49410 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 186 / Monday, September 28, 2009 / Notices 

1Notice of United States Postal Service Filing of 

Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited Package 

Services 2 Negotiated Service Agreement and 

Application for Non-Public Treatment of Materials 

Filed Under Seal, September 15, 2009 (Notice). 

2See Docket No. CP2008–4, Notice of United 

States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision 

Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global 

Expedited Package Services Contracts, May 20, 

2008. 

3See Docket No. CP2009–50, Order Granting 

Clarification and Adding Global Expedited Package 

Services 2 to the Competitive Product List, August 

28, 2009 (Order No. 290). 

4The Postal Service indicates that it has executed 

a modification provision clarifying the manner and 

location for the mailer’s tender of qualifying mail. 

Filing Online system at http:// 

www.prc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 and 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

II. Notice of Filing 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On September 15, 2009, the Postal 

Service filed a notice announcing that it 

has entered into an additional Global 

Expedited Package Services 2 (GEPS 2) 

contract.1 GEPS 2 provides volumebased incentives for mailers that send 

large volumes of Express Mail 

International (EMI) and/or Priority Mail 

International (PMI). The Postal Service 

believes the instant contract is 

functionally equivalent to the 

previously submitted GEPS 2 contracts 

and is supported by the Governors’’ 

Decision filed in Docket No. CP2008–4. 

Id. at 1.2

The instant contract. The Postal 

Service filed the instant contract 

pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5. In addition, 

the Postal Service contends that the 

contract is in accordance with Order No. 

290.3 The term of the instant contract is 

one year beginning October 1, 2009. 

Notice at 2. 

In support of its Notice, the Postal 

Service filed four attachments as 

follows: 

1. Attachment 1—an application for 

non-public treatment of materials to 

maintain the contract and supporting 

documents under seal; 

2. Attachment 2—a redacted copy of 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–7 which 

establishes prices and classifications for 

GEPS contracts, a description of 

applicable GEPS contracts, formulas for 

prices, an analysis and certification of 

the formulas and certification of the 

Governors’ vote; 

3. Attachment 3—a redacted copy of 

the contract, applicable annexes, and a 

provision to modify the mailer’s tender 

requirements; 4 and 

4. Attachment 4—a certified statement 

required by 39 CFR 3015.5(c)(2). 

Functional equivalency. The Postal 

Service asserts that the instant contract 

is functionally equivalent to the contract 

in Docket No. CP2009–50 and prior 

GEPS 2 contracts. Id. at 3–5. It also 

contends that the instant contract meets 

the requirements of Governors’ Decision 

No. 08–7 for rates for GEPS contracts. 

Id. at 3. The Postal Service states that 

the basic difference between the 

contract in Docket No. CP2009–50 and 

the instant contract is customer-specific 

information including the customer’s 

name, address, representative to receive 

notices and identity of the signatory. Id. 

at 3–4. The Postal Service contends that 

the instant contract satisfies the pricing 

formula and classification system 

established in Governors’ Decision No. 

08–7. Id. at 3. It contends that the 

instant contract and all GEPS 2 

contracts have similar cost and market 

characteristics and is functionally 

equivalent in all relevant aspects. Id. at 

5. The Postal Service concludes that this 

contract is in compliance with 39 U.S.C. 

3633, and requests that this contract be 

included within the GEPS 2 product. Id. 

Other issues. The Postal Service states 

that it has executed a clarifying 

modification to the contract provisions 

with the mailer regarding tender 

requirements and a representative 

sample of the modification is filed with 

the notice. Id. at 3. It also affirms that 

a signed copy is available to the 

Commission upon request. The 

Commission directs the Postal Service 

to file an executed copy of the 

modification provision in this docket by 

September 21, 2009. 

II. Notice of Filing 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. CP2009–65 for consideration of 

matters related to the contract identified 

in the Postal Service’s Notice. 

Interested persons may submit 

comments on whether the Postal 

Service’s contract is consistent with the 

policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633 or 3642. 

Comments are due no later than 

September 25, 2009. The public 

portions of these filings can be accessed 

via the Commission’s Web site (http:// 

www.prc.gov). 

The Commission appoints Paul L. 

Harrington to serve as Public 

Representative in this proceeding. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. CP2009–65 for consideration of the 

issues raised in this docket. 

2. Comments by interested persons in 

these proceedings are due no later than 

September 25, 2009. 

3. As set forth in this order, the Postal 

Service shall file an executed copy of 

the modification provision by 

September 21, 2009. 

4. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Paul L. 

Harrington is appointed to serve as 

officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in this 

proceeding. 

5. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

Issued: September 17, 2009. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–23446 Filed 9–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

PRESIDIO TRUST 

Notice of Trial Use Limits 

SUMMARY: By Federal Register notice of 

August 20, 2009 (73 FR 42028), the 

Presidio Trust (‘‘Trust’’) announced its 

proposal to undertake trial temporary 

traffic-calming and reduction measures 

for a period up to 45 days in that 

portion of The Presidio of San Francisco 

(‘‘Presidio’’) under the Trust’s 

administrative jurisdiction (‘‘Area B’’), 

including temporary road closures of 

certain roads, in order to assess various 

means that may slow traffic through 

Area B and reduce cut-through traffic. 

The Trust also announced its 

termination of the temporary public use 

limits no later than 45 days after they 

commence. In its notice of the trial 

temporary traffic-calming and reduction 

measures the Trust solicited public 

comment through September 21, 2009. 

Under 36 CFR 1001.5, the Board of 

Directors of the Presidio Trust (‘‘Board’’) 

may close all or a portion of Area B to 

all public use or to a specific use or 

activity, given a determination that such 

action is necessary for the maintenance 

of public health and safety, the 

protection of environmental or scenic 

values, or the avoidance of conflict 

among visitor use activities. The Board 

has determined that the trial temporary 

traffic-calming and reduction measures, 

including temporary road closures of 

certain roads for a period up to 45 days 

commencing approximately September 

29, 2009, will afford the Trust the 

opportunity to study and monitor the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 186 / Monday, September 28, 2009 / Notices 49411 

effects (both positive and negative) of 

these actions. The Board has authorized 

these temporary public use limits in 

Resolution 09–19. 

Comments: The Trust received 

approximately 100 individual 

comments as well as a petition signed 

by 128 residents of Area B. The 

comments generally fall into three 

categories: (1) Inconvenience—some 

commented that temporary road 

closures, specifically the closure of 

Presidio Boulevard, would create an 

inconvenience to motorists, both to 

those who live in the Presidio as well 

as to those who live outside the park; (2) 

safety and congestion—some worry that 

rerouting traffic to other streets might 

create safety problems, especially on 

West Pacific Avenue, the roadway 

adjacent to Julius Kahn Playground; and 

(3) timing and length of study. 

Responses to Comments: In the 2002 

Presidio Trust Management Plan, the 

Trust committed to mitigate traffic 

impacts as Area B occupancy increased 

and visitation grew. The Trust has 

implemented a number of strategies and 

an array of traffic-calming measures. In 

March 2009, the Trust took traffic 

counts at all Presidio gates which 

allowed the Trust to ascertain what 

percentage of the cars entering the 

Presidio simply drove through the park 

and out another gate. The Trust 

determined that, while the Trust 

appears to have succeeded in managing 

traffic generated by park residents, 

tenants and visitors, and that the 

Presidio has sufficient capacity for 

traffic generated by anticipated land 

uses in Area B, cut-through traffic has 

become a major issue representing 

approximately 50% of the traffic in Area 

B. With the anticipated transformation 

of Doyle Drive, the landscape of the 

Presidio will be changing and new 

traffic patterns will emerge. 

This trial limitation of public use and 

resulting study will help the Trust in 

implementing its management 

responsibilities and in avoiding 

conflicts among resident, tenant and 

visitor activities by allowing the Trust to 

analyze the effects of measures that are 

intended to slow traffic and to 

discourage cut-through traffic on Area 

B’s major streets and gateways and 

through the Presidio’s residential 

neighborhoods. In particular, it will 

help the Trust plan for the effect the 

new Doyle Drive/Girard Street 

interchange may have on the use of Area 

B streets for cut-through traffic. Further, 

as implementation of the Presidio’s 

Trail and Bikeways Master Plan 

continues, the Trust expects the 

numbers of pedestrian and cyclists 

using the park to increase. Ensuring the 

safety of this growing population means 

prioritizing the traffic movements of 

park users over traffic unrelated to park 

uses. 

The study will examine the effects of 

a variety of potential traffic-calming 

solutions. The challenge is to weigh the 

benefit of a potentially significant 

reduction in traffic in the park against 

the inconvenience of using other routes. 

Cut-through traffic, especially those 

vehicles using the Presidio Boulevard 

gate, is creating congestion elsewhere in 

the Presidio. During the temporary 

closures the Trust anticipates a 

reduction in traffic volume throughout 

the Presidio. Safety concerns along West 

Pacific Avenue will be addressed 

through the addition of a speed cushion, 

increased United States Park Police 

enforcement, signage, and altering 

parking patterns to create a pedestrian 

zone out of the roadway. The study is 

scheduled for a brief window before 

construction of the Doyle Drive 

Replacement Project begins later in the 

fall. The study is designed in part to 

anticipate changes that may come about 

as a result of Doyle Drive; gathering data 

before construction begins is essential to 

undertaking an analysis of the impacts 

of potential changes. All roads will 

remain open to MUNI, PresidioGo and 

emergency vehicles. The Trust has 

considered public comment and has 

decided to proceed with the temporary 

public use limits and to terminate the 

use limits no later than 45 days after 

they commence. 

Further Information: Further 

information about the study can be 

found at http://www.presidio.gov or by 

contacting Public Affairs 

(415.561.5418), The Presidio Trust, 34 

Graham St., P.O. Box 29052, San 

Francisco, CA 94129–0052. 

Dated: September 22, 2009. 

Karen A. Cook, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E9–23313 Filed 9–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4R–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 

Education and Advocacy, 

Washington, DC 20549–0213. 

Extension: 

Form N–4, SEC File No. 270–282, OMB 

Control No. 3235–0318. 

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 (the 

‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget a 

request for extension of the previously 

approved collection of information 

discussed below. 

The collection of information is 

entitled: ‘‘Form N–4 (17 CFR 239.17b 

and 274.11c) under the Securities Act of 

1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.) and under 

the Investment Company Act of 1940 

(15 U.S.C. 80a–1 et seq.) registration 

statement of separate accounts 

organized as unit investment trusts.’’ 

Form N–4 is the form used by insurance 

company separate accounts organized as 

unit investment trusts that offer variable 

annuity contracts to register as 

investment companies under the 

Investment Company Act of 1940 and/ 

or to register their securities under the 

Securities Act of 1933. The primary 

purpose of the registration process is to 

provide disclosure of financial and 

other information to investors and 

potential investors for the purpose of 

evaluating an investment in a security. 

Form N–4 also permits separate 

accounts organized as unit investment 

trusts that offer variable annuity 

contracts to provide investors with a 

prospectus containing the information 

required in a registration statement prior 

to the sale or at the time of confirmation 

or delivery of the securities. The 

estimated annual number of 

respondents filing on Form N–4 is 104 

for those filing initial registration 

statements and 1,360 for those filing 

post-effective amendments. The 

proposed frequency of response is 

annual. The estimate of the total annual 

reporting burden of the collection of 

information is approximately 278.5 

hours per initial filing and 197.25 hours 

for a post-effective amendment, for a 

total of 297,224 hours ((104 initial 

registration statements × 278.5 hours) + 

(1,360 post-effective amendments × 

197.25 hour)). Providing the information 

required by Form N–4 is mandatory. 

Responses will not be kept confidential. 

Estimates of the burden hours are made 

solely for the purposes of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, and are not derived from 

a comprehensive or even a 

representative survey or study of the 

costs of Commission rules and forms. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid 

control number. 

Please direct general comments 

regarding the above information to the 

following persons: (i) Desk Officer for 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES