38918 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 5, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 5100.1 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction because it 

creates a safety zone. An environmental 

analysis checklist and a categorical 

exclusion determination are available in 

the docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add temporary § 165.T11–190 to 

read as follows: 

§ 165.T11–190 Safety Zone; Sea World 

Labor Day Fireworks, Mission Bay, San 

Diego, California. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All waters of Mission Bay, 

from surface to bottom, within 600 feet 

of the barge at an approximate position 

of 32°46′03′′ N, 117°13′11′′ W. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., 

each day, on September 5, 2009 through 

September 7, 2009. If the event 

concludes prior to the scheduled 

termination time, the Captain of the Port 

will cease enforcement of this safety 

zone and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to this section: 

Designated representative, means any 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officers 

of the Coast Guard on board Coast 

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, or local, 

state, or federal law enforcement vessels 

who have been authorized to act on the 

behalf of the Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port of San Diego or 

his designated on-scene representative. 

(2) Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the safety zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Sector San Diego Command Center. The 

Command Center may be contacted on 

VHF–FM Channel 16. 

(3) All persons and vessels must 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel must proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: July 6, 2009. 

T.H. Farris, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. E9–18629 Filed 8–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0685] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone: USCG Barque Eagle 

Transits of Rockland Harbor, ME, 

Portland Harbor, ME and Portsmouth 

Harbor, NH 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary moving safety 

zone excluding all vessels within a 100 

yard radius of the U.S. Coast Guard 

Barque EAGLE during the vessel’s 

transit in Rockland Harbor, Penobscot 

Bay, Casco Bay and Portland Harbor in 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 5, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 38919 

Maine as well as during its transit of 

Portsmouth Harbor, NH. This safety 

zone is needed to protect spectators, 

event safety vessels and others in the 

maritime community from the safety 

hazards created by sailing a large vessel 

in close proximity to smaller vessels. 

Entry into this safety zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port, Sector Northern New England or 

his designated representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. 

on July 24, 2009 until 6 p.m. on August 

10, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2009– 

0685 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting 

the Advanced Docket Search option on 

the right side of the screen, inserting 

USCG–2009–0685 in the Docket ID box, 

pressing Enter, and then clicking on the 

item in the Docket ID column. They are 

also available for inspection or copying 

at the Docket Management Facility (M– 

30), U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail Chief Petty Officer 

Randy Bucklin, U.S. Coast Guard Sector 

Northern New England, Waterways 

Management Division, telephone (207) 

741–5440; e-mail 

randy.bucklin@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule for the moving 

safety zone without prior notice and 

opportunity to comment pursuant to 

authority under section 4(a) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 

U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because the 

details regarding USCG Barque 

EAGLES’s sail through the various 

harbors in Maine and in Portsmouth 

New Hampshire were not available in 

time to give the public notice and an 

opportunity to comment thus making 

issuance of an NPRM impractical. 

Further, a cancellation or delay of the 

EAGLE’s sail to accommodate a notice 

and comment period is contrary to the 

public’s interest in ensuring the safety 

of spectators, event safety vessels and 

other users of the waterway. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. In addition to the reasons 

stated above, a delay or cancellation of 

the EAGLE’s sail to accommodate 30 

days for publication before the rule 

becomes effective is contrary to the 

public interest. Further, immediate 

action is needed to ensure a safe, vessel 

free zone exists around this large sailing 

vessel as it transits the various harbors. 

Background and Purpose 

The EAGLE is a large, steel hull sail 

training ship that is limited in its ability 

to quickly maneuver around smaller 

vessels. USCGC Barque Eagle will be 

making port calls in Rockland Harbor, 

ME and Portland Harbor ME as well as 

a port call in Portsmouth NH as part of 

the marine event ‘‘The Tall Ships Visit 

to Portsmouth Harbor, NH’’. This safety 

zone is required to protect persons and 

vessels from the safety hazards 

associated with a large sailing vessel’s 

limited maneuverability. 

Discussion of Rule 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary moving safety zone excluding 

all vessels within a 100 yard radius of 

the USCGC Barque Eagle during the 

transit to the CG Moorings in Rockland 

Harbor, ME (44–069.33N 069–06.09W), 

as it transits outbound into the main 

channel in Penobscot Bay, as it transits 

inbound to State Pier in Portland 

Harbor, ME (43–39.38N 070–14.45W), as 

it transits outbound Casco Bay to 

Portland Head Light, inbound to Main 

State Pier in Portsmouth, NH (43– 

05.03N 070–45.65W) for ‘‘The Tall 

Ships visit to Portsmouth Harbor’’ 

marine event while the event is in 

progress, and as it transits outbound 

Portsmouth Harbor to the 2KR buoy. 

This safety zone is needed to protect 

spectators, event sponsors’ safety 

vessels, and others in the maritime 

community from the safety hazards that 

may arise from an event of this type. 

Entry into this safety zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port, Sector Northern New England or 

his designated representative. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. 

The Coast Guard expects the 

economic impact of this rule to be so 

minimal that a full regulatory evaluation 

is unnecessary. The effect of this rule 

will not be significant for the following 

reasons: The safety zones will be of 

limited duration. The events are 

designed to avoid, as much as 

practicable, deep draft, fishing, and 

recreational boating traffic routes. 

Vessels may be authorized to transit the 

zone with permission of the Captain of 

the Port, Sector Northern New England. 

Additionally, maritime advisories will 

be broadcast during the duration of the 

enforcement periods. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This rule may affect the following 

entities, some of which may be small 

entities: The owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zones. However, this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities due 

to the minimal time that vessels will be 

restricted from the areas, the ample 

space available for vessels to maneuver 

and navigate around the zones, and 

advance notifications will be made to 

the local community by marine 

information broadcasts. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
38920 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 5, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we offer to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The 

Coast Guard will not retaliate against 

small entities that question or complain 

about this rule or any policy or action 

of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this rule under that Order and have 

determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 or more in any one year. 

Though this rule will not result in such 

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of 

this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not affect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g) of the Instruction. This rule 

involves creation of a temporary safety 

zone for a limited period of time. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

categorical exclusion determination will 

be available in the docket where 

indicated under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, and 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR Part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107– 

295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T01–0685 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T01–0685 Safety Zone; USCG 

Barque Eagle transits of Rockland Harbor, 

ME, Portland Harbor, ME and Portsmouth 

Harbor, NH. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All navigable waters within 

100 yards in all directions of the United 

States Coast Guard Barque EAGLE 

(USCGC EAGLE) during its transit and 

port calls in Rockland, ME, Portland, 

ME and Portsmouth, NH for ‘‘The Tall 

Ships Visit to Portsmouth Harbor, NH’’. 

(b) Enforcement periods: 

(1) This rule will be enforced from 8 

a.m. on July 24, 2009 to 4 p.m. on July 

27, 2009 in Rockland Harbor, ME; 

(2) This rule will be enforced from 8 

a.m. on July 31, 2009 through 4 p.m. on 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 5, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 38921 

1Request of the United States Postal Service to 

Add Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 7 to 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General 

Applicability, July 2, 2009. 

2Errata to Request of the United States Postal 

Service to Add Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 7 to Competitive Product List and Notice 

of Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General 

Applicability, July 6, 2009 (Request). 

3See Notice of the United States Postal Service 

of Filing Under Seal of Revised Financial Analysis 

Workbooks for Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 7, July 8, 2009 (Revised Workbooks). 

4Attachment A to the Request. The analysis that 

accompanies the Governors’ Decision notes, among 

other things, that the contract is not risk free, but 

concludes that the risks are manageable. 

5Attachment B to the Request. 

6Attachment C to the Request. 

7Attachment D to the Request. 

8Attachment E to the Request. 

9PRC Order No. 240, Notice and Order 

Concerning Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 

7 Negotiated Service Agreement, July 7, 2009 (Order 

No. 240). 

10Chairman’s Information Request No. 1 and 

Notice of Filing of Questions Under Seal, July 14, 

2009 (CHIR No. 1). 

August 3, 2009 in Portland Harbor, ME; 

and, 

(3) This rule will be enforced from 6 

a.m. August 7, 2009 through 6 p.m. on 

August 10, 2009 in Portsmouth, NH. 

(c) Regulations: 

(1) In accordance with the general 

regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry 

into or movement within this zone by 

any person or vessel are prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port (COTP), Sector Northern New 

England or the COTP’s designated 

representative. 

(2) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone may 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

designated representative at telephone 

number 207–767–0303 or designated 

representative on VHF Channel 13 

(156.7 MHz) or VHF channel 16 (156.8 

MHz) to seek permission to do so. If 

permission is granted, all persons and 

vessels must comply with the 

instructions provided by the COTP or 

the COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Definitions. 

(1) Designated representative means a 

Coast Guard Patrol Commander, 

including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty 

officer, or other officer operating a Coast 

Guard vessel and a Federal, State, or 

local law enforcement officer designated 

by or assisting the Captain of the Port 

(COTP). 

Dated: July 24, 2009. 

B.J. Downey, Jr., 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port, Sector Northern New 

England. 

[FR Doc. E9–18631 Filed 8–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3020 

[Docket Nos. MC2009–32 and CP2009–43; 

Order No. 256] 

Express Mail and Priority Mail Contract 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is adding 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 7 

to the Competitive Product List. This 

action is consistent with changes in a 

recent law governing postal operations. 

Republication of the lists of market 

dominant and competitive products is 

also consistent with new requirements 

under the law. 

DATES: Effective August 5, 2009 and is 

applicable beginning July 27, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 or 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory 

History, 74 FR 33482 (July 13, 2009). 

I. Introduction 

II. Background 

III. Information Request 

IV. Comments 

V. Commission Analysis 

VI. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

The Postal Service seeks to add a new 

product identified as Express Mail & 

Priority Mail Contract 7 to the 

Competitive Product List. For the 

reasons discussed below, the 

Commission approves the Request. 

II. Background 

On July 2, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed a formal request pursuant to 39 

U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30, et seq., 

to add Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 7 to the Competitive Product 

List.1 On July 6, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed a revised version of its filing which 

includes attachments inadvertently 

omitted from the July 2, 2009 request.2

The Postal Service asserts that the 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 7 

product is a competitive product ‘‘not of 

general applicability’’ within the 

meaning of 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3). Id. at 

1. The Request has been assigned 

Docket No. MC2009–32. 

The Postal Service 

contemporaneously filed a contract 

related to the proposed new product 

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

CFR 3015.5. Id. The contract has been 

assigned Docket No. CP2009–43. 

On July 8, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed under seal revised versions of the 

financial analysis workbooks originally 

filed under seal on July 2, 2009.3

In support of its Request, the Postal 

Service filed the following materials: (1) 

A redacted version of the Governors’ 

Decision authorizing the new product 

which also includes an analysis of 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 7 

and certification of the Governors’ 

vote; 4 (2) a redacted version of the 

contract which, among other things, 

provides that the contract will expire 3 

years from the effective date, which is 

proposed to be 1 day after the 

Commission issues all regulatory 

approvals; 5 (3) requested changes in the 

Mail classification Schedule product 

list; 6 (4) a Statement of Supporting 

Justification as required by 39 CFR 

3020.32; 7 and (5) certification of 

compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a).8

In the Statement of Supporting 

Justification, Mary Prince Anderson, 

Manager, Sales and Communications, 

Expedited Shipping, asserts that the 

service to be provided under the 

contract will cover its attributable costs, 

make a positive contribution to 

institutional costs, and increase 

contribution toward the requisite 5.5 

percent of the Postal Service’s total 

institutional costs. Id., Attachment D. 

Thus, Ms. Anderson contends there will 

be no issue of subsidization of 

competitive products by market 

dominant products as a result of this 

contract. Id. W. Ashley Lyons, Manager, 

Regulatory Reporting and Cost Analysis, 

Finance Department, certifies that the 

contract complies with 39 U.S.C. 

3633(a). See Id., Attachment E. 

The Postal Service filed much of the 

supporting materials, including the 

unredacted Governors’ Decision and the 

unredacted contract, under seal. In its 

Request, the Postal Service maintains 

that the contract and related financial 

information, including the customer’s 

name and the accompanying analyses 

that provide prices, terms, conditions, 

and financial projections, should remain 

confidential. Id. at 2–3. 

In Order No. 240, the Commission 

gave notice of the two dockets, 

appointed a public representative, and 

provided the public with an opportunity 

to comment.9

III. Information Request 

On July 14, 2009, the Chairman issued 

an information request seeking 

responses to 6 questions.10 The 

information request was filed under 

seal. Id. On July 20, 2009, the Postal 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES