Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 1996 / Notices 3059

within 60 days from the date of this

notice.

ADDRESSES: A free single copy of the

DEIS (NUREG–1531) and DTER

(NUREG–1532) may be requested by

those considering public comment by

writing to the NRC Publications Section,

ATTN: Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O.

Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013–

7082. A copy of each document is also

available for inspection and/or copying

in the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L St. NW, Washington, DC.

Any interested party may submit

comments on these documents for

consideration by the staff. Consistent

with its past commitments, NRC is

extending the comment period 15 days

beyond the required minimum of 45

days. To be certain of consideration,

comments on these reports must be

received within 60 days from the date

of this notice. Comments received after

the due date will be considered to the

extent practical. Comments on either

document should be sent to Chief, HighLevel Waste and Uranium Recovery

Projects Branch, Mail Stop TWFN 7–J9,

Division of Waste Management, Office

of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Myron Fliegel, High-Level Waste and

Uranium Recovery Projects Branch,

Mail Stop TWFN 7–J9, Division of

Waste Management, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555. Telephone 301/

415–6629.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC,

in cooperation with the NPS, has

prepared a DEIS regarding the

administrative action of approving an

amendment to Atlas’ NRC license

authorizing reclamation of uranium mill

tailings at the existing site near Moab,

Utah. The uranium mill no longer

operates and is currently being

dismantled. The nearby 9.52-millionmetric-ton (10.5-million-ton), 52.6–ha

(130-acre), uranium mill tailings pile

needs to be stabilized for long-term

disposal. The DEIS describes the

evaluation concerning (1) the purpose of

and need for the proposed action,

evaluated under NEPA and the agencies’

implementing regulations, (2)

alternatives considered, (3) existing

environmental conditions, and (4)

environmental consequences of the

proposed action and proposed

mitigating measures.

Three alternatives were evaluated.

Atlas’ proposal (Alternative 1) is to

reclaim the tailings pile for permanent

disposal and long-term custodial care by

a government agency in its current

location near Moab, prepare the 162-ha

(400-acre) site for closure, and depart

the site after having its NRC license

terminated.

Under Alternative 2, Atlas would

transport all of the tailings and other

contaminated material to an alternate

site. The DEIS considers the Plateau

site, located approximately 29 km (18

mi) northwest of Moab, as the primary

alternate site. The DEIS considers

several alternatives for transporting the

tailings to the alternate site.

Under the no-action alternative

(Alternative 3), the NRC would make no

licensing decision, and Atlas would

cease operations involving management

of the tailings. Because this alternative

would not comply with regulations and

is not environmentally acceptable, it is

not evaluated in detail in this DEIS.

As documented in the DEIS, the

NRC’s preliminary conclusion is that

Atlas’ proposal (reclamation on site) is

acceptable with respect to

environmental costs and benefits.

Alternative 2 (transport to and

stabilization at an alternate site) would

result in some advantages (primarily by

freeing the current site near the

Colorado River for other uses and

eliminating the potential for impacts to

the Colorado River) and disadvantages

(primarily related to the transport of

tailings to a new site and the longer

period of construction) compared to

Alternative 1. Alternative 2 would be

considerably more expensive than

Alternative 1.

The NRC has also prepared a DTER

that evaluates Atlas’ proposed

reclamation of the uranium mill tailings

with respect to NRC safety regulations.

NRC regulations applicable to

reclamation of uranium tailings are

primarily in Part 40 of 10 CFR, with

specific technical criteria appearing in

Appendix A. The DTER is organized by

the technical disciplines involved in the

assessment of the proposed reclamation,

but also provides a criterion by criterion

evaluation of Atlas’ proposed

reclamation with respect to Appendix

A. The NRC review identified 20 issues

in geology, seismology, geotechnical

engineering, erosion protection, water

resources protection, and radon

attenuation that preclude the NRC from

concluding that the applicable

regulations would be met under Atlas’

proposed reclamation. Atlas can provide

further information to try to resolve

these issues.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of January 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Joseph J. Holonich,

Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium

Recovery Projects Branch, Division of Waste

Management, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 96–1679 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Consideration of Valve Mispositioning

in Pressurized-Water Reactors; Issued

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of issuance.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has issued Generic

Letter 89–10, Supplement 7 to notify

licensees of nuclear power reactors that

the NRC is removing the

recommendation that motor operated

valve (MOV) mispositioning be

considered by pressurized-water reactor

licensees in responding to Generic

Letter 89–10, ‘‘Safety-Related MotorOperated Valve Testing and

Surveillance,’’ as was done for boilingwater reactor licensees in Supplement 4.

Although this generic letter supplement

forwards a new NRC position, no

specific action or written response is

required. This generic letter is available

in the Public Document Rooms under

accession number 9601190442.

DATES: The generic letter was issued on

January 24, 1996.

ADDRESSEES: Not applicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David C. Fischer at (301) 415–2728.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of January, 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dennis M. Crutchfield,

Director, Division of Reactor Program

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–1682 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–322]

Long Island Power Authority—

Shoreham Nuclear Power Station;

Closing of Local Public Document

Room

Notice is hereby given that the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

is closing the local public document

room (LPDR) for records pertaining to

the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA)

Shoreham Nuclear Power Station

located at the Shoreham-Wading River

Public Library, Shoreham, New York.
3060 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 1996 / Notices

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988)

This LPDR is no longer needed and will

close effective March 16, 1996.

The Shoreham Public Library has

been the LPDR for the Shoreham

Nuclear Power Station since January

1979. Since that time the LPDR has

continued to maintain documents on

the construction through

decommissioning stages of the facility.

On April 11, 1995, NRC issued an order

terminating License Number NPF–82,

releasing the facility and site for

unrestricted use. Therefore, effective

March 16, 1996, the LPDR will be

closed.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of January 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Carlton Kammerer,

Director, Division of Freedom of Information

and Publications Services, Office of

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–1680 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket Nos. 72–14, 50–346, 72–1004

(License No. NPF–3)]

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station;

Toledo Edison Company; Receipt of

Petition for Director’s Decision Under

10 C.F.R. § 2.206

Notice is hereby given that by a

Petition dated December 5, 1995, filed

on behalf of the Toledo Coalition for

Safe Energy, Alice Hirt, Charlene

Johnston, Dini Schut, and William

Hoops (Petitioners), the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission was requested

to immediately issue orders to prevent

the loading of spent nuclear fuel into

the VECTRA Technologies Inc.,

NUHOMS–24P dry shielded canisters

(DSCs) at the Davis-Besse nuclear power

station until an NRC rulemaking and/or

license modification hearing is

conducted on all safety-related changes

which have been made to the canisters,

as described in the Safety Analysis

Report. Also, the NRC was requested not

to authorize any loading of the canisters

until a written procedure for unloading

in both urgent and nonurgent

circumstances is written, approved, and

field-tested.

Petitioners contend that the safety of

the canisters has been compromised

because of reduction in the thickness of

the canister welds. In addition, they

claim that the NRC administrative

process by which permission was

granted for VECTRA to deliver the

canisters to the Davis-Besse station and

for the canisters to be used on site are

legally suspect, expressing the belief

that agency rulemaking or some other

public proceeding is necessary for

permission for such a transfer and use

to be granted.

The Petition is being treated pursuant

to 10 C.F.R. § 2.206 of the Commission’s

regulations. The Petition has been

referred to the Director of the Office of

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

As provided by Section 2.206,

appropriate action will be taken on this

Petition within a reasonable time. By

letter dated December 18, 1995, the

Director denied the Petitioners’ request

for immediate action on the Petition.

A copy of the Petition is available for

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20555.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 23rd day

of January 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Carl J. Paperiello,

Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 96–1681 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–p

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities; Request For Public

Comment

Upon Written Request, Copies Available

From: Securities and Exchange Commission,

Office of Filings and Information Services,

Washington, DC 20549.

Extension: Form 40–F, SEC File No.

270–335, OMB Control No. 3235–0381.

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

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

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) is publishing the

following summary of collection for

public comment.

Form 40–F is used by certain

Canadian issuers to register securities

pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’)

or as an annual report pursuant to

Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange

Act. An estimated 320 submissions are

made pursuant to Form 40–F, resulting

in an estimated annual total burden of

640 hours.

Written comments are invited on: (a)

Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate

of the burden of the proposed collection

of information; (c) ways to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected; and (d)

ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on

respondents, including through the use

of automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Consideration will be given to

comments and suggestions submitted in

writing within 60 days of this

publication.

Direct your written comments to

Michael E. Bartell, Associate Executive

Director, Office of Information

Technology, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 5th Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20549.

Dated January 23, 1996.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–1671 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–36763; File No. SR–

Philadep–95–11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations;

Philadelphia Depository Trust

Company; Notice of Filing and

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed

Rule Change To Restate, and Amend

Schedule of Fees and Charges

January 24, 1996.

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on

December 26, 1995, the Philadelphia

Depository Trust Company (‘‘Philadep’’)

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 primarily by

Philadep. 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 proposed rule change will restate

Philadep’s schedule of fees and charges

with certain amendments.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission,

Philadep included statements

concerning the purpose of and statutory

basis for the proposed rule change. The

text of these statements may be

examined at the places specified in Item

IV below. Philadep has prepared

summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B),