1660 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Notices 

The Postal Service’s FY 2009 ACR 

discusses the evolution of its 

measurement of service standards to 

meet the mandate of 39 U.S.C. 

3652(a)(2)(B)(i). The Postal Service 

reports that its hybrid IMb-based system 

for obtaining service performance 

results for bulk market dominant 

products is still under development. 

The Postal Service intends to use data 

from this system to measure service 

performance of its bulk mail products in 

the future. Id. at 9–10. Also of interest 

is the expansion of the coverage of the 

Postal Service’s EXFC system for 

measuring the service performance of 

single-piece First-Class Mail from 463 

3–digit ZIP Code areas to 892 3–digit 

ZIP Code areas. It notes that on-time 

performance in the expansion ZIP Codes 

initially lagged the on-time performance 

of the legacy ZIP Codes by 13.5 percent, 

but that management initiatives reduced 

that gap to less than 1 percent by the 

end of FY 2009. Id. at 12–13. 

In its most recent compliance 

determination, the Commission raised 

concerns about the customer satisfaction 

measurement survey used by the Postal 

Service in its FY 2008 ACR. The Postal 

Service describes new modifications it 

made to improve that system, id. at 16– 

17, and customer satisfaction 

measurement instruments it has 

developed and is implementing for use 

in its FY 2010 ACR. Id. at 19. 

Generally, market dominant products 

that were flat shaped or parcel shaped 

failed to cover their attributable costs in 

FY 2009. For example, Periodicals lost 

$642 million, earning revenues that 

were only 76 percent of attributable 

costs. Id. at 40, Table 3. Standard 

Regular flats, and Standard Regular 

parcels and NFMs together lost $830 

million. Flats were roughly 82 percent 

of attributable costs, and revenues for 

parcels and NFMs were roughly 75 

percent of attributable costs. Id. at 26, 

Table 2. Package Services, as a class, 

lost $53 million. Among package 

services products, only Bound Printed 

Matter flats and Inbound Surface Parcel 

Post covered their attributable costs. Id. 

at 42–43, Table 4. Four Special Services 

failed to recover their attributable 

costs—Registered Mail, Stamped Cards, 

International Ancillary Services, and 

Confirm. Id. at 52–53, Table 5. Finally, 

International Inbound Single-Piece 

First-Class Mail failed to cover its costs, 

earning revenues that were 

approximately 60 percent of attributable 

costs. Id. at 22. Additionally, the Postal 

Service provides a discussion of the 

competing policy considerations that 

impact workshare discounts and the 

reasons a substantial number of 

workshare discounts may have 

exceeded avoided costs in FY 2009. Id. 

at 58–73. 

With respect to competitive products, 

seven international products failed to 

recover their attributable costs— 

Inbound International Expedited 

Services 1 and 2; Inbound Surface 

Parcel Post at Non-UPU Rates; 

International Money Transfer Service; 

Competitive Registered Mail; 

Competitive Insurance; Competitive 

Return Receipt; and Competitive 

International Business Reply Service 

negotiated service agreement contracts. 

Id. at 77–79. 

The Postal Service estimates that 

competitive products as a whole 

covered their incremental costs, 

calculated two alternative ways, and 

therefore pass the test for identifying 

cross-subsidy of competitive products 

by market dominant products. It, 

therefore, concludes competitive 

products were in compliance with 39 

U.S.C. 3633(a)(1). 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. ACR2009 to consider matters raised 

by the Postal Service’s FY 2009 Annual 

Compliance Report. 

2. Comments on the United States 

Postal Service FY 2009 Annual 

Compliance Report to the Commission, 

including the Comprehensive Statement 

of Postal Operations and other reports, 

are due on or before February 1, 2010. 

3. Reply comments are due on or 

before February 16, 2010. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–295 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–S 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Data Collection Available for Public 

Comments and Recommendations 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice announces the Small Business 

Administration’s intentions to request 

approval on a new and/or currently 

approved information collection. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

March 15, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send all comments 

regarding whether these information 

collections are necessary for the proper 

performance of the function of the 

agency, whether the burden estimates 

are accurate, and if there are ways to 

minimize the estimated burden and 

enhance the quality of the collection, to 

Cynthia Pitts, Director, Disaster 

Administrative Services, Small Business 

Administration, 409 3rd Street, 6th 

Floor, Washington, DC 20416. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cynthia Pitts, mailto: Director, 202– 

205–7570 cynthia.pitts@sba.gov Curtis 

B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202–205– 

7030 curtis.rich@sba.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Per OMB 

Circular A–123, Appendix B. Agencies 

must perform credit score inquiries and 

analysis prior to issuing travel credit 

cards. When credit score inquiry results 

in no score, this form will be used as an 

alternative means to asses credit history 

as required by the Circular. 

Title: ‘‘Alternatives Creditworthiness 

Assessment.’’ 

Description of Respondents: 

Applicants applying for Disaster Loans. 

Form Number: 2294. 

Annual Responses: 1,849. 

Annual Burden: 8. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carol Fendler, mail to: System 

Accountant, Office of Investment 202– 

205–7559, carol.fendler@sba.gov; Curtis 

B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202–205– 

7030, curtis.rich@sba.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SBA 

Forms 2181, 2182 and 2183 provide 

SBA with the necessary information to 

make properly supported decisions 

regarding the approval denial of an 

applicant for a small business 

investment company (SBIC) license. 

SBA uses this information to asses an 

applicants ability to successfully 

operate an SBIC within the scope of the 

Small Business Investment Act, as 

amended. 

Title: ‘‘SBIC Management Assessment 

Questionnaire (MAQ) & License 

Application; Exhibits to SBIC License 

Applications/MAQ.’’ 

Description of Respondents: Small 

Business Owners and Farmers. 

Form Number’s: 2181, 2182, 2183. 

Annual Responses: 255. 

Annual Burden: 4,300. 

Jacqueline White, 

Chief, Administrative Information Branch. 

[FR Doc. 2010–322 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Disaster Declaration # 12006 and # 

12007; New York Disaster # NY–00086 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES