422 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 1996 / Notices

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.J. Wetterhahn, Esquire,

Winston and Strawn, 1400 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20005–3502

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 December 28, 1995,

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 Pennsville Public Library, 190 S.

Broadway, Pennsville, New Jersey

08070.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of January 1996.

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David H. Jaffe,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

I–2, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–144 Filed 1–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–155]

Consumers Power Company Big Rock

Point Plant; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of 10 CFR

Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph

III.D.1.(a), Type A Tests, to the

Consumers Power Company (CPCo or

the licensee), for operation of the Big

Rock Point Plant (BRP), located in

Charlevoix County, Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow an

exemption from the requirement of 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix J, [Option A],

Paragraph III.D.1.(a), for a one-time

schedular extension for the Type A test

(containment integrated leak rate test

(ILRT)) of approximately 12 months,

from the 1996 refueling outage to the

1997 refueling outage.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated November 8, 1995.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The current ILRT requirements for Big

Rock Point as set forth in Appendix J,

are that a set of three Type A tests must

be performed at approximately equal

intervals during each 10-year period

service period. Also, the third test of

each set shall be conducted when the

plant is shut down for the 10-year plant

inservice inspections (ISI). The previous

Type A test was performed in Feburary

1992. The first of the fourth 10-year

period Type A tests is currently

scheduled to be performed in January

1996.

The licensee has requested a

schedular exemption from the

requirement in 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix J, [Option A], Section

III.D.1.(a) to perform certain Type A

tests at ‘‘approximately equal time

intervals.’’ Specifically, the proposed

exemption would allow CPCo to delay

the Type A test until the January 1997

refueling outage. The interval between

the Type A tests would increase from 47

months to 59 months.

Environment Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that the proposed one-time

exemption would not increase the

probability or consequences of accidents

previously analyzed and the proposed

one-time exemption would not affect

facility radiation levels or facility

radiological effluents. The licensee has

analyzed the results of previous Type A

tests performed at the Big Rock Point

Plant to show adequate containment

performance. The licensee will continue

to be required to conduct Type B and

Type C local leak rate tests which

historically have been shown to be the

principal means of detecting

containment leakage paths with the

Type A tests confirming the Type B and

C tests results. It is also noted that the

licensee would perform a general

inspection of accessible interior or

exterior surfaces of the containment

structures and components although it

is only required by Appendix J to be

conducted in conjunction with Type A

tests. The NRC staff considers that these

inspections, though limited in scope,

provide an important added level of

confidence in the continued integrity of

the containment boundary.

The 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 off site, 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 the proposed

exemption.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

exemption 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

exemption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

there is no measurable environmental

impact associated with the proposed

action, 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 any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement Related to the Operation of

Big Rock Point Plant.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on November 20, 1995, the staff

consulted with the Michigan State

official, Mr. Dennis Hahn of the Nuclear

Facilities and Environmental

Monitoring Section, Office of the

Department of Public Health, 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 action.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 1996 / Notices 423

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated November 8, 1995, 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

North Central Michigan College, 1515

Howard Street, Petoskey, MI 49770.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day

of December 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Linh N. Tran,

Project Manager, Project Directorate III–I,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–145 Filed 1–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

Notice of Intention to Request

Reclearance of Information Collection,

SF 3102

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(Public Law 104–13, May 22, 1995), this

notice announces that the Office of

Personnel Management intends to

submit to the Office of Management and

Budget a request for reclearance of an

information collection. SF 3102,

Designation of Beneficiary Federal

Employees Retirement System, is used

by employees and annuitants covered

under the Federal Employees

Retirement System to designate a

beneficiary to receive any lump sum

due in the event of his/her death.

Approximately 1,136 SF 3102 forms

are completed annually. Each form takes

approximately 15 minutes to complete.

The annual estimated burden is 284

hours.

For copies of this proposal, contact

Jim Farron on (202) 418–3208, or E-mail

to jmfarron@mail.opm.gov.

DATES: Comments on this proposal

should be received within 60 calendar

days from the date of this publication.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments

to—Daniel A. Green, Chief, Retirement

and Insurance Service, FERS Division,

U.S. Office of Personnel Management,

1900 E Street, NW, Room 4429,

Washington, DC 20415.

FOR INFORMATION REGARDING

ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION—CONTACT:

Mary Beth Smith-Toomey, Management

Services Division, (202) 606–0623.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Lorraine A. Green,

Deputy Director.

[FR Doc. 96–117 Filed 1–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–M

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

Summary: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad

Retirement Board has submitted the

following proposal(s) for the collection

of information to the Office of

Management and Budget for review and

approval.

Summary of Proposal(s):

(1) Collection title: Statement

Regarding Contributions and Support.

(2) Form(s) submitted: G–134.

(3) OMB Number: 3220–0099.

(4) Expiration date of current OMB

clearance: November 30, 1995.

(5) Type of request: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

(6) Respondents: Individuals or

households.

(7) Estimated annual number of

respondents: 300.

(8) Total annual responses: 300.

(9) Total annual reporting hours: 92.

(10) Collection description:

Dependency on the employee for onehalf support at the time of the

employee’s death can be a condition

affecting eligibility for a survivor

annuity provided for under Section 2 of

the Railroad Retirement Act. One-half

support is also a condition which may

negate the public service pension offset

in Tier I for a spouse or widow(er).

Additional Information or Comments:

Copies of the form and supporting

documents can be obtained for Chuck

Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer

(312–751–3363). Comments regarding

the information collection should be

addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad

Retirement Board, 844 North Rush

Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611–2092 and

the OMB reviewer, Laura Oliven (202–

395–7316), Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10230, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, D.C.

20503.

Ron Hodapp,

Acting Clearance Officer.

FR Doc. 96–141 Filed 1–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 35–26446]

Filings Under the Public Utility Holding

Company Act of 1935, as Amended

(‘‘Act’’)

December 29, 1995.

Notice is hereby given that the

following filing(s) has/have been made

with the Commission pursuant to

provisions of the Act and rules

promulgated thereunder. All interested

persons are referred to the application(s)

and/or declaration(s) for complete

statements of the proposed

transaction(s) summarized below. The

application(s) and/or declaration(s) and

any amendments thereto is/are available

for public inspection through the

Commission’s Office of Public

Reference.

Interested persons wishing to

comment or request a hearing on the

application(s) and/or declaration(s)

should submit their views in writing by

January 22, 1996, to the Secretary,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20549, and serve a

copy on the relevant applicant(s) and/or

declarant(s) at the address(es) specified

below. Proof of service (by affidavit or,

in case of an attorney at law, by

certificate) should be filed with the

request. Any request for hearing shall

identify specifically the issues of fact or

law that are disputed. A person who so

requests will be notified of any hearing,

if ordered, and will receive a copy of

any notice or order issued in the matter.

After said date, the application(s) and/

or declaration(s), as filed or as amended,

may be granted and/or permitted to

become effective.

Arkansas Power & Light Company (70–

7571)

Arkansas Power & Light Company

(‘‘AP&L’’), 425 West Capitol Avenue,

40th Floor, P.O. Box 551, Little Rock,

Arkansas 72201, a subsidiary of Entergy

Corporation, a registered holding

company, has filed a post-effective

amendment to its application under

sections 9(a) and 10 of the Act and rule

54 thereunder.

By prior Commission orders, dated

December 20, 1988 and July 7, 1989

(HCAR Nos. 24787 and 24917,

respectively) (‘‘Orders’’), AP&L was

authorized to enter into a fuel lease,

dated as of December 22, 1988

(‘‘Lease’’), with River Fuel Trust #1

(‘‘Trust’’), under which AP&L leases

nuclear fuel required for use at its

Arkansas Nuclear One Generating

Station (‘‘ANO’’). Under the terms of the

Lease, the Trust makes payments to