51340 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 6, 2009 / Notices 

upcoming (Cycle 16) refueling outages 

for each unit. The temporary exemption 

would allow the LFAs to be used for up 

to three operating cycles (Cycles 16, 17, 

and 18). Currently, eight AREVA NP 

LFAs are scheduled for installation in 

SONGS Unit 2 for Cycle 16. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s request for 

exemption dated January 30, 2009, as 

supplemented by letter dated March 16, 

2009. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed temporary exemption is 

needed by SCE to allow the use of M5 

alloy clad LFAs to evaluate cladding 

material for use in future fuel 

assemblies and to provide a more robust 

design to eliminate grid to rod fretting 

fuel failures. The regulations specify 

standards and acceptance criteria only 

for fuel rods clad with Zircaloy or 

ZIRLO. Consistent with 10 CFR 50.46, a 

temporary exemption is required to use 

fuel rods clad with an advanced alloy 

that is not Zircaloy or ZIRLO. Therefore, 

the licensee needs a temporary 

exemption to insert up to 16 LFAs 

containing new cladding material into 

the SONGS Unit 2 or Unit 3 reactor 

cores. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC has completed its safety 

evaluation of the proposed action and 

concludes that the proposed exemption 

will not present any undue risk to the 

public health and safety. The safety 

evaluation performed by Framatome 

ANP, Inc., ‘‘BAW–10227P–A, 

Evaluation of Advanced Cladding and 

Structural Material (M5) in PWR Reactor 

Fuel, Framatome Cogema Fuels, 

February 2000,’’ demonstrates that the 

predicted chemical, mechanical, and 

material performance characteristics of 

the M5 cladding are within those 

approved for Zircaloy under anticipated 

operational occurrences and postulated 

accidents. Furthermore, the LFAs will 

be placed in non-limiting locations. In 

the unlikely event that cladding failures 

occur in the LFAs, the environmental 

impact would be minimal and is 

bounded by previous accident analyses. 

The proposed action will not 

significantly increase the probability or 

consequences of accidents. No changes 

are being made in the types of effluents 

that may be released offsite. There is no 

significant increase in the amount of 

any effluent released offsite. 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 have a potential to affect 

any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents, does not 

affect any environmental resources, and 

has no other environmental impact. 

Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed action. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. 

The details of the staff’s safety 

evaluation will be provided in the 

exemption that will be issued as part of 

the letter to the licensee approving the 

exemption to the regulation. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

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 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for SONGS 

Units 2 and 3, dated May 12, 1981. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on April 8, 2009, the NRC staff 

consulted with the California State 

official, Mr. Steve Hsu of the Radiologic 

Health Branch of the California 

Department of Public Health, 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 January 30, 2009, as 

supplemented by letter dated March 16, 

2009, Agency Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) 

Accession Nos. ML090360738 and 

ML090780251, respectively. Documents 

may be examined, and/or copied for a 

fee, at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 

North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. Publicly available records 

will be accessible electronically from 

the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 

site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or 

send an e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day 

of September 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

James R Hall, 

Senior Project Manager, 

Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 

Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E9–24053 Filed 10–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act; Notice of Meetings 

DATES: Weeks of October 5, 12, 19, 26, 

November 2, 9, 2009. 

PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference 

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

STATUS: Public and Closed. 

Week of October 5, 2009 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of October 5, 2009. 

Week of October 12, 2009—Tentative 

Tuesday, October 13, 2009. 

9:30 a.m.—Discussion of Security 

Issues (Closed—Ex. 3) 

Week of October 19, 2009—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of October 19, 2009. 

Week of October 26, 2009—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of October 26, 2009. 

Week of November 2, 2009—Tentative 

Tuesday, November 3, 2009. 

9:30 a.m.—Briefing on Fire Protection 

Lessons Learned from Shearon 

Harris (Public Meeting) (Contact: 

Alex Klein, 301–415–2822) 

This meeting will be webcast live at 

the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. 

Week of November 9, 2009—Tentative 

Tuesday, November 10, 2009. 

9:30 a.m.—Briefing on NRC 

International Activities (Public 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 6, 2009 / Notices 51341 

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 25, 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). 

4See Docket Nos. CP2008–21 and CP2008–24, 

United States Postal Service Motion for Temporary 

Relief, September 25, 2009 (Motion). The Postal 

Service requests an extension of the expiration date 

for the original contract for this customer-based on 

extenuating circumstances. This motion was filed 

contemporaneously with the filing of this notice. 

Meeting), (Contact: Karen 

Henderson, 301 415–0202) 

This meeting will be webcast live at 

the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. 

* * * * * 

* The schedule for Commission 

meetings is subject to change on short 

notice. To verify the status of meetings, 

call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. 

Contact person for more information: 

Rochelle Bavol, (301) 415–1651. 

* * * * * 

Additional Information 

The Briefing on Fire Protection 

Closure Plan previously scheduled on 

Thursday, May 28, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. 

has been cancelled. A more focused 

briefing has been scheduled in its place: 

The Briefing on Fire Protection Lessons 

Learned from Shearon Harris currently 

scheduled on Tuesday, November 3, 

2009, at 9:30 a.m. 

* * * * * 

The NRC Commission Meeting 

Schedule can be found on the Internet 

at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policymaking/schedule.html. 

* * * * * 

The NRC provides reasonable 

accommodation to individuals with 

disabilities where appropriate. If you 

need a reasonable accommodation to 

participate in these public meetings, or 

need this meeting notice or the 

transcript or other information from the 

public meetings in another format (e.g. 

braille, large print), please notify the 

NRC’s Disability Program Coordinator, 

Rohn Brown, at 301–492–2279, TDD: 

301–415–2100, or by e-mail at 

rohn.brown@nrc.gov. Determinations on 

requests for reasonable accommodation 

will be made on a case-by-case basis. 

* * * * * 

This notice is distributed 

electronically to subscribers. If you no 

longer wish to receive it, or would like 

to be added to the distribution, please 

contact the Office of the Secretary, 

Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969), 

or send an e-mail to 

darlene.wright@nrc.gov. 

Dated: October 1, 2009. 

Rochelle C. Bavol, 

Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–24142 Filed 10–2–09; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CP2009–66; Order No. 310] 

New Postal Product 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service recently 

filed a notice with the Commission 

announcing that it has entered into an 

additional Global Expedited Package 

Services Contract 2 contract. This 

document provides public notice of the 

Postal Service’s filing and announces 

establishment of a formal docket to 

consider the Postal Service’s action. It 

also invites public comment and 

addresses other procedural matters. 

DATES: Comments are due October 7, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http:// 

www.prc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 or 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

II. Notice of Filing 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On September 25, 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– 

4.2 Id. at 1. 

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, 2009.4

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; 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 3–4. 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, identity of the signatory, and 

provisions clarifying tender locations, 

minimum revenue and/or volume 

requirements, and liquidated damages. 

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 asserts 

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 

4. 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. 

II. Notice of Filing 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. CP2009–66 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 October 

7, 2009. The public portions of these 

filings can be accessed via the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES