Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Proposed Rules 80219 

1Petition of the United States Postal Service for 

the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed 

Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Seven), 

November 8, 2023 (Petition). The Postal Service 

also filed a notice of filing of public and non-public 

material relating to Proposal Seven. Notice of Filing 

of USPS–RM2024–1–1 and USPS–RM2024–1–NP1 

and Application for Nonpublic Treatment, 

November 8, 2023. 

2 Docket No. RM2022–1, Initial Comments of the 

United States Postal Service, March 25, 2022, at 7, 

24–26, 38. 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3050 

[Docket No. RM2024–1; Order No. 6784] 

Periodic Reporting 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is 

acknowledging a recent filing requesting 

the Commission initiate a rulemaking 

proceeding to consider changes to 

analytical principles relating to periodic 

reports (Proposal Seven). This 

document informs the public of the 

filing, invites public comment, and 

takes other administrative steps. 

DATES: Comments are due: December 

18, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at https://

www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit 

comments electronically should contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section by 

telephone for advice on filing 

alternatives. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 

202–789–6820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Proposal Seven 

III. Notice and Comment 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On November 8, 2023, the Postal 

Service filed a petition pursuant to 39 

CFR 3050.11 requesting that the 

Commission initiate a rulemaking 

proceeding to consider changes to 

analytical principles related to periodic 

reports.1 The Petition identifies the 

proposed analytical changes filed in this 

docket as Proposal Seven. 

II. Proposal Seven 

Background. Proposal Seven is a 

request to change the methodology for 

developing, attributing, and distributing 

Cost Segment 2 costs related to 

supervisors and technical personnel. 

Petition at 1. Proposal Seven stems from 

the Postal Service’s identification of 

supervisors and technicians costs as a 

medium-term area in need of study and 

is the result of that study.2 Cost Segment 

2 includes salaries, benefits, and other 

related costs of supervisors (except 

those associated with supervising 

vehicle maintenance and custodial 

employees) and technical personnel. 

Petition, Proposal Seven at 1. Cost 

Segment 2 also includes expenses 

associated with non-supervisory 

employees who work in the district 

offices such as customer service 

representatives and address 

management personnel. Id. at 1–2. 

Supervisors direct the activities for 

those employees that process, deliver, 

and transport the mail. Id. at 1. 

Technical personnel work to improve 

the efficiency of activities performed by 

postal employees and include industrial 

engineers, accountants, and human 

resources personnel and include staff 

working in district offices. Id. 

Currently, accrued supervisor costs 

are apportioned to supervisor activities 

through In-Office Cost Systems (IOCS) 

observations and assignment of 

corresponding activity codes. Id. at 2. 

The costs associated with these 

activities are classified and distributed 

as variable to the same degree as the 

work activities supervised. Id. The 

Postal Service represents that in FY 

2022, approximately 39,000 IOCS 

readings were used in determining the 

supervisors and technicians cost 

components for FY 2022. Id. According 

to the Postal Service, the IOCS readings 

are costly, consume valuable resources, 

and ‘‘by their nature do not yield 

measurements that supply product level 

detail.’’ Id. 

Proposal. The Postal Service’s 

proposal seeks to replace its use of IOCS 

readings with operational payroll data 

and ‘‘reasonable assumptions’’ in 

determining cost component totals. Id. 

at 3–4. According to the Postal Service, 

this would result in a set of eight cost 

components. Id. The current IOCS 

measurements divide the accrued costs 

in Segment 2 into sixteen cost 

components. Id. at 2–3. More 

specifically, the Postal Service proposes 

to use system payment data by Labor 

Distribution Code (LDC) to form these 

cost components, which would 

significantly reduce reliance on IOCS 

measurements. Id. at 1, 3–4. Under the 

proposed methodology, supervisor cost 

components would be formed by 

utilizing the ratio of total payroll salary 

and benefits by supervisor LDC and 

facility type and, for some LDCs, the 

portion of labor costs for the employee 

craft type supervised. Id. at 7. 

Additionally, the proposal seeks to tie 

Professional and Technical total costs to 

the Trial Balance total rather than 

relying on IOCS readings and modeling. 

Id. at 4. Currently, technician costs are 

categorized within the cost component 

for ‘‘Product Specific and Other S & T.’’ 

Id. The Postal Service proposes that 

these costs instead be separated into 

their own cost components based on the 

General Ledger amounts. Id. The Postal 

Service proposes to separate the 

remaining supervisor costs even further 

according to function (using the ratio of 

payroll data cost according to their 

function), including the following LDCs: 

function 1 (mail processing); function 2 

(carriers); function 3 (vehicle service); 

and function 4 (customer service). Id. at 

5. All remaining supervisor LDCs would 

be allocated to the Other Supervisors 

cost component. Id. 

The Postal Service proposes further 

dividing function 1 costs into 

International Service Centers, Network 

Distribution Centers, and other costs 

based on the ratio of payroll costs by 

location (facility) and applying ‘‘more 

detailed support costs variabilities and 

distribution keys.’’ Id. at 5, 7. For 

supervisors that oversee activities of 

both function 2 and 4 employees 

(carriers, window clerks and back-office 

clerks), the Postal Service proposes 

summing the payroll costs of function 2 

and function 4 and then using the 

underlying direct labor costs to 

reallocate the functional costs between 

the two functions. Id. at 6. Function 2 

delivery costs will then further be 

separated into rural and city carrier 

supervision costs based on the 

nationwide proportions of routes by 

type of delivery. Id. Function 4 costs 

will then be further allocated to cost 

pools for Window and Non-MODS clerk 

supervision using direct labor cost 

proportions within function 4. Id. 

Rationale. The Postal Service justifies 

the proposed changes as improving 

efficiency by using ‘‘passively available 

operational data,’’ to form cost 

components rather than costly IOCS 

measurements. Id. at 7. Additionally, 

the Postal Service justifies the change as 

an improvement because it would 

increase ‘‘the accuracy and efficiency of 

product cost estimation in Cost Segment 

2.’’ Id. at 10. For instance, the Postal 

Service asserts that one significant 

improvement with this model is the 

increase in the rural delivery 

supervision cost component, which will 

result in a cost ratio ‘‘more aligned with 

operational reality.’’ Id. at 8–9. The 

Postal Service indicates that the current 

methodology’s ‘‘extreme ratio’’ might be 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
80220 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

the result of the difficulty in IOCS 

sampling in rural areas. Id. at 9–10. 

Impact. The Postal Service asserts that 

its proposal will result in ‘‘an overall 

decrease of approximately $163 million 

in attributable costs due to the 

reformulation of the cost components,’’ 

mostly ‘‘due to the new Other 

Supervisors costs component, which if 

implemented would be classified as 

institutional.’’ Id. at 10. Overall, the 

proposal will result in a decrease in unit 

costs for most product classes, except 

for Market Dominant Services. Id. at 10– 

11. 

III. Notice and Comment 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. RM2024–1 for consideration of 

matters raised by the Petition. More 

information on the Petition may be 

accessed via the Commission’s website 

at https://www.prc.gov. Interested 

persons may submit comments on the 

Petition and Proposal Seven no later 

than December 18, 2023. Pursuant to 39 

U.S.C. 505, Almaroof Agoro is 

designated as an officer of the 

Commission (Public Representative) to 

represent the interests of the general 

public in this proceeding. 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. RM2024–1 for consideration of the 

matters raised by the Petition of the 

United States Postal Service for the 

Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider 

Proposed Changes in Analytical 

Principles (Proposal Seven), filed 

November 8, 2023. 

2. Comments by interested persons in 

this proceeding are due no later than 

December 18, 2023. 

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the 

Commission appoints Almaroof Agoro 

to serve as an officer of the Commission 

(Public Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in this 

docket. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this Order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Erica A. Barker, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25430 Filed 11–16–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 16 

[EPA–HQ–OMS–2019–0371; FRL–10082–03– 

OMS] 

Privacy Act Regulations for EPA–83 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency) is proposing to 

revise the Agency’s Privacy Act 

regulations to exempt a system of 

records, EPA–83, the Personnel Security 

System (PSS) 2.0, from certain 

requirements of the Privacy Act because 

the system will contain information 

relevant to insider threat inquiries and 

background investigations. If such 

information is not kept confidential, it 

could jeopardize EPA or a referring 

agency’s ability to conduct background 

investigations, insider threat inquiries, 

or any related inquiries. In the ‘‘Rules 

and Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is simultaneously 

publishing the revision of the Agency’s 

Privacy Act Regulations to include 

EPA–83 as a direct final rule without a 

prior proposed rule. If the Agency 

receives no adverse comment, it will not 

take further action on this proposed 

rule. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 18, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OMS–2019–0371, at https://

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Goldsby, Personnel Security Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

William Jefferson Clinton North 

Building, Mail Code 3206A, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 

564–1569; email address: 

Goldsby.John@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA issuing this proposed 

rule? 

The EPA proposes to revise the 

Agency’s Privacy Act regulations in 

order to exempt a system of records, 

EPA–83, the Personnel Security System 

(PSS) 2.0, from certain requirements of 

the Privacy Act. The EPA has published 

a direct final rule exempting this system 

of records in the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register because it views this as a 

noncontroversial action and anticipates 

no adverse comment. EPA explains its 

reasons for the direct final rule in the 

preamble to that rule. If EPA receives no 

adverse comment, it will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. If 

EPA receives adverse comment, it will 

withdraw the direct final rule and the 

rule will not take effect. EPA will 

address public comments in any 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA does not intend to 

institute a second comment period on 

this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the ADDRESSES

section of this document. 

II. General Information 

The EPA published a Privacy Act 

system of records notice for information 

collected and maintained in the 

Personnel Security System (PSS) 2.0 (85 

FR 32380, May 29, 2020), and a Notice 

of a Modified System of Records 

concurrently with this proposed rule. 

PSS 2.0 supports the Personnel Security 

Branch (PSB) with tracking the 

documentation associated with 

background investigations for Federal 

and non-Federal personnel working for 

EPA. PSS 2.0 contains investigatory 

material compiled for the purpose of 

determining suitability, eligibility, or 

qualifications for Federal civilian 

employment, Federal contracts, or 

access to classified information. 

Additionally, the PSB plans to update 

PSS 2.0 with a new module focused on 

providing the agency with insider threat 

inquiry management and coordination 

capabilities. The Insider Threat Program 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS