9832 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices 

staff’s original proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated February 7, 

2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Virginia Electric and Power Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–338 and 50–339, North 

Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, 

Louisa County, Virginia 

Date of application for amendment: 

March 30, 2010. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendments revised the North Anna 

Technical Specifications (TSs) by 

relocating specific surveillance 

frequencies to a licensee-controlled 

program with the implementation of 

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 04–10, 

‘‘Risk-Informed Technical Specifications 

Initiative 5b, Risk-Informed Method for 

Control of Surveillance Frequencies.’’ 

Date of issuance: January 31, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 180 days from the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: 262 and 243. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. NPF–4 and NPF–7: Amendments 

changed the licenses and the technical 

specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: May 18, 2010 (75 FR 27833). 

The supplements dated August 30, 

2010, and January 18, 2011, provided 

additional information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination. The 

Commission’s related evaluation of the 

amendments is contained in a Safety 

Evaluation dated January 31, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day 

of February 2011. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Joseph G. Giitter, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–3721 Filed 2–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 03034542; License No: 37– 

30412–01; EA–10–077; NRC–2011–0041] 

In the Matter of Superior Well Services, 

Ltd. Indiana, PA; Confirmatory Order 

Modifying License (Effective 

Immediately) 

I 

Superior Well Services, Ltd. (SWS or 

Licensee) is the holder of radioactive 

material License No. 37–30412–01 

issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC or agency) pursuant 

to 10 CFR Part 30. The license 

authorizes the possession, storage, and 

use of radioactive sources for oil and gas 

well logging at the Licensee’s facilities 

in Buckhannon, West Virginia, Sophia, 

West Virginia, and Gaylord, Michigan, 

and at temporary jobsites within the 

NRC’s jurisdiction, in accordance with 

conditions specified therein. 

II 

On October 21, 2010, the NRC issued 

a Notice of Violation (Notice) and 

Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty 

(CP) in the amount of $34,000 for five 

violations that were categorized into 

two severity level (SL) III problems. The 

violations were identified during an 

NRC inspection as well as an 

investigation conducted by the NRC 

Office of Investigations (OI). (Reference: 

NRC Inspection Report No. 03034542/ 

2009001 and OI Investigation Report 

No. 1–2009–035). The violations were 

also discussed at a predecisional 

enforcement conference (PEC) on 

September 2, 2010. 

The first SL III problem described in 

the Notice related to an event that 

occurred on September 20, 2008, when 

two well-logging sealed sources fell off 

of a company truck during transport. 

One violation involved the failure to 

secure the packages containing the 

licensed material from shifting during 

transport. On September 20, 2008, when 

the truck transporting these sources 

reportedly hit a large pothole, the weld 

securing the source plate to the truck 

broke, and the sources fell off of the 

truck and remained unattended by the 

side of a public highway. The second 

violation involved the failure to control 

and maintain constant surveillance of 

the sources while they were on the 

highway (an unrestricted area). Since 

SWS did not recognize that the sources 

had fallen out of the truck until the 

truck reached its destination at the SWS 

facility in Buckhannon, WV, the sources 

remained unattended for approximately 

ninety minutes until SWS personnel 

located and retrieved the sources. The 

third violation involved the failure to 

immediately report this occurrence by 

telephone to the NRC Operations 

Center. The involved SWS employees, 

including the site Radiation Safety 

Officer (RSO) for the associated SWS 

facility, did not recognize the need to 

report this event to the NRC. As a result, 

SWS did not provide the required 

immediate telephone notification of this 

event to the NRC Operations Center 

until July 23, 2009, after an NRC 

inspector informed SWS of the 

reportability requirement while 

conducting a routine inspection. 

The second SL III problem described 

in the Notice involved SWS’s failure to 

conduct required radiological surveys of 

vehicles before transporting licensed 

material and the deliberate falsification 

of survey records for these vehicles. 

Specifically, former SWS employees 

informed the NRC inspector and 

investigator that on numerous 

occasions, they did not perform the 

surveys and they instead completed the 

survey forms by copying data from 

previously completed forms. The 

employees’ failure to perform the 

required radiological surveys of vehicles 

prevented SWS from assuring that the 

dose rates inside and outside the trucks 

did not exceed limits set by the NRC 

and the U.S. Department of 

Transportation. The employees who 

admitted to the NRC that they had 

falsified survey records indicated that 

they did so because they did not know 

how to use the survey instruments. 

III 

In response to the October 21, 2010, 

NRC letter, SWS requested the use of 

the NRC’s Alternative Dispute 

Resolution (ADR) process to resolve 

differences it had with the NRC 

regarding the Notice. ADR is a process 

in which a neutral professional 

mediator with no decision-making 

authority assists the parties in reaching 

an agreement to resolve any differences 

regarding the enforcement action. On 

January 4, 2011, the NRC and SWS met 

in an ADR mediation session, arranged 

through Cornell University’s Scheinman 

Institute on Conflict Resolution. During 

that ADR mediation session, an 

agreement in principle was reached. 

This Confirmatory Order is the result of 

that agreement, the elements of which 

consisted of the following: 

1. SWS did not take issue with the 

NRC conclusion set forth in the October 

21, 2010, letter and enclosed Notice that 

the subject violations regarding the 

temporary loss of two well-logging 

sources occurred as identified. Further, 

SWS did not take issue with the NRC 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices 9833 

conclusion that the violations 

collectively warranted classification as 

an SL III problem and that SWS was 

subject to a civil penalty in accordance 

with the NRC Enforcement Policy, since 

the violations involved the loss of 

sealed sources. 

2. Regarding the subject violations 

related to the failure to conduct 

radiological surveys, however, SWS 

maintained that the surveys were 

performed and that the employees who 

admitted to the NRC that they had 

falsified survey records did so because 

they were disgruntled after they had lost 

their jobs with SWS. Based upon the 

sworn testimony of the involved 

individuals, the NRC maintained that 

the former employees did not perform 

the surveys and that they created 

records indicating that the surveys had 

been performed when, in fact, they 

knew the surveys had not been 

performed. Although the NRC 

acknowledged that SWS management 

did not encourage or condone this 

practice, the NRC maintained that SWS 

was accountable because licensees are 

responsible for the actions of their 

employees. The NRC and SWS agreed to 

disagree on this violation. 

3. The NRC acknowledged that SWS 

had taken several corrective actions in 

response to the violations, so as to 

preclude the occurrence of similar 

violations in the future. These actions 

include: 

a. For the SL III Problem involving 

violations associated with the loss of 

radioactive material (RAM), SWS has: 

i. Enhanced how the material is 

secured in company trucks during 

transport by welding the plate with the 

source holders to the truck frame, 

repairing the lock, and installing a 

heavy hasp lock to secure the door from 

opening during transport; 

ii. Provided training on NRC 

notification requirements; 

iii. Scheduled monthly conference 

calls with available site RSOs, Regional 

managers, and the Corporate RSO to 

discuss issues; and 

iv. Replaced the Corporate RSO. 

b. For the SL III Problem involving 

two violations associated with the 

failure to perform surveys, SWS has: 

i. Increased focus on vehicle 

radiological surveys during initial and 

annual employee training, and required 

documentation of the completion of this 

training; 

ii. Implemented random audits and 

observations of vehicle radiation 

surveys by SWS management; 

iii. Developed job aids for SWS 

employees on the use of radiation 

survey meters; and 

iv. Reinforced to staff that falsification 

of survey readings would not be 

tolerated. 

4. The NRC also acknowledged that 

since the October 21, 2010, letter, SWS 

has independently taken additional 

actions to enhance safety both within 

the company and the industry. Those 

actions include 

a. For the SL III Problem involving 

violations associated with the loss of 

RAM, SWS has: 

i. Discussed this event, and the 

lessons learned, with management 

representatives from other oilfield 

services companies; 

ii. Provided the details of this event 

to its radiological training contractors, 

Applied Health Physics (AHP), for 

inclusion as an example in its 

radiological training programs; 

iii. Instituted the corrective actions 

implemented at SWS’s Buckhannon, 

WV facility at its other locations (within 

both NRC and Agreement State 

jurisdictions) that utilize similar 

sources, as well as enhanced security 

measures at those sites that use only 

portable moisture density gauges; 

iv. Instituted an audit protocol to be 

employed by the SWS Local Radiation 

Safety Officers (LRSOs), with oversight 

by the Health and Safety Engineers, to 

review the radiological safety programs 

and prevent recurrence of this type of 

violation; 

v. Provided training to the LRSOs on 

the audit protocol described in Item 

III.4.a.iv; and 

vi. Instituted a practice that the 

Facility Operations Managers at the 

SWS wireline locations will also fulfill 

the role of the LRSOs. 

b. For the SL III Problem involving 

two violations associated with the 

failure to perform surveys, SWS has: 

i. Instituted the practice of the LRSOs 

conducting random audits of completed 

surveys to verify the recorded values are 

reasonable. 

5. SWS has also agreed to take 

additional actions to address the 

violations, to further enhance safety 

both within the company and the 

industry. These actions consist of: 

a. For the SL III Problem involving 

violations associated with the loss of 

RAM, SWS agreed to: 

i. Provide presentations that discuss 

this event and SWS’s lessons learned 

and corrective actions at the following 

forums: 

1. Pennsylvania Independent Oil and 

Gas Association; 

2. Oilfield Safety Alliance; 

3. Society of Petroleum Engineers; 

ii. Submit an article discussing this 

event and SWS’s lessons learned and 

corrective actions for consideration for 

publication in an Association of Energy 

Services Companies publication, a 

North American Transportation 

Management Institute publication, and 

the Applied Health Physics (AHP) 

newsletter; and 

iii. Provide the details of this event to 

AHP for inclusion as an example in its 

training program, which is provided to 

AHP’s other related clients. 

b. For the SL III Problem involving 

two violations associated with the 

failure to perform surveys, SWS agreed 

to: 

i. Modify its annual radiation training 

to emphasize that regulations and 

license conditions must be properly 

followed, including the requirements of 

providing complete and accurate 

information to the NRC (10 CFR 30.9) 

and the potential consequences that can 

occur to the company and to individuals 

who fail to comply; and 

ii. Enhance the practice of the LSROs 

conducting random audits of completed 

surveys to verify the recorded values are 

reasonable (as discussed in Item III.4.b.i) 

by also periodically reviewing video 

footage of surveys being conducted. 

6. SWS agreed to complete these 

actions within 90 days of the date of the 

Confirmatory Order confirming these 

commitments, and send the NRC Region 

I Regional Administrator a letter 

informing the NRC that the actions are 

complete, within 30 days of the 

completion of these actions. 

7. In addition to the actions described 

above, SWS has instituted actions to 

enhance corporate safety culture. These 

include the implementation of 

anonymous employee safety concern 

feedback programs, routine employee 

observation tools, and other tools that 

promote employee responsibility for 

safety and empower employees to raise 

safety concerns on the jobsite. 

8. In light of the actions that SWS has 

taken as described in Items 3, 4, and 6, 

as well as the additional actions SWS 

committed to take as described in Item 

5, the NRC agreed to reduce the amount 

of the civil penalty to $17,000. SWS 

agreed to pay this amount within 30 

days of the date of the Confirmatory 

Order confirming these commitments. 

9. In accordance with NRC practice, 

the Confirmatory Order and the letter 

forwarding it to SWS will be publicly 

available and accompanied by a press 

release. 

On February 4, 2011, SWS consented 

to issuance of this Order with the 

commitments, which are described in 

Section V below. The Licensee further 

agreed that this Order is to be effective 

upon issuance and that it has waived its 

right to a hearing. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

9834 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices 

IV 

Since SWS has agreed to take 

additional actions to address NRC 

concerns, as set forth in Section III, the 

NRC has concluded that its concerns 

can be resolved through issuance of this 

Confirmatory Order. 

I find that SWS’s commitments, as set 

forth in Section V, are acceptable and 

necessary and conclude that with these 

commitments the public health and 

safety are reasonably assured. In view of 

the foregoing, I have also determined 

that public health and safety require 

that the Licensee’s commitments be 

confirmed by this Order. Based on the 

above and SWS’s consent, this Order is 

immediately effective upon issuance. 

V 

Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 

161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 

and the Commission’s regulations in 10 

CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Part 30, It is 

hereby ordered, effective immediately 

that SWS shall: 

A. Within 30 days of the date of this 

order, pay a civil penalty of $17,000, 

utilizing one of the payment methods 

described in NUREG/BR–0254, 

‘‘Payment Methods.’’ 

B. Within 90 days of the date of this 

order, complete the following actions: 

1. For the SL III Problem involving 

violations associated with the loss of 

RAM, SWS will: 

a. Provide presentations that discuss 

this event and SWS’s lessons learned 

and corrective actions at the following 

forums: 

i. Pennsylvania Independent Oil and 

Gas Association; 

ii. Oilfield Safety Alliance; 

iii. Society of Petroleum Engineers; 

b. Submit an article discussing this 

event and SWS’s lessons learned and 

corrective actions for consideration for 

publication in an Association of Energy 

Services Companies publication, a 

North American Transportation 

Management Institute publication, and 

the Applied Health Physics newsletter; 

and 

c. Provide the details of this event to 

AHP for inclusion as an example in its 

training program, which is provided to 

AHP’s other related clients. 

2. For the SL III Problem involving 

two violations associated with the 

failure to perform surveys and creation 

of inaccurate survey records, SWS will: 

a. Modify its annual radiation training 

to emphasize that regulations and 

license conditions must be properly 

followed, including the requirements of 

providing complete and accurate 

information to the NRC and maintaining 

records that are complete and accurate 

in all material respects (10 CFR 30.9) 

and the potential consequences that can 

occur to the company and to individuals 

who fail to comply; and 

b. Enhance the practice of the LSROs 

conducting random audits of completed 

surveys to verify the recorded values are 

reasonable (as discussed in Item III.4.b.i) 

by also periodically reviewing video 

footage of surveys being conducted. 

C. Within 30 days of completion of all 

of the actions described in Section V.B. 

of this Order, send the Regional 

Administrator, NRC Region I, a letter 

confirming that all actions are 

completed and describe details of their 

completion. 

The Director, Office of Enforcement, 

may relax or rescind, in writing, any of 

the above conditions upon 

demonstration by SWS of good cause. 

VI 

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the 

licensee must, and any other person 

adversely affected by this Order may, 

submit an answer to this Order within 

20 days of its publication in the Federal 

Register. In addition, any other person 

adversely affected by this Order may 

request a hearing on this Order within 

20 days of its publication in the Federal 

Register. Where good cause is shown, 

consideration will be given to extending 

the time to request a hearing. A request 

for extension of time must be directed 

to the Director, Office of Enforcement, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555, and include a 

statement of good cause for the 

extension. 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing, a petition for leave 

to intervene, any motion or other 

document filed in the proceeding prior 

to the submission of a request for 

hearing or petition to intervene, and 

documents filed by interested 

governmental entities participating 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule 

(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to 

submit and serve all adjudicatory 

documents over the internet, or in some 

cases to mail copies on electronic 

storage media. Participants may not 

submit paper copies of their filings 

unless they seek an exemption in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 

(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the 

participant should contact the Office of 

the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone 

at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital 

ID certificate, which allows the 

participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

documents and access the E-Submittal 

server for any proceeding in which it is 

participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 

submitting a request or petition for 

hearing (even in instances in which the 

participant, or its counsel or 

representative, already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Based upon 

this information, the Secretary will 

establish an electronic docket for the 

hearing in this proceeding if the 

Secretary has not already established an 

electronic docket. 

Information about applying for a 

digital ID certificate is available on 

NRC’s public Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/

apply-certificates.html. System 

requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in NRC’s 

‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’ 

which is available on the agency’s 

public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants 

may attempt to use other software not 

listed on the Web site, but should note 

that the NRC’s E-Filing system does not 

support unlisted software, and the NRC 

Meta System Help Desk will not be able 

to offer assistance in using unlisted 

software. 

If a participant is electronically 

submitting a document to the NRC in 

accordance with the E-Filing rule, the 

participant must file the document 

using the NRC’s online, Web-based 

submission form. In order to serve 

documents through the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), users will 

be required to install a Web browser 

plug-in from the NRC Web site. Further 

information on the Web-based 

submission form, including the 

installation of the Web browser plug-in, 

is available on the NRC’s public Web 

site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. 

Once a participant has obtained a 

digital ID certificate and a docket has 

been created, the participant can then 

submit a request for hearing or petition 

for leave to intervene. Submissions 

should be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the documents are 

submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing 

system. To be timely, an electronic 

filing must be submitted to the E-Filing 

system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on the due date. Upon receipt of 

a transmission, the E-Filing system 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices 9835 

time-stamps the document and sends 

the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the documents on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before a hearing request/ 

petition to intervene is filed so that they 

can obtain access to the document via 

the E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the agency’s adjudicatory E-Filing 

system may seek assistance by 

contacting the NRC Meta System Help 

Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link 

located on the NRC Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by e-mail at 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at 866–672–7640. The NRC 

Meta System Help Desk is available 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding government holidays. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file an 

exemption request, in accordance with 

10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper 

filing requesting authorization to 

continue to submit documents in paper 

format. Such filings must be submitted 

by: (1) First class mail addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, 

express mail, or expedited delivery 

service to the Office of the Secretary, 

Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking 

and Adjudications Staff. Participants 

filing a document in this manner are 

responsible for serving the document on 

all other participants. Filing is 

considered complete by first-class mail 

as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 

by courier, express mail, or expedited 

delivery service upon depositing the 

document with the provider of the 

service. A presiding officer, having 

granted an exemption request from 

using E-Filing, may require a participant 

or party to use E-Filing if the presiding 

officer subsequently determines that the 

reason for granting the exemption from 

use of E-Filing no longer exists. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http:// 

ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, 

unless excluded pursuant to an order of 

the Commission, or the presiding 

officer. Participants are requested not to 

include personal privacy information, 

such as social security numbers, home 

addresses, or home phone numbers in 

their filings, unless an NRC regulation 

or other law requires submission of such 

information. With respect to 

copyrighted works, except for limited 

excerpts that serve the purpose of the 

adjudicatory filings and would 

constitute a Fair Use application, 

participants are requested not to include 

copyrighted materials in their 

submission. 

If a person (other than SWS) requests 

a hearing, that person shall set forth 

with particularity the manner in which 

his interest is adversely affected by this 

Confirmatory Order and shall address 

the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) 

and (f). 

If a hearing is requested by a person 

whose interest is adversely affected, the 

Commission will issue an order 

designating the time and place of any 

hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to 

be considered at such hearing shall be 

whether this Confirmatory Order should 

be sustained. 

In the absence of any request for 

hearing, or written approval of an 

extension of time in which to request a 

hearing, the provisions specified in 

Section V above shall be final 20 days 

from the date this Confirmatory Order is 

published in the Federal Register 

without further order or proceedings. If 

an extension of time for requesting a 

hearing has been approved, the 

provisions specified in Section V shall 

be final when the extension expires if a 

hearing request has not been received. 

A request for a hearing shall not stay 

the immediate effectiveness of this 

order. 

Dated this the 8th day of February 2011. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

William M. Dean, 

Regional Administrator, NRC Region I. 

[FR Doc. 2011–3851 Filed 2–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Advisory Committee on Reactor 

Safeguards; Meeting of the ACRS 

Subcommittee on Digital 

Instrumentation & Control (DI&C); 

Revision to February 23, 2011, ACRS 

Meeting Federal Register Notice 

The Federal Register Notice for the 

ACRS Subcommittee Meeting on Digital 

Instrumentation & Control (DI&C) 

scheduled to be held on February 23, 

2011, is being revised to notify the 

following: 

The meeting will be open to public 

attendance with exception of portions 

that may be closed to protect 

unclassified safeguards information or 

information that is proprietary to 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3) and (4). 

The notice of this meeting was 

previously published in the Federal 

Register on Friday, February 11, 2011, 

[75 FR 7882]. All other items remain the 

same as previously published. 

Further information regarding this 

meeting can be obtained by contacting 

Christina Antonescu, Designated 

Federal Official (Telephone: 301–415– 

6792, E-mail: 

Christina.Antonescu@nrc.gov) between 

7:30 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. (ET). 

Dated: February 15, 2011. 

Yoira Diaz-Sanabria, 

Acting Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, 

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. 

[FR Doc. 2011–3852 Filed 2–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

[OMB Control No. 3206–0190; Form RI 92– 

19] 

Submission for OMB Review; Request 

for Comments on an Extension, 

Without Change, of a Currently 

Approved Information Collection 

AGENCY: Office of Personnel 

Management. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 

L. 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice 

announces that the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) has submitted to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) a request for comments on an 

extension, without change, of a 

currently approved information 

collection. This information collection, 

‘‘Application for Deferred or Postponed 

Retirement: Federal Employees 

Retirement System (FERS)’’ (OMB 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES