

ADDRESS: Comments may be submitted

to the Office of the General Counsel,

Attn: Venezuela Gasoline Dispute,

Room 223, Office of the U.S. Trade

Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20506.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rachel Shub, Assistant General Counsel,

Office of the General Counsel, Office of

the U.S. Trade Representative, 600 17th

Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20506,

(202) 395–7305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At

Venezuela’s request, a WTO dispute

settlement panel will examine whether

EPA’s ‘‘Regulation of Fuels and Fuel

Additives: Standards for Reformulated

and Conventional Gasoline,’’ dated

December 15, 1993 (59 FR 7716;

February 16, 1994) is consistent with

U.S. obligations under the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

1994 and the Agreement on Technical

Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement).

Australia, Canada, the European

Communities and Norway have reserved

their rights to intervene in the panel

proceedings as third parties. (On April

10, 1995, Brazil requested separate

consultations with the United States

under the GATT 1994 and the TBT

Agreement regarding EPA’s regulation.)

Members of the panel are currently

being selected, and the panel is

expected to meet as necessary at the

WTO headquarters in Geneva,

Switzerland to examine the dispute.

Under normal circumstances, the panel

would be expected to issue a report

detailing its findings and

recommendations in six to nine months.

An earlier dispute settlement

proceeding regarding the EPA

regulation, which was initiated by

Venezuela under the GATT 1947 (see 59

FR 52034; October 13, 1994), has been

terminated.

Major Issues Raised by Venezuela and

Legal Basis of Complaint

Venezuela has asserted that EPA’s

regulation accords less favorable

treatment to Venezuela gasoline than to

U.S.-produced gasoline and to gasoline

produced in third countries, and thus is

inconsistent with Articles I and III of the

GATT 1994 and Article 2.1 of the TBT

Agreement. Venezuela has also asserted

that the regulation creates unnecessary

obstacles to international trade and

therefore is inconsistent with Article 2.2

of the TBT Agreement.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the issue raised in the dispute. The

provisions of 15 CFR §§ 2006.13(a) and

(c) (providing that comments received

will be open to public inspection) and

2006.15 will apply to comments

received. Comments must be in English

and provided in fifteen copies. Pursuant

to 15 CFR § 2006.15, confidential

business information must be clearly

marked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’

in contrasting color ink at the top of

each page.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the

URAA, USTR will maintain a public file

on this dispute settlement proceeding,

which will include a list of comments

received, in the USTR Reading Room:

Room 101, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington DC 20506. An

appointment to review the docket

(Docket WTO/D–1, ‘‘Venezuela-United

States: U.S. EPA Gasoline Standards’’),

may be made by calling Brenda Webb,

(202) 395–6186. The USTR Reading

Room is open to the public from 10 a.m.

to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday.

Ira S. Shapiro,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 95–9516 Filed 4–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Under Review by Office of

Management and Budget

Acting Agency Clearance Officer:

David T. Copenhafer (202) 942–8800.

Upon Written Request, Copy

Available From: Securities and

Exchange Commission, Office of Filings

and Information Services, 450 Fifth

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549.

Extension: Form 1–E, File No. 270–

221; Rule 206(3)–2, File No. 270–216;

Rules 8b–1 through 8b–32, File No.

270–135.

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq), the Securities

and Exchange Commission has

submitted for OMB approval requests

for extensions on the following rules

and form:

Form 1–E under the Securities Act of

1933, is a report made pursuant to rules

604 and 605 of Regulation E. Form 1–

E is the form that a small business

investment company or business

development company making an

offering under Regulation E uses to

notify the Commission of the offering. In

most cases, an offering circular is filed

with the Form 1–E. Rule 604 under

Regulation E specifies the filing and

content of a filing of notification on

Form 1–E. Rule 605 specifies the filing

and use of the offering circular. For each

of the 4 registrants that prepare Form 1–

E and an offering circular a year, the

burden hours are approximately 100

hours.

Rule 206(3)–2 permits registered

investment advisers to comply with

Section 206(3) of the Investment