79054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 242 / Friday, December 17, 2010 / Notices 

2See Docket Nos. CP2008–8 through CP2008–10, 

Order Concerning Global Plus Negotiated Service 

Agreements, June 27, 2008 (Order No. 85). 

3See Docket No. CP2008–8, Notice of United 

States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision 

Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global 

Plus Contracts, June 2, 2008, at 1. 

4The Postal Service states that if the date of the 

change in published prices for qualifying mail does 

not occur before January 31, 2012, the contracts’ 

termination date is January 31, 2012. Id. at 5. 

5See Docket Nos. MC2010–26, CP2010–67 and 

CP2010–68, Order Approving Functionally 

Equivalent Global Plus 1A Contracts Negotiated 

Service Agreement, July 30, 2010. 

contracts. The Postal Service states that 

the instant contracts are functionally 

equivalent with one another and to 

previously submitted Global Plus 1A 

contracts.2 It states further that the 

instant contracts are supported by 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–8, which 

establishes prices and classifications not 

of general applicability for Global Plus 

Contracts.3 The two contracts have been 

assigned Docket Nos. CP2011–39 and 

CP2011–40, respectively. 

The instant contracts. The Postal 

Service states that the instant contracts 

are the immediate successors to the 

Global Plus 1A contracts in Docket Nos. 

CP2010–67 and CP2010–68 that are 

scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m. on the 

day prior to the date of any change in 

the published rates that affect the 

qualifying mail (as defined in the 

contract) in the agreement. The change 

in published rates is expected to occur 

for Express Mail International and 

Priority Mail International on January 2, 

2011. Request at 4. The instant contracts 

are expected to begin January 2, 2011, 

and expire at 11:59 p.m. on the day 

prior to the day of any change in the 

published rates that affect the qualifying 

mail subject to the contracts in the 

month of January 2012.4 Id. at 4–5. 

The Postal Service filed copies of the 

contracts, Governors’ Decision with 

attachments, and supporting financial 

documentation under seal. Id. at 3. 

Additionally, the Postal Service filed 

the following five attachments: 

• Attachment 1—a statement of 

supporting justification required by 39 

CFR 3020.32; 

• Attachments 2A and 2B—a redacted 

copy of each contract and applicable 

annexes; 

• Attachments 3A and 3B—certified 

statements required by 39 CFR 

3015.5(c)(2); 

• Attachment 4—a redacted copy of 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–8, which 

establishes prices and classifications for 

Global Plus Contracts, formulas for the 

prices, analysis and certification of the 

formulas and certification of the 

Governors’ vote; 

• Attachment 5—an application for 

non-public treatment of materials to 

maintain the contract and supporting 

documents under seal. 

Functional equivalence. The Postal 

Service asserts that the instant contracts 

are functionally equivalent to one 

another and to the precursor Global Plus 

1 contracts in that they share similar 

cost and market characteristics. Id. at 5. 

It contends that as a result, the instant 

contracts should be grouped together as 

a single product. Id. 

The Postal Service addresses 

similarities between the instant 

contracts and their predecessors, e.g., 

that the customers are the same and the 

fundamental terms and conditions of 

the contracts remain essentially 

unchanged. Id. at 6. It identifies minor 

changes in contract terms that 

distinguish the instant contracts from 

each other, e.g., customer name, postage 

prices, penalties, identification of prior 

agreements, and preservation after 

termination provisions. The Postal 

Service asserts that the differences do 

not affect either the service provided or 

the structure of the contracts. It also 

states that the differences do not affect 

functional equivalency. Id. at 5–6. 

Baseline treatment. The Postal Service 

states that each of the instant contracts 

takes the place of its immediate 

predecessor which served as the 

baseline contracts for the Global Plus 1A 

Contracts product.5 It requests that the 

instant contracts be considered ‘‘the new 

‘baseline’ contracts for future functional 

equivalency analyses concerning the 

Global Plus 1 product.’’ (Footnote 

omitted.) Request at 4. 

Filing under part 3020. In support of 

its filing, the Postal Service submitted a 

statement of Supporting Justification 

and a copy of Governors’ Decision No. 

08–8 as Attachments 1 and 4, 

respectively. The Postal Service asserts 

that analysis under 39 U.S.C. 3642(b) is 

unnecessary here because of the 

Commission findings in Order No. 43 

that Negotiated Service Agreements for 

outbound International Mail are 

classified as competitive. Further, it 

contends that the classification 

requirements of section 3642 have been 

met and that there is, ‘‘no further need 

to ponder whether Global Plus 1B 

contracts are market dominant or 

covered within the postal monopoly.’’ 

Id. at 7. 

The Postal Service states that its 

filings demonstrate that the instant 

contracts comply with the requirements 

of 39 U.S.C. 3633, fit within the Mail 

Classification Schedule language for 

Global Plus Contracts and are 

functionally equivalent to each other. 

Id. at 8. It urges the Commission to add 

Global Plus 1B Contracts to the 

competitive product list and to establish 

the instant contracts as the baseline 

contracts for the Global Plus 1B product. 

Id. 

II. Notice of Filing 

The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. MC2011–7, CP2011–39 and 

CP2011–40 for consideration of matters 

raised in the Postal Service’s Notice. 

Interested persons may submit 

comments on whether the Postal 

Service’s filings in the captioned 

dockets are consistent with the policies 

of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 

part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020 subpart 

B. Comments are due no later than 

December 21, 2010. The public portions 

of these filings can be accessed via the 

Commission’s Web site (http// 

www.prc.gov). 

The Commission appoints Paul L. 

Harrington to serve as Public 

Representative in these dockets. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. MC2011–7, CP2011–39 and 

CP2010–40 for consideration of matters 

raised by the Postal Service’s Request. 

2. Comments by interested persons in 

these proceedings are due no later than 

December 21, 2010. 

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Paul L. 

Harrington is appointed to serve as the 

officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in these 

proceedings. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31657 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. MC2011–8, CP2011–41 and 

CP2011–42; Order No. 608] 

New Postal Product 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a 

recently-filed Postal Service request to 

add Global Plus 2B Contracts to the 

competitive product list. This notice 

addresses procedural steps associated 

with this filing. 

DATES: Comments are due: December 

21, 2010. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 242 / Friday, December 17, 2010 / Notices 79055 

1Request of the United States Postal Service to 

Add Global Plus 2B to the Competitive Product List 

and Notice of Filing Two Functionally Equivalent 

Global Plus 2B Contracts Negotiated Service 

Agreements and Application for Non-Public 

Treatment of Materials Filed Under Seal, December 

9, 2010 (Notice). 

2See Docket Nos. CP2008–8 through CP2008–10, 

Order Concerning Global Plus negotiated Service 

Agreements, June 27, 2008 (Order No. 85). 

3See Docket No. CP2008–8, Notice of United 

States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision 

Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global 

Plus Contracts, June 2, 2008, at 1. 

4 See Docket Nos. MC2010–27, CP2010–69 and 

CP2010–70, Order Approving Functionally 

Equivalent Global Plus 2A Contracts Negotiated 

Service Agreements, July 30, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http:// 

www.prc.gov. Commenters who cannot 

submit their views electronically should 

contact the person identified in FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 

telephone for advice on alternatives to 

electronic filing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov or 202–789– 

6820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Notice of Filing 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 

CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service 

seeks to add a new product Global Plus 

2B Contracts, to the competitive product 

list and to that end, filed notice, 

pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5, announcing 

that it has entered into two Global Plus 

2B contracts.1

The Postal Service states that the 

instant contracts are functionally 

equivalent with one another and to 

previously submitted Global Plus 2B 

contracts.2 It states further that the 

instant contracts are supported by 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–10, which 

establishes prices and classifications not 

of general applicability for Global Plus 

Contracts.3

The Request has been assigned Docket 

No. MC2011–8. 

The Postal Service 

contemporaneously filed copies of the 

contracts related to the proposed 

competitive product classification 

pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 

CFR 3015.5. The two contracts have 

been assigned Docket Nos. CP2011–41 

and CP2011–42, respectively. 

The instant contracts. The Postal 

Service states that the instant contracts 

are the immediate successors to the 

Global Plus 2A contracts in Docket Nos. 

CP2010–69 and CP2010–70 that are 

scheduled to expire on 11:59 p.m. on 

January 16, 2011. Request at 3. The 

instant contracts are expected to begin 

January 17, 2011, and expire at 11:59 

p.m. on the day prior to the day in 

January 2012 when Canada Post 

Corporation institutes price changes for 

its domestic Lettermail, Incentive 

Lettermail, Admail, and/or Publications 

Mail products. If these prices do not 

change during the month of January the 

contracts terminate on January 31, 2012. 

Id. at 4–5. 

The Postal Service filed copies of the 

contracts, Governors’ Decision with 

attachments, and supporting financial 

documentation under seal. Id. at 3. 

Additionally, in support of its Request 

and Notice, the Postal Service filed the 

following five attachments: 

• Attachment 1—a statement of 

supporting justification required by 39 

CFR 3020.32; 

• Attachments 2A and 2B—a redacted 

copy of each contract and applicable 

annexes; 

• Attachments 3A and 3B—certified 

statements required by 39 CFR 

3015.5(c)(2); 

• Attachment 4—a redacted copy of 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–10, which 

establishes prices and classifications for 

Global Direct, Global Bulk Economy, 

and Global Plus Contracts, formulas for 

the prices, analysis and certification of 

the formulas and certification of the 

Governors’ vote; 

• Attachment 5—an application for 

non-public treatment of materials to 

maintain the contract and supporting 

documents under seal. 

Functional equivalence. The Postal 

Service asserts that the instant contracts 

are functionally equivalent both to one 

another and to the precursor Global Plus 

2A contracts in that they share similar 

cost and market characteristics. Id. at 4. 

It contends as a result the instant 

contracts should be grouped together as 

a single product. Id. at 4–6. 

The Postal Service addresses 

similarities between the instant 

contracts and their predecessors, e.g., 

the fundamental terms and conditions 

of the contracts remain essentially 

unchanged. Id. at 6. It identifies minor 

changes in contract terms that 

distinguish the instant contracts from 

each other, e.g., customer name, 

penalties, and identification of prior 

agreements. The Postal Service asserts 

that the differences do not affect 

functional equivalency. Id. at 5–6. 

Baseline treatment. The Postal Service 

states that each of the instant contracts 

takes the place of its immediate 

predecessor which served as the 

baseline contract for the Global Plus 2A 

Contracts product.4 It requests that the 

instant contracts be considered ‘‘the new 

‘baseline’ agreements for consideration 

of future functional analyses of the 

Global Plus 2B product.’’ Id. at 4. 

Filing under part 3020. In support of 

its filing, the Postal Service submitted a 

statement of Supporting Justification 

and a copy of Governors’ Decision No. 

08–10 as Attachments 1 and 4 

respectively. The Postal Service asserts 

that analysis under 39 U.S.C. 3642(b) is 

unnecessary here because of the 

Commission findings in Order No. 43 

that Negotiated Service Agreements for 

outbound International Mail are 

classified as competitive. Further it 

contends that the classification 

requirements of section 3642 have been 

met and that there is, ‘‘no further need 

to ponder whether Global Plus 2B 

contracts are market dominant or 

covered by the postal monopoly.’’ Id. at 

7. 

The Postal Service states that its 

filings demonstrate that the instant 

contracts comply with the requirements 

of 39 U.S.C. 3633, fit within the Mail 

Classification Schedule language for 

Global Plus Contracts under Governors’ 

Decision 08–10 and are functionally 

equivalent to each other. Id. at 8. It 

urges the Commission to add Global 

Plus 2B Contracts to the competitive 

product list and to establish the instant 

contracts as the baseline contracts for 

the Global Plus 2B product. Id. 

II. Notice of Filing 

The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. MC2011–8, CP2011–41 and 

CP2011–42 for consideration of matters 

raised in the Postal Service’s Request. 

Interested persons may submit 

comments on whether the Postal 

Service’s filings in the captioned 

dockets are consistent with the policies 

of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 

part 3015, and 39 CFR 3020 subpart B. 

Comments are due no later than 

December 21, 2010. The public portions 

of these filings can be accessed via the 

Commission’s Web site (http:// 

www.prc.gov). 

The Commission appoints Paul L. 

Harrington to serve as Public 

Representative in these dockets. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. MC2011–8, CP2011–41 and 

CP2011–42 for consideration of matters 

raised by the Postal Service’s Request. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
79056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 242 / Friday, December 17, 2010 / Notices 

2. Comments by interested persons in 

these proceedings are due no later than 

December 21, 2010. 

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Paul L. 

Harrington is appointed to serve as the 

officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in these 

proceedings. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31671 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 

Proposed Data Collection(s) Available 

for Public Comment and 

Recommendations 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

requirement of Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

which provides opportunity for public 

comment on new or revised data 

collections, the Railroad Retirement 

Board (RRB) will publish periodic 

summaries of proposed data collections. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed information collections are 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information has practical 

utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s 

estimate of the burden for the collection 

of the information; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden related to 

the collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

1. Title and Purpose of Information 

Collection 

Representative Payee Parental 

Custody Monitoring: OMB 3220–0176. 

Under Section 12 (a) of the Railroad 

Retirement Act (RRA), the Railroad 

Retirement Board (RRB) is authorized to 

select, make payments to, and to 

conduct transactions with, a 

beneficiary’s relative or some other 

person willing to act on behalf of the 

beneficiary as a representative payee. 

The RRB is responsible for determining 

if direct payment to the beneficiary or 

payment to a representative payee 

would best serve the beneficiary’s 

interest. Inherent in the RRB’s 

authorization to select a representative 

payee is the responsibility to monitor 

the payee to assure that the beneficiary’s 

interests are protected. The RRB utilizes 

Form G–99d, Parental Custody Report, 

to obtain information needed to verify 

that a parent-for-child representative 

payee still has custody of the child. One 

response is required from each 

respondent. The RRB proposes no 

changes to Form G–99d. 

The estimated annual respondent 

burden is as follows: 

Form #(s) Annual 

responses Time (min) Burden (hrs) 

G–99d .......................................................................................................................................... 1,030 5 86 

2. Title and Purpose of Information 

Collection 

Report of Medicaid State Office on 

Beneficiary’s Buy-In Status; OMB 3220– 

0185. 

Under Section 7(d) of the Railroad 

Retirement Act, the RRB administers the 

Medicare program for persons covered 

by the railroad retirement system. Under 

Section 1843 of the Social Security Act, 

states may enter into ‘‘buy-in 

agreements’’ with the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services for the 

purpose of enrolling certain groups of 

low-income individuals under the 

Medicare medical insurance (Part B) 

program and paying the premiums for 

their insurance coverage. Generally, 

these individuals are categorically 

needy under Medicaid and meet the 

eligibility requirements for Medicare 

Part B. States can also include in their 

buy-in agreements, individuals who are 

eligible for medical assistance only. The 

RRB uses Form RL–380–F, Report to 

State Medicaid Office, to obtain 

information needed to determine if 

certain railroad beneficiaries are entitled 

to receive Supplementary Medical 

Insurance program coverage under a 

state buy-in agreement in states in 

which they reside. Completion of Form 

RL–380–F is voluntary. One response is 

received from each respondent. The 

RRB proposes no changes to Form RL– 

380–F. 

The estimated annual respondent 

burden is as follows: 

Form #(s) Annual 

responses Time (min) Burden (hrs) 

RL–380–F .................................................................................................................................... 600 10 100 

Additional Information or Comments: 

To request more information or to 

obtain a copy of the information 

collection justification, forms, and/or 

supporting material, please call the RRB 

Clearance Officer at (312) 751–3363 or 

send an e-mail request to 

Charles.Mierzwa@RRB.GOV. Comments 

regarding the information collection 

should be addressed to Patricia A. 

Henaghan, Railroad Retirement Board, 

844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 

60611–2092 or send an e-mail to 

Patricia.Henaghan@RRB.GOV. Written 

comments should be received within 60 

days of this notice. 

Charles Mierzwa, 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31795 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7905–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–63530; File No. SR– 

NASDAQ–2010–164] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change to Provide an 

Exemption from the Thirty-Day Written 

Notice Requirement of Rule 7018(i)(3) 

December 10, 2010. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES