Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Notices 9887

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

guideline level, at which an

investigation occurs; or (5) change the

statistical test applied to the final survey

data to one other than the Sign test or

the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test.

The NRC staff has determined that the

amendment approving the LTP and LTP

change process involves no significant

change in the types, or significant

increase in the amounts, of any effluents

that may be released off site, and that

there is no significant increase in

individual or cumulative occupational

radiation exposure.

The proposed action will not

significantly 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

occupational or public radiation

exposure. Therefore, there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed

action does not involve any historic

sites. It does not affect non-radiological

plant effluents and has no other

environmental impact. Therefore, there

are no significant non-radiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that

there are no significant environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

As an alternative to the proposed

action, the staff considered denial of the

proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no action’’

alternative). 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 for the Trojan Nuclear Plant

or the Generic Environmental Impact

Statement on Decommissioning of

Nuclear Facilities.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

The NRC staff has prepared this

environmental assessment with input

from the State of Oregon’s Historical

Preservation Officer, letter dated

February 28, 2000; the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, letter dated March 9,

2000; and the State of Oregon’s Office of

Energy, letter dated April 10, 2000. No

other sources were used beyond those

referenced in this environmental

assessment.

The State of Oregon’s Historical

Preservation Officer noted that there is

a historically significant area,

Archaeological Site 35C01, on the

Trojan property, and a burial site, Coffin

Rock, near the Trojan property. The

licensee, in its letter to NRC, dated May

18, 2000, noted that it had established

agreements to preserve Archaeological

Site 35C01. Therefore, the activities

necessary to decommission the Trojan

facility will not impact this historically

significant area. Further, based on the

distance between any activities

necessary to decommission Trojan

property and Coffin Rock, it is very

unlikely that these activities will have

any impact on the burial site.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

provided a revised list of threatened and

endangered species in the vicinity of the

Trojan site. Additional species from the

Fish and Wildlife Service’s August 18,

1995, list now included as either

threatened or endangered are the

northern spotted owl, chum salmon,

steelhead, and Nelson’s checkeredmallow. The licensee, in its letter dated

May 18, 2000, noted that license

termination activities will continue to

be largely confined to previously

developed portions of the Trojan site.

Consequently, these activities should

not substantially affect undisturbed

areas of the site, which are where

protected bird, mammal, and plant

species might be found. With regard to

aquatic life, the licensee noted that the

design of the intake and discharge

systems minimized the impacts on

Columbia River aquatic life during

power operation of the Trojan plant.

These impacts have been significantly

reduced during this post-power

operational phase of the facility.

Therefore, the finding made in the

staff’s DEA, that the impact of

decommissioning activities at the Trojan

facility would not affect Federally

protected, threatened, or endangered

species in the vicinity of the Trojan

facility, is still valid.

In accordance with its stated policy,

on January 3, 2001, the staff consulted

with the Oregon State Official, Mr.

Adam Bless of the Oregon Office of

Energy, regarding the environmental

impact of the proposed action. The State

official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

On the basis of the environmental

assessment, the NRC concludes that the

proposed action will not have a

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

NRC has determined not to prepare an

environmental impact statement for the

proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated August 5, 1999, as supplemented

by letters dated November 23, 1999,

December 27, 1999, May 4, 2000,

October 19, 2000, and November 22,

2000. Documents may be examined,

and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s

Public Document Room, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.

Publicly available records will be

accessible electronically from the

ADAMS Public Library component on

the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov

(the Electronic Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day

of February 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David J. Wrona,

Project Manager, Decommissioning Section,

Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning

Division of Licensing Project Management,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–3501 Filed 2–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–43925; File No. SR–PCX–

01–06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness

of Proposed Rule Change by the

Pacific Exchange, Inc. Regarding the

Dissemination of Options Quote Size

February 5, 2001.

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on January

22, 2001, the Pacific Exchange, Inc.

(‘‘PCX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the

Securities and Exchange Commission

(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed

rule change as described in Items I, II,

and III below, which Items have been

prepared by the PCX. 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 effect a

systems change to disseminate via the

Options Price Reporting Authority

(‘‘OPRA’’) the size of options markets in

issues quoted and traded in decimals.

9888 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Notices

3These guaranteed market sizes range from

between twenty contracts and one hundred

contracts. See PCX Rule 6.87(b) and PCX Rule

6.86(a) and (g). The Exchange notes that the

guaranteed Auto-Ex size in an issue must be the

same as the guaranteed size for manual execution

in that issue, pursuant to PCX Rule 6.86(g).

4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(5)

8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

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

PCX 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 PCX 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 is modifying its

systems to permit options market sizes

to be disseminated via OPRA. Pursuant

to this systems change, the Exchange

will disseminate the size that the PCX

guarantees in a particular issue for

automatic execution on the Exchange’s

Automatic Execution System (‘‘AutoEx’’) pursuant to PCX Rule 6.87(b) and

for manual execution pursuant to PCX

Rule 6.86(a).3 At this time, the Exchange

intends to disseminate the size of

markets in only those issues that are

quoted and traded in decimals.

2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes that the

proposal is consistent with section 6(b)

of the Act,4 in general, and section

6(b)(5),5 in particular, in that they are

designed to facilitate transactions in

securities and promote just and

equitable principles of trade.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The PCX does not believe that the

proposed rule change will impose any

burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received From

Members, Participants, or Others

No written comments were solicited

or received with respect to the proposed

rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

Because the foregoing proposed rule

changes an existing trading system of

the Exchange and does not (1) affect the

protection of investors or the public

interest; (2) impose any significant

burden on competition; or (3) have the

effect of limiting the access to or

availability of the system, the proposed

rule filing has become effective

pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the

Act 6 and subparagraph (f)(5) of Rule

19b–4 thereunder.7 At any time within

60 days of the filing of the proposed rule

change, the Commission may summarily

abrogate such rule change if it appears

to the Commission that such action is

necessary or appropriate in the public

interest, for the protection of investors,

or otherwise in furtherance of the

purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the propsoed rule

change is consistent with the Act.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of

the submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements

with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the

Commission, and all written

communications relating to the

proposed rule change between the

Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be

available for inspection and copying in

the Commission’s Public Reference

Room. Copies of such filing also will be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of the PCX. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–PCX–01–06 and should be

submitted by March 5, 2001.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.8

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–3492 Filed 2–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Determination Under the Caribbean

Basin Trade Partnership Act

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The United States Trade

Representative has determined that

Trinidad and Tobago is making

substantial progress toward

implementing and following the

customs procedures required by the

Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act

and, therefore, imports of eligible

products from Trinidad and Tobago

qualify for the trade benefits provided

under the Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 6, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher Wilson, Director of Central

America and the Caribbean, Office of

the United States Trade Representative,

(202) 395–5190.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act

(Title II of the Trade and Development

Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106–200)

(CBTPA) amended the Caribbean Basin

Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) to

provide preferential tariff treatment for

imports of certain products of

beneficiary Caribbean and Central

American countries. The trade benefits

provided by the CBTPA are available to

imports of eligible products from

countries that the President designates

as ‘‘CBTPA beneficiary countries,’’

provided that these countries have

implemented and follow, or are making

substantial progress toward

implementing and following, certain

customs procedures that assist the

Customs Service in verifying the origin

of the products.

In Proclamation 7351 of October 2,

2000, the President designated all 24

current beneficiaries under the CBERA

as ‘‘CBTPA beneficiary countries.’’

Proclamation 7351 delegated to the

United States Trade Representative

(USTR) the authority to determine

whether the designated CBTPA

beneficiary countries have implemented

and follow, or are making substantial

progress toward implementing and

following, the customs procedures

required by the CBTPA. The President

directed the USTR to announce any

such determinations in the Federal

Register and to implement them

through modifications of the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTS).

Based on information and

commitments provided by the