In the Matter of United States Enrichment Corporation, Paducah Gaseous Enrichment Plant; Confirmatory Order (Effective Immediately), 43726-43729 [E9-20678]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
43726
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
and regulatory enforcement in that
sector. Agricultural producers and their
representatives have expressed concerns
about changes in the agricultural
marketplace, including increasing
processor concentration in some
commodities. There have been several
congressional oversight hearings related
to competition in the agricultural sector,
as well as legislative proposals to
restrict the activities of agricultural
processors and intensify federal
government scrutiny of agricultural
mergers.
The workshops will address the
dynamics of competition in agriculture
markets, including, among other issues,
buyer power (also known as
monopsony) and vertical integration.
They will examine legal doctrines and
jurisprudence and current economic
learning, and will provide an
opportunity for farmers, ranchers,
consumer groups, processors,
agribusinesses, and other interested
parties to provide examples of
potentially anticompetitive conduct and
to discuss any concerns about the
application of the antitrust laws to the
agricultural sector. The goals of the
workshops are to promote dialogue
among interested parties and foster
learning with respect to the appropriate
legal and economic analyses of these
issues as well as to listen to and learn
from parties with real-world experience
in the agricultural sector.
To begin, the DOJ and USDA are
soliciting public comments from
lawyers, economists, agribusinesses,
consumer groups, academics,
agricultural producers, agricultural
cooperatives, and other interested
parties. The DOJ and USDA are
interested in comments on the
application of the antitrust laws to
monopsony and vertical integration in
the agricultural sector, including the
scope, functionality, and limits of
current or potential rules. The DOJ and
USDA are also inviting input on
additional topics that might be
discussed at the workshops, including
the impact of agriculture concentration
on food costs, the effect of agricultural
regulatory statutes or other applicable
laws and programs on competition,
issues relating to patent and intellectual
property affecting agricultural marketing
or production, and market practices
such as price spreads, forward contracts,
packer ownership of livestock before
slaughter, market transparency, and
increasing retailer concentration.
The DOJ and USDA plan to hold the
first workshop in early 2010. While
some of these workshops may be held
in Washington, DC, others will be held
regionally. The DOJ and USDA plan to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
publish a more detailed description of
the topics to be discussed before each
workshop and to solicit additional
submissions about each topic. The
workshops will be transcribed and
placed on the public record. Any
written comments received also will be
placed on the public record.
DATES: Any interested person may
submit written comments responsive to
any of the topics addressed in this
Federal Register notice. Respondents
are encouraged to provide comments as
soon as possible, but no later than
December 31, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted in both paper and
electronic form to the Department of
Justice. All comments received will be
publicly posted. The comments should
be submitted as follows:
Two paper copies should be
addressed to the Legal Policy Section,
Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of
Justice, 450 5th Street, NW., Suite
11700, Washington, DC 20001. The
Antitrust Division is requesting that the
paper copies of each comment be sent
by courier or overnight service, if
possible, because U.S. postal mail at the
Department is subject to delay due to
heightened security precautions. The
electronic version of each comment
should be submitted by electronic mail
to agriculturalworkshops@usdoj.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark B. Tobey, Special Counsel for
State Relations and Agriculture,
Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of
Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20530; telephone: (202)
532–4763; e-mail:
agriculturalworkshops@usdoj.gov.
Detailed agendas and schedules for the
workshops will be made available on
the Antitrust Division’s Web site,
https://www.usdoj.gov/atr.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Horizontal Merger Guidelines recognize
monopsony power and its exercise as a
concern in analyzing potential
competitive effects of proposed mergers
and acquisitions. As a general
proposition, the analysis of competitive
issues in monopsony cases is the mirror
image of the more common analysis of
competitive issues in monopoly cases.
For example, instead of determining
whether the merged firm would gain
sufficient market power to raise prices
to consumers, monopsony analysis
focuses on whether the merged firm
would gain sufficient market power to
depress prices paid to its suppliers.
Likewise, instead of determining
whether the buyers could defeat an
attempt by the merged firm to increase
prices by a small but significant and
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
non-transitory amount by switching to
alternative products or alternative
suppliers, the issue in a monopsony
investigation is whether the sellers
could defeat an attempt by the merged
firm to depress prices by producing
other products or by selling their
products to other buyers.
Vertical integration occurs when
multiple stages of production, for
example, processing, distribution, or
marketing, are brought together in one
firm or are linked by contracts. In many
instances, vertical integration may be
procompetitive, allowing firms to
reduce their costs. However, there may
be circumstances in which vertical
integration raises antitrust concerns,
usually by increasing barriers to entry,
facilitating collusion, or circumventing
regulation.
Christine A. Varney,
Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust
Division.
Ann Wright,
Deputy Undersecretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs, Department of
Agriculture.
[FR Doc. E9–20671 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0376; Docket No.: 07007001;
Certificate No. GDP–1; EA–08–280]
In the Matter of United States
Enrichment Corporation, Paducah
Gaseous Enrichment Plant;
Confirmatory Order (Effective
Immediately)
I
The United States Enrichment
Corporation (USEC), a subsidiary of
USEC Inc., is the holder of NRC
Certificates of Compliance (COC) No.
GDP–1 issued by the NRC pursuant to
10 CFR part 76 on November 26, 1996,
and renewed on December 22, 2008.
The COC is set to expire on December
31, 2013. The certificate authorizes
USEC to operate the Paducah Gaseous
Diffusion Plant (Paducah), located near
Paducah, Kentucky. The certificate also
authorizes USEC to receive, and other
NRC licensees to transfer to USEC,
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material to the extent
permitted under the COC.
This Confirmatory Order is the result
of an agreement reached during an
alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
mediation session conducted on July 1,
2009.
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
II
On September 30, 2008, the NRC’s
Office of Investigations (OI) completed
an investigation (OI Case No. 2–2008–
009) regarding activities at the Paducah
Gaseous Diffusion Plant facility located
in Paducah, Kentucky. Based on the
evidence developed during the
investigation, the NRC staff concluded
that on August 10, 2007, a Training
Records Clerk and a Security Analyst
willfully shipped a package containing
classified information to an address that
was not an approved classified mailing
address (CMA). These actions were
contrary to 10 CFR 95.39(b)(3) and
Paducah Security Procedure CP2–SS–
SE1036, Classified Matter Protection
and Control, which require the external
transmission of classified mail be made
to a uniquely designated CMA for the
receipt of classified information.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
III
On July 1, 2009, the NRC and USEC
met in an ADR session mediated by a
professional mediator, which was
arranged through Cornell University’s
Institute on Conflict Resolution. ADR is
a process in which a neutral mediator
with no decision-making authority
assists the parties in reaching an
agreement or resolving any differences
regarding their dispute. This
confirmatory order is issued pursuant to
the agreement reached during the ADR
process. The elements of the agreement
consist of the following:
1. The NRC and USEC agreed that a
violation occurred on August 10, 2007,
when a Training Records Clerk and a
Security Analyst shipped a package
containing classified information to an
address that was not an approved CMA.
These actions were contrary to 10 CFR
95.39(b)(3) and Paducah Security
Procedure CP2–SS–SE1036, Classified
Matter Protection and Control, which
require the external transmission of
classified mail be made to a uniquely
designated CMA for the receipt of
classified information.
2. Based on its review and
investigation, USEC-Paducah concluded
that the cause of the violation was not
due to willfulness on the part of the
Training Records Clerk or the Security
Analyst.
3. Based on USEC’s review of the
incident and NRC concerns associated
with precluding recurrence of the
violation, USEC-Paducah completed the
following corrective actions and
enhancements:
a. Processed procedural
enhancements to procedure CP2–SS–
SE1036 to provide instructions for
verifying proper use of classified
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
mailing addresses and shipping
addresses, clarify entity with authority
to package and process classified
shipments and mailings, provide
specific instructions for use of
commercial carriers, and provide
actions to take for off-normal requests.
b. Security Management briefed and
discussed the event and error with the
Security staff personnel. The briefing
and discussions included the apparent
violation of the procedure and reiterated
management expectations with respect
to procedure adherence.
c. The Records Management
Document Control (RMDC) Manager
briefed and discussed the event and
procedural error with RMDC personnel.
Expectations discussed included that
classified materials may be mailed and
not shipped to USEC headquarters, and
that RMDC has primary responsibility
for mailing classified information, while
Shipping and Receiving has primary
responsibility for shipping classified
information.
d. Security and RMDC staff were
retrained on requirements for off-site
shipping/mailing. The training
highlighted shipment of classified
documents versus the mailing of
classified documents.
e. Lessons learned were documented
and issued to all site personnel. The
lessons included: the importance of
procedural adherence, even when under
time constraints; the need to reimplement procedure steps when the
environment changes; the requirement
that all forms be completed; and the use
of error prevention tools.
4. In addition to the actions
completed by USEC as discussed above,
USEC agreed to additional corrective
actions and enhancements, as fully
delineated below in Section V of the
Confirmatory Order.
5. At the ADR session, the NRC and
USEC agreed that (1) the actions
referenced in Section III.3 and Section
V, would be incorporated into a
Confirmatory Order, and (2) the
resulting Confirmatory Order would be
considered by the NRC for any
assessment of USEC, as appropriate.
6. In consideration of the completed
corrective actions delineated in Section
III.3 and the commitments delineated in
Section V of this Confirmatory Order,
the NRC agreed to refrain from
proposing a civil penalty or issuing a
Notice of Violation for all matters
discussed in the NRC’s letter to USEC of
February 6, 2009 (EA–08–280).
7. This agreement is binding upon
successors and assigns of USEC.
On August 12, 2009, USEC consented
to issuance of this Order with the
commitments, as described in Section V
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43727
below. USEC further agreed that this
Order is to be effective upon issuance
and that it has waived its right to a
hearing.
IV
Since USEC has completed the
actions as delineated in Section III.3,
and agreed to take the actions as set
forth in Section V, the NRC has
concluded that its concerns can be
resolved through issuance of this Order.
I find that USEC’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 determined that
public health and safety require that
USEC’s commitments be confirmed by
this Order. Based on the above and
USEC’s consent, this Order is
immediately effective upon issuance.
V
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections
104b, 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 76, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THAT
CERTIFICATE NO. GDP–1 BE
MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
a. In October 2008, USEC-Paducah
developed recurring training for
Operations and Maintenance
supervisors to reinforce ‘‘conduct of’’
principles and procedure compliance.
Training will continue on a quarterly
basis for a period of at least twelve (12)
months after issuance of the
Confirmatory Order.
b. In July 2008, a group of Paducah
plant employees attended an INPO
course on Human Performance. This
group formed the Human Performance
Steering team which was established to
assist the plant in efforts to prevent
among other things, noncompliance
with regulatory requirements and other
adverse events.
i. Brainstorming sessions were held
with workers to identify practical
solutions to preventing adverse events.
ii. Multiple interactive informational
training sessions were held with small
groups of employees focusing on
identifying critical job tasks and the
tools to prevent and protect against
causing adverse events when
performing critical tasks. Sessions in
Maintenance and Operations have been
completed. This approach will continue
for the remainder of the Paducah
employees for a period of at least twelve
(12) months after issuance of the
Confirmatory Order.
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
43728
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
c. By no later than sixty (60) calendar
days after the issuance of the
Confirmatory Order, USEC agrees to
develop a ‘‘lessons learned’’ document
addressing the lessons learned from the
event which gave rise to this mediation,
and share those lessons learned with
USEC’s Paducah Gaseous Diffusion
Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion
Plant, Headquarters, the American
Centrifuge Plant (ACP), and ACP
vendors who handle classified
information. After issuance of the
lessons learned, USEC will require a
response within ninety (90) days which
identifies any actions taken by the
vendors to address the lessons learned.
USEC will track internal actions via the
use of its Business Prioritization
System.
d. By no later than one-hundred
twenty (120) calendar days after the
issuance of the Confirmatory Order,
USEC agrees to revise the relevant
classified material mailing and shipping
procedures applicable to USEC’s
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
USEC Headquarters, and the ACP to
clarify the definition of the term
‘‘cleared commercial carrier’’ as that
term applies to the mailing or shipping
of classified information, and provide
associated training.
e. USEC-Paducah agrees to complete
the items listed in Section V above
within twelve (12) months of issuance
of the Confirmatory Order.
f. Within three (3) months of
completion of the terms of the
Confirmatory Order, USEC-Paducah will
provide the NRC with a letter discussing
its basis for concluding that the
Confirmatory Order has been satisfied.
The Regional Administrator, NRC
Region II, may relax or rescind, in
writing, any of the above conditions
upon a showing by USEC of good cause.
VI
Any person adversely affected by this
Confirmatory Order, other than USEC,
may request a hearing 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 20555–0001, and
include a statement of good cause for
the extension.
If a person other than USEC requests
a hearing, that person shall set forth
with particularity the manner in which
his interest is adversely affected by this
Order and shall address the criteria set
forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
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.
A request for a hearing must be filed
in accordance with the NRC E-Filing
rule, which became effective on October
15, 2007. The NRC E-filing Final Rule
was issued on August 28, 2007 (72 FR
49139), and was codified in pertinent
part at 10 CFR part 2, subpart B. The EFiling process requires participants to
submit and serve documents over the
Internet or, in some cases, to mail copies
on electronic optical storage media.
Participants may not submit paper
copies of their filings unless they seek
a waiver in accordance with the
procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements associated with E-Filing,
at least five (5) days prior to the filing
deadline the requestor must contact the
Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by
calling (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 NRC proceeding in which
it is participating; and/or (2) creation of
an electronic docket for the proceeding
(even in instances when the requestor
(or its counsel or representative) already
holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Each requestor will need to
download the Workplace Forms
ViewerTM to access the Electronic
Information Exchange (EIE), a
component of the E-Filing system. The
Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and
is available at https://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html.
Information about applying for a digital
ID certificate also is available on NRC’s
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals/applycertificates.html.
Once a requestor has obtained a
digital ID certificate, had a docket
created, and downloaded the EIE
viewer, he/she can then submit a
request for a hearing through EIE.
Submissions should be in Portable
Document Format (PDF) in accordance
with NRC guidance available on the
NRC public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the filer submits its
document through EIE. To be timely,
electronic filings must be submitted to
the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the due date. Upon
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing
system time-stamps the document and
sends the submitter an e-mail notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
EIE system also distributes an e-mail
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 document on those
participants separately. Therefore, any
others who wish to participate in the
proceeding (or their counsel or
representative) must apply for and
receive a digital ID certificate before a
hearing request is filed so that they may
obtain access to the document via the EFiling system.
A person filing electronically using
the agency’s adjudicatory e-filing system
may seek assistance through the
‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the NRC
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals.html or by calling the
NRC Meta-System Help Desk, which is
available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday,
excluding government holidays. The
Meta-System Help Desk can be
contacted by telephone at 1–866–672–
7640 or by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov.
Participants who believe that they
have good cause for not submitting
documents electronically must file a
motion, 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 firstclass 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.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in NRC’s
electronic hearing docket, which is
available to the public at https://
ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp,
unless excluded pursuant to an order of
the Commission, an Atomic Safety and
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
Licensing Board, or a 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. 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 works.
VII
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 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
HEARING SHALL NOT STAY THE
IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS
ORDER.
Dated this 18th day of August 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Victor M. McCree,
Deputy Regional Administrator for
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–20678 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. IC–28849; File No. 812–13611]
MML Series Investment Fund, et al.;
Notice of Application
August 20, 2009.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: The Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’).
ACTION: Notice of application for an
exemption pursuant to Section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940, as
amended (the ‘‘1940 Act or Act’’),
seeking exemptions from Sections 9(a),
13(a), 15(a) and 15(b) of the 1940 Act
and Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and 6e–
3(T)(b)(15) thereunder.
Applicants: MML Series Investment
Fund (‘‘MML Trust’’), MML Series
Investment Fund II (‘‘MML II Trust’’)
and Massachusetts Mutual Life
Insurance Company (‘‘MassMutual’’)
(collectively, ‘‘Applicants’’).
SUMMARY: Summary of Application:
Applicants request an order pursuant to
Section 6(c) of the 1940 Act exempting
each life insurance company separate
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
account supporting variable life
insurance contracts (‘‘VLI Account’’)
(and its insurance company depositor)
that may invest in shares of an existing
portfolio of the MML Trust or the MML
II Trust (an ‘‘Existing Fund’’) or a
‘‘Future Fund,’’ as defined below, from
the provisions of Sections 9(a), 13(a),
15(a) and 15(b) of the Act and Rules 6e–
2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) thereunder,
in situations where such VLI Accounts
hold shares of any Existing Fund or
Future Fund (each, a ‘‘Fund;’’
collectively, the ‘‘Funds’’) when one or
more of the following other types of
investors also hold shares of the Funds:
(1) a life insurance company separate
account supporting variable annuity
contracts (a ‘‘VA Account’’), (2) any VLI
account, (3) a Fund’s investment adviser
or affiliated person of the investment
adviser (representing seed money
investments in the Fund), and/or (4)
trustees of a qualified group pension or
group retirement plan outside the
separate account context. As used
herein, a Future Fund is any investment
company (or investment portfolio or
series thereof), other than an Existing
Fund, designed to be sold to VLI
Accounts and to which Applicants or
their affiliates may in the future serve as
investment advisers, investment
subadvisers, investment managers,
administrators, principal underwriters,
or sponsors.
43729
LLP, 1275 Pennsylvania Avenue,
Washington, DC 20004–2415.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Cowan, Senior Counsel, or Zandra
Bailes, Branch Chief, Office of Insurance
Products, Division of Investment
Management at (202) 551–6795.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
following is a summary of the
application. The complete application is
available for a fee from the
Commission’s Public Reference Branch,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549 ((202) 551–8090).
Applicants’ Representations
1. MML Trust was organized as a
Massachusetts business trust on
December 19, 1984. MML Trust is
registered under the 1940 Act as an
open-end management investment
company (File No. 811–02224). MML
Trust is a series investment company as
defined by Rule 18f–2 under the Act
and is currently comprised of twentyseven series.
2. Shares of the series of the MML
Trust are offered solely to separate
investment accounts established by
MassMutual and its life insurance
company subsidiaries. The MML Trust
has filed a registration statement under
the Securities Act of 1933 (the ‘‘1933
Act’’) on Form N–1A (File No. 2–39334)
to register such shares. The Trust may
establish additional series in the future
and additional classes of shares for such
DATES: Filing Date: The application was
series. Shares of MML Trust are not
filed on December 15, 2008, and
amended and restated on April 14, 2009 offered to the general public.
3. MML II Trust was formed as a
and August 12, 2009.
Massachusetts business trust on
Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An
February 8, 2005. MML II Trust is
order granting the application will be
registered under the 1940 Act as an
issued unless the Commission orders a
open-end management investment
hearing. Interested persons may request
company (File No. 811–21714). MML II
a hearing by writing to the Secretary of
Trust is a series investment company as
the Commission and serving Applicants
defined by Rule 18f–2 under the Act
with a copy of the request, personally or
and is currently comprised of ten series.
by mail. Hearing requests should be
4. Shares of the series of the MML II
received by the Commission by 5:30
Trust are offered solely to separate
p.m. on September 14, 2009, and should
investment accounts established by
be accompanied by proof of service on
MassMutual and its life insurance
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit
company subsidiaries. The MML II
or, for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Trust has filed a registration statement
Hearing requests should state the nature
under the 1933 Act on Form N–1A (File
of the writer’s interest, the reason for the
No. 333–122804) to register such shares.
request, and the issues contested.
The Trust may establish additional
Persons may request notification of a
series in the future and additional
hearing by writing to the Secretary of
classes of shares for such series. Shares
the Commission.
of MML II Trust are not offered to the
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and
general public.
5. MassMutual is the investment
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
adviser to the MML Trust and the MML
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
II Trust and is responsible for providing
Applicants, c/o Andrew M. Goldberg,
all necessary investment management
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance
Company, 1295 State Street, Springfield, and administrative services.
MassMutual is paid an investment
MA 01111. Copy to Mary Thornton
management fee from each Fund’s
Payne, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 165 (Thursday, August 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43726-43729]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20678]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0376; Docket No.: 07007001; Certificate No. GDP-1; EA-08-280]
In the Matter of United States Enrichment Corporation, Paducah
Gaseous Enrichment Plant; Confirmatory Order (Effective Immediately)
I
The United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC), a subsidiary of
USEC Inc., is the holder of NRC Certificates of Compliance (COC) No.
GDP-1 issued by the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR part 76 on November 26,
1996, and renewed on December 22, 2008. The COC is set to expire on
December 31, 2013. The certificate authorizes USEC to operate the
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (Paducah), located near Paducah,
Kentucky. The certificate also authorizes USEC to receive, and other
NRC licensees to transfer to USEC, byproduct material, source material,
or special nuclear material to the extent permitted under the COC.
This Confirmatory Order is the result of an agreement reached
during an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mediation session
conducted on July 1, 2009.
[[Page 43727]]
II
On September 30, 2008, the NRC's Office of Investigations (OI)
completed an investigation (OI Case No. 2-2008-009) regarding
activities at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant facility located in
Paducah, Kentucky. Based on the evidence developed during the
investigation, the NRC staff concluded that on August 10, 2007, a
Training Records Clerk and a Security Analyst willfully shipped a
package containing classified information to an address that was not an
approved classified mailing address (CMA). These actions were contrary
to 10 CFR 95.39(b)(3) and Paducah Security Procedure CP2-SS-SE1036,
Classified Matter Protection and Control, which require the external
transmission of classified mail be made to a uniquely designated CMA
for the receipt of classified information.
III
On July 1, 2009, the NRC and USEC met in an ADR session mediated by
a professional mediator, which was arranged through Cornell
University's Institute on Conflict Resolution. ADR is a process in
which a neutral mediator with no decision-making authority assists the
parties in reaching an agreement or resolving any differences regarding
their dispute. This confirmatory order is issued pursuant to the
agreement reached during the ADR process. The elements of the agreement
consist of the following:
1. The NRC and USEC agreed that a violation occurred on August 10,
2007, when a Training Records Clerk and a Security Analyst shipped a
package containing classified information to an address that was not an
approved CMA. These actions were contrary to 10 CFR 95.39(b)(3) and
Paducah Security Procedure CP2-SS-SE1036, Classified Matter Protection
and Control, which require the external transmission of classified mail
be made to a uniquely designated CMA for the receipt of classified
information.
2. Based on its review and investigation, USEC-Paducah concluded
that the cause of the violation was not due to willfulness on the part
of the Training Records Clerk or the Security Analyst.
3. Based on USEC's review of the incident and NRC concerns
associated with precluding recurrence of the violation, USEC-Paducah
completed the following corrective actions and enhancements:
a. Processed procedural enhancements to procedure CP2-SS-SE1036 to
provide instructions for verifying proper use of classified mailing
addresses and shipping addresses, clarify entity with authority to
package and process classified shipments and mailings, provide specific
instructions for use of commercial carriers, and provide actions to
take for off-normal requests.
b. Security Management briefed and discussed the event and error
with the Security staff personnel. The briefing and discussions
included the apparent violation of the procedure and reiterated
management expectations with respect to procedure adherence.
c. The Records Management Document Control (RMDC) Manager briefed
and discussed the event and procedural error with RMDC personnel.
Expectations discussed included that classified materials may be mailed
and not shipped to USEC headquarters, and that RMDC has primary
responsibility for mailing classified information, while Shipping and
Receiving has primary responsibility for shipping classified
information.
d. Security and RMDC staff were retrained on requirements for off-
site shipping/mailing. The training highlighted shipment of classified
documents versus the mailing of classified documents.
e. Lessons learned were documented and issued to all site
personnel. The lessons included: the importance of procedural
adherence, even when under time constraints; the need to re-implement
procedure steps when the environment changes; the requirement that all
forms be completed; and the use of error prevention tools.
4. In addition to the actions completed by USEC as discussed above,
USEC agreed to additional corrective actions and enhancements, as fully
delineated below in Section V of the Confirmatory Order.
5. At the ADR session, the NRC and USEC agreed that (1) the actions
referenced in Section III.3 and Section V, would be incorporated into a
Confirmatory Order, and (2) the resulting Confirmatory Order would be
considered by the NRC for any assessment of USEC, as appropriate.
6. In consideration of the completed corrective actions delineated
in Section III.3 and the commitments delineated in Section V of this
Confirmatory Order, the NRC agreed to refrain from proposing a civil
penalty or issuing a Notice of Violation for all matters discussed in
the NRC's letter to USEC of February 6, 2009 (EA-08-280).
7. This agreement is binding upon successors and assigns of USEC.
On August 12, 2009, USEC consented to issuance of this Order with
the commitments, as described in Section V below. USEC further agreed
that this Order is to be effective upon issuance and that it has waived
its right to a hearing.
IV
Since USEC has completed the actions as delineated in Section
III.3, and agreed to take the actions as set forth in Section V, the
NRC has concluded that its concerns can be resolved through issuance of
this Order.
I find that USEC'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 determined that public health and safety require that
USEC's commitments be confirmed by this Order. Based on the above and
USEC's consent, this Order is immediately effective upon issuance.
V
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 104b, 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 76, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THAT CERTIFICATE NO. GDP-1 BE MODIFIED AS
FOLLOWS:
a. In October 2008, USEC-Paducah developed recurring training for
Operations and Maintenance supervisors to reinforce ``conduct of''
principles and procedure compliance. Training will continue on a
quarterly basis for a period of at least twelve (12) months after
issuance of the Confirmatory Order.
b. In July 2008, a group of Paducah plant employees attended an
INPO course on Human Performance. This group formed the Human
Performance Steering team which was established to assist the plant in
efforts to prevent among other things, noncompliance with regulatory
requirements and other adverse events.
i. Brainstorming sessions were held with workers to identify
practical solutions to preventing adverse events.
ii. Multiple interactive informational training sessions were held
with small groups of employees focusing on identifying critical job
tasks and the tools to prevent and protect against causing adverse
events when performing critical tasks. Sessions in Maintenance and
Operations have been completed. This approach will continue for the
remainder of the Paducah employees for a period of at least twelve (12)
months after issuance of the Confirmatory Order.
[[Page 43728]]
c. By no later than sixty (60) calendar days after the issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, USEC agrees to develop a ``lessons learned''
document addressing the lessons learned from the event which gave rise
to this mediation, and share those lessons learned with USEC's Paducah
Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
Headquarters, the American Centrifuge Plant (ACP), and ACP vendors who
handle classified information. After issuance of the lessons learned,
USEC will require a response within ninety (90) days which identifies
any actions taken by the vendors to address the lessons learned. USEC
will track internal actions via the use of its Business Prioritization
System.
d. By no later than one-hundred twenty (120) calendar days after
the issuance of the Confirmatory Order, USEC agrees to revise the
relevant classified material mailing and shipping procedures applicable
to USEC's Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion
Plant, USEC Headquarters, and the ACP to clarify the definition of the
term ``cleared commercial carrier'' as that term applies to the mailing
or shipping of classified information, and provide associated training.
e. USEC-Paducah agrees to complete the items listed in Section V
above within twelve (12) months of issuance of the Confirmatory Order.
f. Within three (3) months of completion of the terms of the
Confirmatory Order, USEC-Paducah will provide the NRC with a letter
discussing its basis for concluding that the Confirmatory Order has
been satisfied.
The Regional Administrator, NRC Region II, may relax or rescind, in
writing, any of the above conditions upon a showing by USEC of good
cause.
VI
Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other
than USEC, may request a hearing 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-
0001, and include a statement of good cause for the extension.
If a person other than USEC requests a hearing, that person shall
set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is
adversely affected by this 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.
A request for a hearing must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-
Filing rule, which became effective on October 15, 2007. The NRC E-
filing Final Rule was issued on August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139), and was
codified in pertinent part at 10 CFR part 2, subpart B. The E-Filing
process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the
Internet or, in some cases, to mail copies on electronic optical
storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their
filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements associated with E-
Filing, at least five (5) days prior to the filing deadline the
requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by calling (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 NRC proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2)
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances
when the requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an
NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor will need to
download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM to access the
Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing
system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is
available at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate
also is available on NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.
Once a requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a
docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, he/she can then submit a
request for a hearing through EIE. Submissions should be in Portable
Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the
NRC public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its
document through EIE. To be timely, electronic filings must be
submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-
stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming
receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail
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 document on those participants separately.
Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (or
their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital
ID certificate before a hearing request is filed so that they may
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 through the ``Contact Us'' link
located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC Meta-System Help Desk, which is
available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, excluding government holidays. The Meta-System Help Desk can be
contacted by telephone at 1-866-672-7640 or by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov.
Participants who believe that they have good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file a motion, 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.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and
[[Page 43729]]
Licensing Board, or a 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. 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 works.
VII
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
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 HEARING SHALL NOT STAY THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS ORDER.
Dated this 18th day of August 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Victor M. McCree,
Deputy Regional Administrator for Operations.
[FR Doc. E9-20678 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P