12888 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Notices 

1Notice of the United States Postal Service Filing 

of a Functionally Equivalent International Business 

Reply Service Competitive Contract 3 Negotiated 

Service Agreement, February 24, 2012 (notice). 

a direct result of ground motion caused 

by an earthquake centered in Mineral, 

Virginia, approximately 10 miles from 

North Anna 1 and 2. The licensee has 

not determined the root cause of this 

event, nor has it explained why the 

reactor tripped on ‘‘negative flux rate’’ 

rather than on loss of offsite power. 

(2) Subsequent to the earthquake, the 

licensee initiated various inspection 

activities and tests to discover the extent 

of damage to the nuclear facility, but 

these inspection and testing activities 

continue and remain incomplete and 

non-validated. 

(3) The licensee had set an overly 

aggressive schedule for restarting North 

Anna 1 and 2 that was based on 

economic considerations rather than 

safety. 

(4) The licensee needs to amend its 

licensing documents, including its 

licenses and the updated facility 

analysis report. As a result of ground 

motion experienced at, and damage 

sustained to, North Anna 1 and 2, due 

to the earthquake of August 23, 2011, 

which is greater than the licensee’s 

design and safety bases, North Anna 1 

and 2, are in an unanalyzed condition 

and current licensing documents are 

erroneous and incomplete. As a result, 

the licensee cannot rely on them to 

provide reasonable assurance to the 

NRC that these nuclear reactors can be 

operated in a safe and reliable manner 

to protect public health and safety. 

(5) The licensee needs to conduct new 

seismic and geological evaluations of 

the North Anna 1 and 2, site that are 

independent. These evaluations should 

ascertain the degree and magnitude of 

future earthquake events and address a 

‘‘worst case’’ earthquake. 

(6) There are numerous issues with 

the seismic instrumentation at North 

Anna 1 and 2, including lack of free 

field instrumentation, issues associated 

with conversion of analog data to digital 

data, issues with lack of on-site 

personnel with sufficient training in 

seismic measurements, and potential 

skewing of ground motion data due to 

the location of the ‘‘scratch plates.’’ 

(7) Retrofitting of North Anna 1 and 

2, is required due to damage to North 

Anna 1 and 2, from the earthquake of 

August 23, 2011. 

(8) There are concerns with the 

impact of the August 23, 2011, 

earthquake on the North Anna 1 and 2, 

Independent Spent Fuel Storage 

Installation (ISFSI) including the fact 

that 25 casks weighing over 115 tons 

were not supposed to shift as much as 

4.5 inches during a predicted 

earthquake, validation of the integrity of 

the seals inside the spent fuel casks, 

assessing whether spent nuclear fuel 

storage facilities could topple or 

otherwise sustain significant damage 

resulting in a release, and assessing 

whether the licensee’s emergency plans 

adequately addressed damage to the 

ISFSI as a result of a severe earthquake. 

(9) The petitioner is concerned that 

the licensee cannot be trusted to 

communicate reliable information to the 

public or the regulator based on the fact 

that the licensee in the 1970s failed to 

promptly disclose the discovery of 

geological information and was 

subjected to a monetary fine for the 

violation. 

The request is being treated pursuant 

to Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) 2.206, ‘‘Requests 

for action under this subpart,’’ of the 

Commission’s regulations. The request 

has been referred to the Director of the 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. As 

provided by § 2.206, appropriate action 

will be taken on this petition within a 

reasonable time. The petitioner met 

with the NRR petition review board on 

September 29, 2011 (transcript at 

ADAMS Accession No. ML11332A046), 

and November 7, 2011 (transcript at 

ADAMS Accession No. ML113530035), 

to discuss the petition. The results of 

these discussions were considered in 

the PRB’s final recommendation to 

accept the petition for review and in 

establishing the schedule for the review 

of the petition. 

A copy of the petition is available for 

inspection at the Commission’s Public 

Document Room, located at One White 

Flint North, Public File Area O1–F21, 

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly 

available documents created or received 

at the NRC are accessible electronically 

through the NRC’s Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at 

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 

by email to PDR Resource@nrc.gov 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd 

day of February, 2012. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Eric J. Leeds, 

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5150 Filed 3–1–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CP2012–17; Order No. 1261] 

International Mail Contract 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a 

recently-filed Postal Service request to 

enter into an additional International 

Business Reply Service contract. This 

document invites public comments on 

the request and addresses several 

related procedural steps. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically by accessing the ‘‘Filing 

Online’’ link in the banner at the top of 

the Commission’s Web site (http://www.

prc.gov) or by directly accessing the 

Commission’s Filing Online system at 

https://www.prc.gov/prc-pages/filingonline/login.aspx. Commenters who 

cannot submit their views electronically 

should contact the person identified in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section as the source for case-related 

information for advice on alternatives to 

electronic filing. 

DATES: Comments are due: March 6, 

2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

at 202–789–6820 (case-related 

information) or DocketAdmins@prc.gov 

(electronic filing assistance). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Notice of Filing 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On February 24, 2012, the Postal 

Service filed a notice announcing that it 

has entered into an additional 

International Business Reply Service 

(IBRS) contract.1 The Postal Service 

asserts that the instant contract is 

functionally equivalent to the IBRS 3 

baseline contract originally filed in 

Docket Nos. MC2011–21 and CP2011– 

59 and supported by Governors’ 

Decision No. 08–24 (IBRS 3 baseline 

contract). Id., Attachment 3. The notice 

explains that Order No. 684, which 

established IBRS Competitive Contracts 

3 as a product, also authorized 

functionally equivalent agreements to be 

included within the product, provided 

that they meet the requirements of 39 

U.S.C. 3633. Id. at 1–2. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Notices 12889 

The instant contract. The Postal 

Service filed the instant contract 

pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5, and states 

that the instant contract is also in 

compliance with Order No. 178. The 

instant contract will remain in effect 

until 1 year after its effective date, 

unless termination of the agreement 

occurs earlier. Id. The Postal Service 

shall notify the mailer of the effective 

date of the instant contract within 30 

days of its approval by the Commission. 

Id., Attachment 1 at 4. The instant 

contract may be terminated by either 

party upon 30 days’ written notice. Id., 

Attachment 1 at 10. 

In support of its notice, the Postal 

Service filed four attachments as 

follows: 

• Attachment 1—a redacted copy of 

the contract and applicable annexes; 

• Attachment 2—a certified statement 

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

• Attachment 3—a redacted copy of 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–24, which 

establishes prices and classifications for 

IBRS contracts, a description of 

applicable IBRS contracts, formulas for 

prices, an analysis of the formulas, a 

certification as to the formulas for prices 

offered under applicable IBRS contracts, 

and certification of the Governors’ vote; 

and 

• Attachment 4—an application for 

non-public treatment of materials to 

maintain redacted portions of the 

contract and file supporting documents 

under seal. 

The notice enumerates the reasons 

why the instant IBRS Competitive 

Contract allegedly fits within the Mail 

Classification Schedule language for 

IBRS Competitive Contract 3. The Postal 

Service identifies general contract terms 

that distinguish the instant contract 

from the IBRS 3 baseline contract, such 

as (1) a revised sentence in Article 15 

stating that the Postal Service may be 

required to file information in 

connection with the contract in other 

Commission dockets; and (2) an 

additional Article 30 concerning 

intellectual property, co-branding, and 

licensing. Id. at 5. The Postal Service 

states that the differences affect neither 

the fundamental service that the Postal 

Service is offering nor the fundamental 

structure of the contract. Id. 

The Postal Service concludes that its 

filing demonstrates that the new IBRS 

contract complies with the requirements 

of 39 U.S.C. 3633 and is functionally 

equivalent to the IBRS 3 baseline 

contract filed in Docket Nos. MC2011– 

21 and CP2011–59. Id. at 6. Therefore, 

it requests that the instant contract be 

included within the IBRS Competitive 

Contract 3 (MC2011–21) product. Id. 

II. Notice of Filing 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. CP2012–17 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. 3633 and 39 CFR 

3015.5. Comments are due no later than 

March 6, 2012. The public portions of 

this filing can be accessed via the 

Commission’s Web site, http://www.prc.

gov. 

The Commission appoints James F. 

Callow to serve as Public Representative 

in the captioned proceeding. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. CP2012–17 for consideration of 

matters raised by the Postal Service’s 

notice. 

2. Comments by interested persons in 

this proceeding are due no later than 

March 6, 2012. 

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, James F. 

Callow is appointed to serve as the 

officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in this 

proceeding. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5161 Filed 3–1–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Notice of Sunshine Act Meetings 

DATES: Time and Date: Wednesday, 

March 14, 2012, at 11 a.m. 

PLACE: Commission Hearing Room, 901 

New York Avenue NW., Suite 200, 

Washington, DC 20268–0001. 

STATUS: Part of this meeting will be 

open to the public. The rest of the 

meeting will be closed to the public. 

The open session will be audiocast. The 

audiocast may be accessed via the 

Commission’s Web site at http:// 

www.prc.gov. A period for public 

comment will be offered following 

consideration of the last numbered item 

in the open session. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The agenda 

for the Commission’s March 14, 2012 

meeting includes the items identified 

below. 

PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC: 1. Report 

on legislative activities. 

2. Report on status of Commission 

dockets. 

3. Report from the Office of the 

Secretary and Administration. 

4. Report on analytical tools used by 

Commission staff. 

5. Report on international activities 

and inbound international mail 

revenues and costs. 

6. Strategic overview of the military 

postal service. 

Chairman’s public comment period. 

PORTION CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC: 

7. Discussion of pending litigation. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

Postal Regulatory Commission, 901 New 

York Avenue NW., Suite 200, 

Washington, DC 20268–0001, at 202– 

789–6820 (for agenda-related inquiries) 

and Shoshana M. Grove, Secretary of the 

Commission, at 202–789–6800 or 

shoshana.grove@prc.gov (for inquiries 

related to meeting location, access for 

handicapped or disabled persons, the 

audiocast, or similar matters). 

By the Commission. 

Dated: February 29, 2012. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5294 Filed 2–29–12; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

PRESIDIO TRUST 

Notice of Public Meeting 

AGENCY: The Presidio Trust. 

ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with § 103(c)(6) 

of the Presidio Trust Act, 16 U.S.C. 

460bb appendix, and in accordance 

with the Presidio Trust’s bylaws, notice 

is hereby given that a public meeting of 

the Presidio Trust Board of Directors 

will be held commencing 6:30 p.m. on 

Wednesday, March 14, 2012, at the 

Golden Gate Club, 135 Fisher Loop, 

Presidio of San Francisco, California. 

The Presidio Trust was created by 

Congress in 1996 to manage 

approximately eighty percent of the 

former U.S. Army base known as the 

Presidio, in San Francisco, California. 

The purposes of this meeting are to 

take action on the minutes of a previous 

Board meeting, to take action on 

forming Board Committees, to provide 

the Chairperson’s report, to provide the 

Executive Director’s report, to provide 

partners’ reports, to provide program 

updates, and to receive public comment 

on other matters in accordance with the 

Trust’s Public Outreach Policy. 

Individuals requiring special 

accommodation at this meeting, such as 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES