Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request, 36273-36274 [E9-17360]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices Title: lllllllllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllll (Tax Identification No.) lllllllllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllll (Mailing Address) lllllllllllllllllllll (Telephone Number) lllllllllllllllllllll (Fax Number) jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Form of TCCULGP Assignment The undersigned is the holder (‘‘Holder’’) or a duly authorized representative (‘‘Representative’’) of a holder or holders of Temporary Corporate Credit Union Stabilization Fund (‘‘TCCUSF’’) guaranteed debt under the _________ [insert title of governing document and CUSIP Number, if any] dated _______ [insert month, day and year] by and between _____ Credit Union (‘‘Issuer’’), as the Issuer, and the undersigned (as amended from time to time, the ‘‘Agreement’’), pursuant to which the TCCUSF-guaranteed debt obligations were issued by ____ Credit Union and are now outstanding. The undersigned Holder, or Representative on behalf of all holders, has demanded payment of amounts due and payable, and that are now in default, such default not having been cured as of the date hereof. In conjunction with that demand, the undersigned Holder, or Representative on behalf of all holders, has executed and submits this Assignment made pursuant to the terms of Section [___] of the Agreement. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned thereto in the Agreement. For value received, the undersigned Holder, or Representative on behalf of all holders, (the ‘‘Assignor’’), hereby assigns to the National Credit Union Administration (‘‘NCUA’’) TCCUSF, without recourse, all of the Assignor’s respective rights, title and interest in and to: (a) The promissory note or other instrument evidencing the debt issued under the Agreement (the ‘‘Note’’); (b) the Agreement pursuant to which the Note was issued; and (c) any other instrument or agreement executed by the Issuer regarding obligations of the Issuer under the Note or the Agreement (collectively, the ‘‘Assignment’’). The Assignor acknowledges and agrees that this Assignment is subject to the Agreement and to the following: 1) In the event the Assignor receives any payment under or related to the Note or the Agreement from a party other than the TCCUSF (a ‘‘Non-TCCUSF Payment’’): a. After the date of demand for a guarantee payment on the TCCUSF pursuant to the TCCULGP, but prior to the date of the TCCUSF’s first guarantee payment under the Agreement, the Assignor shall promptly but in no event later than five (5) Business Days after the receipt notify the TCCUSF of the date and the amount of such Non-TCCUSF Payment and shall apply such payment as payment made by the Issuer, and not as a guarantee payment made by the TCCUSF under the TCCULGP, and therefore, the VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:04 Jul 21, 2009 Jkt 217001 amount of such payment shall be excluded from this Assignment; and b. After the TCCUSF’s first guarantee payment under the Agreement, the Assignor shall forward promptly to the TCCUSF such Non-TCCUSF Payment in accordance with the payment instructions provided in writing by the TCCUSF. 2) Acceptance by the Assignor of payment pursuant to the TCCULGP for its own behalf, or in the case of a Representative Assignor, on behalf of the holders, shall constitute a release by such Holder or holders of any liability of the TCCUSF and the NCUA under the TCCULGP with respect to such payment. The person who is executing this Assignment on behalf of the Assignor hereby represents and warrants to the NCUA and the TCCUSF that he/she/it is duly authorized to do so. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Assignor has caused this instrument to be executed and delivered this ___ day of ____, 20_. Very truly yours, 36273 for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; or (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for National Science Foundation, 725—17th Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, and to Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports [Assignor] Clearance Officer, National Science By: Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, lllllllllllllllllllll Suite 295, Arlington, Virginia 22230 or Printed Name: send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov. lllllllllllllllllllll Comments regarding this information Title: llllllllllllllllll collection are best assured of having For more information about the original their full effect if received within 30 and revised TCCULGPs, including terms, days of this notification. Copies of the conditions, participants, and forms, submission(s) may be obtained by interested parties may contact Senior Analyst calling 703–292–7556. Dave Shetler of the NCUA Office of Corporate FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Credit Unions. Suzanne H. Plimpton at 703–292–7556 Dated: July 16, 2009. or send email to splimpto@nsf.gov. Mary Rupp, Individuals who use a Secretary of the Board. telecommunications device for the deaf [FR Doc. E9–17339 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] (TDD) may call the Federal Information BILLING CODE 7535–01–P Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION NSF may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the Agency Information Collection collection of information displays a Activities: Comment Request currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential AGENCY: National Science Foundation. persons who are to respond to the ACTION: Submission for OMB review; collection of information that such comment request. persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it SUMMARY: The National Science displays a currently valid OMB control Foundation (NSF) has submitted the number. following information collection requirement to OMB for review and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: clearance under the Paperwork Title of Collection: Implementation Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104–13. Evaluation of the ADVANCE Program. This is the second notice for public OMB Control No.: 3145–NEW. comment; the first was published in the Abstract: Federal Register at 74 FR 23219, and no The ADVANCE Program was comments were received. NSF is established by the National Science forwarding the proposed renewal Foundation in 2001 to address the submission to the Office of Management underrepresentation and inadequate and Budget (OMB) for clearance advancement of women on STEM simultaneously with the publication of (Science, Technology, Engineering, and this second notice. The full submission Mathematics) faculties at postsecondary may be found at: https:// institutions. The evaluation being www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. conducted by the Urban Institute Comments regarding (a) whether the focuses on the implementation of collection of information is necessary ADVANCE projects at institutions PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM 22JYN1 36274 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices throughout the nation. The three major funding components—institutional transformation, leadership, and partnership awards—as well as all cohorts funded that completed their funding cycles will be included. The study will rely on a thorough review of project documents, telephone interviews with all grantees, and detailed case studies at selected sites. The goal of the evaluation will be to identify models of implementation and, depending on outcomes by model, conduct case studies at selected institutions to understand how ADVANCE models operate and may be effective in differing settings. Respondents: Faculty and staff at institutions of higher education awarded an ADVANCE grant from NSF. Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 200 (total). Burden on the Public: 200 hours. Identification of the Proposed Action The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed exemption from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, was submitted in response to the need for an exemption as identified by NRC Regulatory Information Summary (RIS) 2006–10, ‘‘Regulatory Expectations with Appendix R Paragraph III.G.2 Operator Manual Actions.’’ The RIS noted that NRC inspections identified that some licensees had relied upon operator manual actions, instead of the options specified in Paragraph III.G.2 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, as a permanent solution to resolve issues related to Thermo-Lag 330–1 fire barriers. The licensee indicates that some of the operator manual actions referenced in the March 3, 2009, application were previously included in correspondence with the NRC and found acceptable in a fire protection-related Safety Evaluation (SE) dated March 24, 1986 (ADAMS Accession No. 8604070468). The remaining operator manual actions referenced were explicitly considered in an SE dated June 25, 1990 (ADAMS Accession No. 9006280092), supporting a separate Appendix R exemption. RIS 2006–10, however, identifies that an exemption under 10 CFR Section 50.12 is necessary for use of the manual actions in lieu of the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, III.G.2, even if the NRC previously issued an SE that found the manual actions acceptable. RIS 2006–10 and Enforcement Guidance Memorandum 07–004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML071830345) provided that exemption requests must be submitted by March 6, 2009. The licensee’s proposed exemption provides the formal vehicle for NRC approval for the use of the specified operator manual actions instead of the options specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, III.G.2. The proposed action would grant exemptions to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2 based on 20 operator manual actions contained in the licensee’s Fire Protection Program Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff evaluated the manual operator actions presented in the proposed exemption in NRC SEs dated Dated: July 17, 2009. Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation. [FR Doc. E9–17360 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–219; NRC–2009–0320] Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of exemptions from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G, ‘‘Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability,’’ for Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR–16, for the use of operator manual actions in lieu of the requirements specified in Section III.G.2, as requested by Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek), located in Ocean County, New Jersey. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES (FPP). The licensee’s FPP requires that the identified operator manual actions be performed outside of the control room to achieve shutdown following fires in certain fire areas. The licensee states that each of the manual actions were subjected to a manual action feasibility review for Oyster Creek that determined that the manual actions are feasible and can be reliably performed. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated March 3, 2009 (available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML090630132). Environmental Assessment VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:04 Jul 21, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 March 24, 1986, and June 25, 1990, and found that they maintained a safe shutdown capability that satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, III.G. Therefore, the proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, nor does the proposed action introduce a new or different kind of accident. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. None of the manual actions to be performed are in areas that have radiation levels that would preclude entry. Further, the licensee stated that the highest expected dose during performance of the manual actions is 100 millirem (2 percent of the annual occupational limit) and the majority of manual actions are not in radiological controlled areas. Based on this consideration, the NRC staff finds that there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts associated with the proposed action. The NRC staff, thus concludes that granting the proposed exemption would result in no significant radiological environmental impact. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological 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. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ 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 The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the 1974 Final Environmental Statement for Oyster Creek and NUREG–1437, Vol. 1, Supplement 28, ‘‘Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM 22JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36273-36274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17360]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review; comment request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) has submitted the 
following information collection requirement to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. 
This is the second notice for public comment; the first was published 
in the Federal Register at 74 FR 23219, and no comments were received. 
NSF is forwarding the proposed renewal submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance simultaneously with the 
publication of this second notice. The full submission may be found at: 
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Comments regarding (a) 
whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the 
information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 
agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology 
and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and 
clarity of the information to be collected; or (d) ways to minimize the 
burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, 
including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, 
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms 
of information technology should be addressed to: Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for National 
Science Foundation, 725--17th Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 
20503, and to Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National 
Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295, Arlington, 
Virginia 22230 or send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov. Comments regarding 
this information collection are best assured of having their full 
effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the 
submission(s) may be obtained by calling 703-292-7556.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne H. Plimpton at 703-292-7556 or 
send email to splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.
    NSF may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless 
the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control 
number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to 
the collection of information that such persons are not required to 
respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title of Collection: Implementation Evaluation of the ADVANCE 
Program.
    OMB Control No.: 3145-NEW.
    Abstract:
    The ADVANCE Program was established by the National Science 
Foundation in 2001 to address the underrepresentation and inadequate 
advancement of women on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
Mathematics) faculties at postsecondary institutions. The evaluation 
being conducted by the Urban Institute focuses on the implementation of 
ADVANCE projects at institutions

[[Page 36274]]

throughout the nation. The three major funding components--
institutional transformation, leadership, and partnership awards--as 
well as all cohorts funded that completed their funding cycles will be 
included. The study will rely on a thorough review of project 
documents, telephone interviews with all grantees, and detailed case 
studies at selected sites. The goal of the evaluation will be to 
identify models of implementation and, depending on outcomes by model, 
conduct case studies at selected institutions to understand how ADVANCE 
models operate and may be effective in differing settings.
    Respondents: Faculty and staff at institutions of higher education 
awarded an ADVANCE grant from NSF.
    Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 200 (total).
    Burden on the Public: 200 hours.

    Dated: July 17, 2009.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. E9-17360 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.