You are on page 1of 3

15914 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Notices

component of NRC’s document system will be accessible electronically from planning to attend this meeting are
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and urged to contact the above named
the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ Management Systems (ADAMS) Public individual at least two working days
reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet prior to the meeting to be advised of any
Electronic Reading Room). Persons who at the NRC Web site, http:// potential changes to the agenda.
do not have access to ADAMS, or who www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons Dated: March 27, 2007.
encounter problems in accessing the who do not have access to ADAMS or Cayetano Santos,
documents located in ADAMS, should who encounter problems in accessing
Acting Branch Chief, ACRS.
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by the documents located in ADAMS
telephone at 1–800–397–4209, 301– should contact the NRC PDR Reference [FR Doc. E7–6077 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am]
415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. staff by telephone at 1–800–397–4209, BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

It is so ordered. or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to


March 28, 2007. pdr@nrc.gov.
For The Atomic Safety and Licensing Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
Board.* of March 2007. [Docket No. R2006–1; Order No. 8]
G. Paul Bollwerk, III, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chairman, Rockville, Maryland. Mohan C. Thadani, Reconsideration of Rate
[FR Doc. E7–6130 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am] Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Recommendations
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
Regulation. ACTION: Notice and order.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY [FR Doc. E7–6086 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY: This document addresses
COMMISSION BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
several procedural and legal matters
[Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499] related to the Postal Service Governors’
NUCLEAR REGULATORY request for reconsideration of three
STP Nuclear Operating Company; aspects of the Commission’s recent rate
COMMISSION
Notice of Withdrawal of Application for recommendations in Docket No. R2006–
Amendments to Facility Operating Advisory Committee on Reactor 1. The recommendations in issue
Licenses Safeguards (ACRS); Subcommittee involve the Priority Mail Flat Rate Box,
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Meeting on Thermal-Hydraulic the nonmachinable surcharge for First-
Commission (the Commission) has Phenomena; Notice of Meeting Class Mail letters, and Standard Mail
granted the request of STP Nuclear flats (including catalogs). The document
The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal- discusses the procedures the
Operating Company (the licensee) to Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a
withdraw its January 31, 2006, Commission adopts to effectuate
meeting on April 19–20, 2007, 11545 reconsideration and identifies several
application for proposed amendments to Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland in
Facility Operating Licenses numbered key deadlines. Issuance of this
Room T–2B3. document provides rate case
NPF–76 and NPF–80, respectively, for The entire meeting will be open to
the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, participants and the public with
public attendance, with the exception of information on the Commission’s
located in Matagorda County. The portions that may be closed to discuss
proposed amendments would have intended course of action in terms of
General Electric proprietary information procedural steps and informs them of
revised the Technical Specification pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
3.8.3.1, ‘‘Onsite Power Distribution— their rights and responsibilities.
The agenda for the subject meeting DATES:
Operating.’’ shall be as follows:
The Commission had previously 1. April 4, 2007: Deadline for filing
Thursday, April 19, 2007—8:30 a.m. motions to reopen the record.
issued a Notice of Consideration of until the conclusion of business.
Issuance of Amendments published in 2. April 11, 2007: Deadline for replies
Friday, April 20, 2007—8:30 a.m.
the Federal Register on February 28, to motions to reopen the record.
until the conclusion of business.
2006 (71 FR 10077). However, by letter 3. April 12, 2007: Deadline for filing
The Subcommittee will review the
dated March 26, 2007, the licensee initial comments.
staff evaluation of the MELLLA+, GE
withdrew the proposed change. 4. April 19, 2007: Deadline for filing
Methods, and GE DSS–CD Topical
For further details with respect to this reply comments.
Reports. The Subcommittee will gather
action, see the application for information, analyze relevant issues and ADDRESSES: Submit comments
amendment dated January 31, 2006, and facts, and formulate proposed positions electronically via the Commission’s
the licensee’s letter dated March 26, and actions, as appropriate, for Filing Online system at http://
2007, which withdrew the application deliberation by the full Committee. www.prc.gov.
for license amendment. Documents may Members of the public desiring to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at provide oral statements and/or written Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
the NRC’s Public Document Room comments should notify the Designated 202–789–6820 and
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 (Telephone: 301–415–8065) five days
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
prior to the meeting, if possible, so that
Maryland. Publicly available records appropriate arrangements can be made. Regulatory History
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES

Electronic recordings will be permitted.


* Copies of this notice of hearing were sent this
Further information regarding this 71 FR 27436 (May 11, 2006)
date by Internet e-mail transmission and the
agency’s E-Submittal system to counsel for (1)
meeting can be obtained by contacting On March 19, 2007, the Governors of
applicant SNC.; (2) the Joint Petitioners; and (3) the the Designated Federal Official between the United States Postal Service issued
NRC staff. 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons a decision approving the Commission’s

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:30 Apr 02, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Notices 15915

February 26, 2007 Opinion and provide an estimate of the time needed letters, setting the rate at $0.17,
Recommended Decision in Docket No. to supplement the record.4 equivalent to the recommended First-
R2006–1 while requesting Class Mail additional ounce rate. The
I. Flat Rate Box
reconsideration of three matters.1 The Governors endorse the $0.17
three issues involve the Priority Mail The Governors contend that the nonmachinable surcharge for one-ounce
Flat Rate Box, the nonmachinable Commission erred in setting the Flat letters. Id.
surcharge for First-Class Mail letters, Rate Box rate at $9.15, suggesting that The Governors note that the
and Standard Mail flats. Id. at 2. inconsistent cost estimates may have recommended rate for two- and three-
The Governors request the been used to develop the recommended ounce letters, $0.58 and $0.75,
Commission ‘‘to move as expeditiously rate. Decision at 14. More specifically, respectively, is identical regardless of
as possible’’ to enable mailers to plan the Governors opine that when machinability. To rectify this situation,
effectively for future mailings. Id. calculating the savings that would the Governors propose that section
Concomitant with the Decision, the accrue as a result of dim-weighting 221.26 of the Domestic Mail
Board of Governors set May 14, 2007 as Priority Mail, the Commission Classification Schedule be revised to
the effective date for changes in rates incorrectly used the Postal Service’s eliminate application of the
and fees with the exception of attributable cost estimates instead of its nonmachinable surcharge only to pieces
Periodicals, for which the own, thereby causing the savings to be weighing one ounce or less. Id. at 5–6.
implementation date has been deferred understated. The Governors conclude In its Initial Statement, the Postal
until July 15, 2007.2 that if the Commission had used its own Service repeats the criticism that the
In a related pleading filed on March cost estimates consistently in the Commission’s recommended rates fail to
28, 2007, the Postal Service offers pricing model, the resulting include a machinability-based price
procedural suggestions on the recommended Flat Rate Box rate would differential for First-Class letters
reconsideration process in general, and have been closer to that proposed by the weighing over one ounce, and argues
proposes specific resolutions of the Postal Service, $8.80. Id. that the Commission’s rationale for a
three issues identified in the Governors’ In its Initial Statement, the Postal surcharge at the one-ounce level applies
Decision.3 Service reiterates the Governors’ equally to the heavier tiers, particularly
By this order, the Commission critique, and advances additional in view of the sizeable recommended
establishes procedures affording technical arguments against the reduction in the additional ounce rate.
participants (and other interested soundness of the Commission’s The Service submits that this gap in rate
parties) an opportunity to provide their recommended rate of $9.15. According design and pricing could be filled by
views on each of the issues on which to the Service, adherence to the recommending the mail classification
reconsideration is sought. Participants methodology and pricing model for the amendment suggested by the Governors,
should address each issue separately Flat Rate Box established on the record and calculates estimates of the
since the substance of each issue differs. justifies a rate of $8.95. Initial Statement consequent revenue impact, which it
Initial comments are due April 12, 2007; at 5–9. characterizes as de minimis. Id. at 2–5.
reply comments may be filed not later Participants are invited to comment Participants commenting on this issue
than April 19, 2007. on the merits of the Governors’ and should, among other matters, specify
In its Initial Statement, the Postal Postal Service’s technical arguments, as any alternative proposed outcome, and
Service anticipates that well as the appropriate pricing objective identify record evidence supporting
‘‘reconsideration in this instance can be for the Priority Mail Flat Rate Box. their position.
conducted without the need to reopen II. Nonmachinable Surcharge III. Standard Mail Flats
the record.’’ Id. at 1. Any participant The Governors advocate extending the
who believes that the record needs to be The Governors express concern that
nonmachinable surcharge to letter- the rates recommended for Standard
reopened and supplemented to address shaped First-Class Mail pieces of two
any matter on which reconsideration is Mail flats may be too high relative to
and three ounces. Id. at 5. The those proposed by the Postal Service
sought must file a motion to that effect Governors observe that the Postal
no later than April 4, 2007. Answers to and may result in some dislocation,
Service proposed to charge particularly within the catalog industry.
any such motion are due no later than nonmachinable one-ounce letters the
April 11, 2007. Each participant, if any, Id. at 8–10.5 Thus, the Governors
rate proposed for one-ounce flats, $0.62. request that the Commission reconsider
seeking to reopen the record must At the recommended one-ounce rate for
provide thorough justification for its ‘‘whether some rebalancing between
flats, $0.80, the Commission found (and Standard Mail letter and flat rates might
request, including specific identification the Governors concur) that application
of the purported deficiencies in the be appropriate.’’ Id. at 10.6
of the one-ounce flats rate to In summarizing their position, the
current record for purposes of nonmachinable one-ounce letters would
reconsideration and an explanation why Governors are careful to note that both
be excessive. Thus, the Commission the Postal Service’s proposed Standard
that participant did not proffer the recommended retention of a separate
purportedly necessary materials during Mail rates and the Commission’s
nonmachinable surcharge for one-ounce
the hearing. Any such movant must also 5 In addition, the Governors cite concern over
4 The Commission recognizes that reopening the mailers’ ability to convert pieces to less costly
1 Decision of the Governors of the United States record may preclude resolving one or more issues shapes, and the potential for increased financial
Postal Service on the Opinion and Recommended prior to May 14, 2007, the date for implementing risks to the Postal Service at the recommended rate
Decision of the Postal Regulatory Commission on most changes in rates and fees. Nonetheless, the levels. Id. at 9–10.
Changes in Postal Rates and Fees, Docket No. Commission concludes that the process is best 6 This request appears to apply to only Standard
R2006–1, March 19, 2007 at 2 (Decision).
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES

served if participants are provided an opportunity Regular and Standard Nonprofit Regular for two
2 Resolution of the Board of Governors of the
to demonstrate that the record should be reopened. reasons. First, the quoted line appears under a
United States Postal Service No. 07–3, March 19, Participants should recognize, however, that caption titled ‘‘Standard Regular and Nonprofit
2007. reopening the record may compromise mailers’ Regular Subclasses.’’ Second, in the next section
3 Initial Statement of the United States Postal ability to plan effectively for future mailings, as the titled ‘‘Standard ECR and Nonprofit ECR,’’ the
Service on Reconsideration, March 28, 2007 (Initial Governors note in requesting expedited Governors do not request reconsideration for ECR/
Statement). reconsideration. NECR flats.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:30 Apr 02, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1
15916 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Notices

recommended rates achieve the Postal at 12. Participants commenting in favor 539; OMB Control No. 3235–0599.
Service’s test year revenue target. of any rebalancing of Standard Mail Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
However, the concerns noted above, letter and flat rates should specify with to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
particularly potential challenges to the particularity the relief requested. Such (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
vitality of the catalog industry, prompt comments should include, at a and Exchange Commission
the Governors to request minimum, citations to the record in (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the
reconsideration, focused on the support of the requested relief and, if Office of Management and Budget
appropriateness of rebalancing Standard possible, specific rates consistent with (‘‘OMB’’) a request for extension of the
Mail letter and flat rates. Unlike the the proposed relief.7 Participants previously approved collection of
other issues on which reconsideration is advocating retention of the information discussed below.
sought, the Governors do not suggest recommended rates are advised to file Proposed rule 15c2–3 (17 CFR
any specific ‘‘rebalancing’’ relief. Id. initial comments to that effect, 240.15c2–3) under the Securities
In its Initial Statement, the Postal explaining the basis for their position. Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
Service explicitly recognizes that, ‘‘in While the procedures adopted herein seq.) would require brokers, dealers and
order to mitigate rates for flats, it would provide an opportunity for comments, municipal securities dealers to provide
be necessary to make upward the Commission reminds potential point of sale disclosure to investors
adjustments in other rates, namely, the commenters of the need to rely on prior to effecting transactions in mutual
rates for letters.’’ Initial Statement at 9. record evidence.8 Anecdotal comments fund shares, UIT interests and college
Further, because the Governors do not unconnected to the record, particularly savings plan interests. The disclosure
challenge the cost or cost differential from persons not parties to the would provide investors with targeted
estimates on which the Commission’s proceeding, are problematic and cannot material information about distribution-
recommended Standard Mail rate design be relied on by the Commission in related costs and remuneration that lead
is based, the Service anticipates that, ‘‘it resolving issues raised on
would likewise be necessary to depart to to conflicts of interest for their brokers,
reconsideration.9 dealers or municipal securities dealers.
some extent from the specific
passthrough levels initially chosen by IV. Ordering Paragraphs The collection of information under
the Commission.’’ Id. at 10. It is ordered: proposed rule 15c2–3 would require
Without suggesting specific 1. Initial comments on matters for some of the disclosure that is also
adjustments, the Postal Service submits which reconsideration has been required under rule 15c2–2. However,
that there are opportunities for requested are due no later April 12, in contrast to the confirmation
providing rate relief to flats mailers 2007. disclosure required under proposed rule
while generating approximately the 2. Reply comments are due no later 15c2–2, which a customer will not
same net revenue by ‘‘impos[ing] only a than April 19, 2007. receive in writing until after a
modest additional rate burden on letter 3. Motions to reopen the record are transaction has been effected, the point
mailers.’’ Id. In doing so, the Service due no later than April 4, 2007. As of sale disclosure that would be
asks that the Commission’s required by the Commission’s Rules of required under rule 15c2–3 would
recommendations comply with two rate Practice and Procedure, answers are due specifically require that investors be
design criteria: (1) Ensuring that the no later than April 11, 2007. provided with information that they can
revised Regular/Nonprofit Regular 5- 4. The Secretary shall arrange for use at the time they determine whether
digit Automation Letters rate remain publication of this notice and order in to enter into a transaction to purchase
below the Basic ECR/NECR letters rates the Federal Register. one of the covered securities.
to continue efforts to support the letters By the Commission.
In addition, the Commission, the self-
automation program; and (2) retaining regulatory organizations, and other
Steven W. Williams,
the initially-recommended dropship securities regulatory authorities would
Secretary.
discounts for Regular and Nonprofit be able to use records of point of sale
[FR Doc. E7–6191 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am] disclosure delivered pursuant to
Regular letters and flats rates.
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P proposed rule 15c2–3 in the course of
Additionally, because any such flats/
letters rate rebalancing would be based examinations, and investigations, as
essentially on policy grounds, the well as enforcement proceedings against
Service submits that it is especially SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE brokers, dealers and municipal
important to solicit the views of COMMISSION securities dealers. However, no
potentially affected Standard Mail users governmental agency would regularly
Proposed Collection; Comment receive any of the information described
whose rates would be affected. In
Request above.
particular, the Service suggests that
mailers may wish to address ‘‘their Upon written request, copies available Proposed rule 15c2–2 potentially
perceptions of the relative trade-offs from: Securities and Exchange would apply to all of the approximately
between possible benefits of further rate Commission, Office of Filings and 5,338 brokers, dealers and municipal
adjustments, and the potential costs of Information Services, Washington, DC securities dealers that are registered
further disruptions associated with any 20549. with the Commission and that are
additional rate changes (which, at this Extension: Rule 15c2–3; SEC File No. 270–
members of NASD. It would also
point, would be of uncertain magnitude potentially apply to approximately 62
and would be implemented at an 7 In addition, such comments should include, if additional municipal securities dealers.
unknown date).’’ Id. at 11. possible, annual volumes of flats and catalogs by It is important to note, however, that the
In their Decision, the Governors note rate cell. If these data are not available, commenters confirmation is a customary document
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES

that reconsideration may enable should so indicate. used by the industry.


8 Alternatively, judicial notice may be appropriate
‘‘individual mailers and their Proposed rule 15c2–3(d) would
in some circumstances. See 39 CFR 3001.31(i).
associations to address unique problems 9 Comments from persons not parties to the require brokers, dealers and municipal
created by the Commission’s [Standard proceeding will be included in the public securities dealers to make records of
Mail rate] recommendations.’’ Decision comments file by the Commission. their disclosure sufficient to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:30 Apr 02, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1

You might also like