Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 1, 1996 / Notices 19327

Services, Office of Administration, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, and should cite

the publication date and page number of

this Federal Register notice. Written

comments may also be delivered to

Room 6D22, Two White Flint North,

11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.

Federal workdays. Copies of written

comments received may be examined at

the NRC Public Document Room, the

Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By May 31, 1996, the licensee may file

a request for a hearing with respect to

issuance of the amendment to the

subject facility operating license and

any person whose interest may be

affected by this proceeding and who

wishes to participate as a party in the

proceeding must file a written request

for a hearing and a petition for leave to

intervene. Requests for a hearing and a

petition for leave to intervene shall be

filed in accordance with the

Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for

Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10

CFR Part 2. Interested persons should

consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714

which is available 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 Richland

Public Library, 955 Northgate Street,

Richland, Washington 99352. If a

request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene is filed by the above

date, the Commission or an Atomic

Safety and Licensing Board, designated

by the Commission or by the Chairman

of the Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board Panel, will rule on the request

and/or petition; and the Secretary or the

designated Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board will issue a notice of hearing or

an appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a

petition for leave to intervene shall set

forth with particularity the interest of

the petitioner in the proceeding, and

how that interest may be affected by the

results of the proceeding. The petition

should specifically explain the reasons

why intervention should be permitted

with particular reference to the

following factors: (1) The nature of the

petitioner’s right under the Act to be

made party to the proceeding; (2) the

nature and extent of the petitioner’s

property, financial, or other interest in

the proceeding; and (3) the possible

effect of any order which may be

entered in the proceeding on the

petitioner’s interest. The petition should

also identify the specific aspect(s) of the

subject matter of the proceeding as to

which petitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person who has filed a petition for

leave to intervene or who has been

admitted as a party may amend the

petition without requesting leave of the

Board up to 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, but such an amended

petition must satisfy the specificity

requirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, a petitioner shall file a

supplement to the petition to intervene

which must include a list of the

contentions which are sought to be

litigated in the matter. Each contention

must consist of a specific statement of

the issue of law or fact to be raised or

controverted. In addition, the petitioner

shall provide a brief explanation of the

bases of the contention and a concise

statement of the alleged facts or expert

opinion which support the contention

and on which the petitioner intends to

rely in proving the contention at the

hearing. The petitioner must also

provide references to those specific

sources and documents of which the

petitioner is aware and on which the

petitioner intends to rely to establish

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner

must provide sufficient information to

show that a genuine dispute exists with

the applicant on a material issue of law

or fact. Contentions shall be limited to

matters within the scope of the

amendment under consideration. The

contention must be one which, if

proven, would entitle the petitioner to

relief. A petitioner who fails to file such

a supplement which satisfies these

requirements with respect to at least one

contention will not be permitted to

participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become

parties to the proceeding, subject to any

limitations in the order granting leave to

intervene, and have the opportunity to

participate fully in the conduct of the

hearing, including the opportunity to

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the

Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. The

final determination will serve to decide

when the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration, the

Commission may issue the amendment

and make it immediately effective,

notwithstanding the request for a

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any

hearing held would take place before

the issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, Attention:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to William

H. Bateman, Director, Project Directorate

IV–2: petitioner’s name and telephone

number, date petition was mailed, plant

name, and publication date and page

number of this Federal Register notice.

A copy of the petition should also be

sent to the Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555,

and to M.H. Phillips, Jr., Esq., Winston

& Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20005–3512, attorney

for the licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for hearing will not be entertained

absent a determination by the

Commission, the presiding officer or the

presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for amendment

dated April 24, 1996, 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

Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate

Street, Richland, Washington 99352.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of April 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

William H. Bateman,

Director, Project Directorate IV–2, Division

of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–10900 Filed 4–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
19328 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 1, 1996 / Notices

1The three measures of performance utilized by

the PSE are: (1) National Market System Quote

Performance, accounting for 45% of the overall

score, measures the percentage of time in a given

quarter that a specialist’s bid and/or offer is equal

to or greater than the best bid or offer in the

consolidated quote system for each dually-traded

security; (2) the Specialist Evaluation Questionnaire

Survey, also accounting for 45% of the overall

score, is composed of questions designed to

evaluate a specialist’s market-making performance

and is to be completed only by floor brokers who

regularly trade with a specialist; and (3) SCOREX

Limit Order Acceptance Performance, which

accounts for the final 10% of the overall score,

measures the percentage of P/COAST (formerly

SCOREX) limit orders accepted by a specialist. See

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28843

(February 1, 1991), 56 FR 5040 (February 7, 1991)

(File No. SR–PSE–87–19) for a more complete

description of each of these measures of

performance.

2The PSE maintains two equity trading floors,

one in Los Angeles and one in San Francisco. See

PSE Rule 4.1(g).

3See PSE Rules 5.37 (b)–(e).

4See PSE Rules 5.37 (g)–(i). The EAC also has the

authority to bypass the second informal proceeding

and commence formal reallocation proceedings

after a specialist’s second quarter of substandard

performance in a rolling twelve-month period. See

PSE Rule 5.37.

5For a description of the procedures followed in

such proceedings, see PSE Rules 5.37 (j)–(s).

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

THE National Partnership Council

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Notice of meeting

TIME AND DATE: 1:00 p.m., May 8, 1996.

PLACE: OPM Conference Center, Room

1350, Theodore Roosevelt Building,

1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC

20415–0001. The conference center is

located on the first floor.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the

public. Seating will be available on a

first-come, first-served basis.

Individuals with special access needs

wishing to attend should contact OPM

at the number shown below to obtain

appropriate accommodations.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The NPC

will discuss its 1996 partnership survey

and revisions to the National

Partnership Award program. There will

also be a presentation on interest-based

problem resolution.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Michael Cushing, Director, Labor

Management Partnership Center, Office

of Personnel Management, Theodore

Roosevelt Building, 1900 E Street, NW.,

Room 5554, Washington, DC 20415–

0001, (202) 606–0010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We invite

interested persons and organizations to

submit written comments. Mail or

deliver your comments to Michael

Cushing at the address shown above. To

be considered at the May 8 meeting,

written comments should be received by

May 3.

Office of Personnel Management.

James B. King,

Director.

[FR Doc. 96–10579 Filed 4–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–37142; File No. SR–PSE–

96–13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the Pacific Stock Exchange

Incorporated Relating to Restrictions

on Equity Allocations (10% Rule)

April 24, 1996.

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 April 10, 1996, the

Pacific Stock Exchange Incorporated

(‘‘PSE’’ 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 is proposing to codify

a policy of the Equity Allocation

Committee (‘‘EAC’’) that specialists who

rank in the bottom 10%, under the

Exchange’s specialist evaluation

program, shall not be eligible for

allocations of securities, absent

mitigating circumstances, until such

ranking rises above the bottom 10%.

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’s specialist evaluation

program is governed by PSE Rule 5.37.

Subsection (a) of that Rule provides that

the EAC shall evaluate all registered

specialists on a quarterly basis. Those

evaluations result in overall ratings of

specialists that are based upon three

separate measures of performance, as

specified in the Rule.1 Subsection (b)

provides that any registered specialist

who is in the bottom 10% of all

registered specialists on that specialist’s

trading floor,2 as determined by the

overall evaluation scores in any one

quarterly evaluation, shall be requested

to meet with the EAC (or a panel

appointed by the EAC) on an informal

basis.3 If a specialist is in the bottom

10% during any two out of four

consecutive quarterly evaluations, the

specialist is requested to appear a

second time before the EAC to explain

his or her performance.4

If the EAC finds in its second informal

meeting with a specialist that there are

no mitigating circumstances that would

demonstrate substantial improvement of

or reasonable justification for the

specialist’s most recent evaluation

score, the EAC will make a

determination that the specialist’s

performance is below acceptable levels,

and notify the specialist of his or her

right to a hearing on such

determination.5 The EAC may take a

number of actions against a registered

specialist found to perform below

acceptable levels, including limitation,

suspension or termination of the

specialist’s registration as a specialist, or

reallocation of his or her stocks.

The Exchange is now proposing to

adopt a rule providing that any

registered specialist who falls into the

bottom 10% of all registered specialists,

as provided in Rule 5.37(b), shall not be

eligible for new allocations until such

ranking rises above the bottom 10%.

However, the proposal also provides

that the EAC may make exceptions if

there are sufficient mitigating

circumstances.

At the PSE, specialist evaluation

results and overall rankings are reported

in the quarter following the quarter of

the evaluation, e.g., the results of the

fourth quarter of 1995 are reported in

the first quarter of 1996. Accordingly, a

specialist who was in the bottom 10%

for the fourth quarter of 1995 will not

be eligible for new allocations of stocks