Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 77939 

1 Includes Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) 

Azimuth, VOR/TACAN (VORTAC), VOR/DME, 

Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) operated by the 

FAA. 

2Core 30 airports are those with significant 

activity serving major metropolitan areas and also 

serve as hubs for airline operations, found at http:// 

aspmhelp.faa.gov/index.php/Core_30. 

the fuse pin cross bolts and fuse pins of the 

left and right MLG forward trunnion lower 

housing to verify that the cross bolts are 

installed correctly and that there are no 

missing fuse pins, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 777–57A0090, dated August 

24, 2011. If any cross bolt of the MLG 

forward trunnion lower housing is not 

installed correctly, or if any fuse pin of the 

MLG forward trunnion lower housing is 

missing: Before further flight, replace all fuse 

pins in the MLG forward trunnion upper and 

lower housing, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 777–57A0090, dated August 

24, 2011. 

Note 1: The service bulletin 

accomplishment instructions might refer to 

other procedures. When the words ‘‘refer to’’ 

are used and the operator has an accepted 

alternative procedure, the accepted 

alternative procedure can be used to comply 

with the AD. When the words ‘‘in accordance 

with’’ are included in the instruction, the 

procedure in the design approval holder 

(DAH) document must be used to comply 

with the AD. 

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO 

to make those findings. For a repair method 

to be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact James Sutherland, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425) 917– 

6533; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

James.Sutherland@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; phone: 

(206) 544–5000, extension 1; fax: (206) 766– 

5680; email: me.boecom@boeing.com; 

Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

You may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(425) 227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 6, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–32077 Filed 12–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 91, 121, 125, 129, and 135 

Proposed Provision of Navigation 

Services for the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen) 

Transition to Performance-Based 

Navigation (PBN) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed policy and 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) seeks comments 

on a proposed transition of the U.S. 

National Airspace System (NAS) 

navigation infrastructure to enable 

performance-based navigation (PBN) as 

part of the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen). The 

FAA plans to transition from defining 

airways, routes and procedures using 

VHF Omni-directional Range (VOR) and 

other legacy navigation aids 

(NAVAIDs) 1 towards a NAS based on 

Area Navigation (RNAV) everywhere 

and Required Navigation Performance 

(RNP) where beneficial. Such 

capabilities will be enabled largely by 

the Global Positioning System (GPS) 

and the Wide Area Augmentation 

System (WAAS). The FAA plans to 

retain an optimized network of Distance 

Measuring Equipment (DME) stations 

and a minimum operational network 

(MON) of VOR stations to ensure safety 

and continuous operations for high and 

low altitude en route airspace over the 

conterminous US (CONUS) and 

terminal operations at the Core 30 

airports.2 The FAA is also conducting 

research on Alternate Positioning, 

Navigation and Timing (APNT) 

solutions that would enable further 

reduction of VORs below the MON. 

In addition, the FAA plans to satisfy 

any new requirements for Category I 

instrument operations with WAAS 

localizer performance with vertical 

guidance (LPV) procedures. A network 

of existing Instrument Landing Systems 

(ILS) would be sustained to provide 

alternative approach and landing 

capabilities to continue recovery and 

dispatch of aircraft during GPS outages. 

This transition would be consistent 

with the FAA’s NextGen 

Implementation Plan (NGIP), NAS 

Enterprise Architecture (EA), and other 

documentation. More information is 

available on the FAA’s NextGen Web 

site at http://www.faa.gov/nextgen and 

the EA Web site at https://nasea.faa.gov. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 7, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by Docket No. FAA–2011–1082 using 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at (202) 493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

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

any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478) 

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Greg Joyner, AJW–911, Navigation 

Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 493–5721. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
77940 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Proposal 

Purpose 

This notice announces the FAA’s 

proposed strategy to meet requirements 

for air navigation service in the United 

States. The FAA is committed to 

maintaining the highest levels of safety, 

capacity, and efficiency in the NAS 

while transitioning from the legacy 

station-referenced system of airways, 

routes and procedures to a performancebased system providing flexible pointto-point navigation enabled by 

geospatial positioning, navigation, and 

timing (PNT) infrastructure and aircraft 

advanced navigation systems. 

Transition to PBN for En Route, 

Terminal and Approach Operations in 

CONUS 

Many NextGen benefits depend on 

PBN, specifically RNAV and RNP 

routes, arrivals, departures, instrument 

approaches and other procedures to 

increase capacity and efficiency, and 

reduce aircraft noise and emissions 

while enhancing safety. All of these 

operations are enabled primarily by GPS 

and WAAS. 

GPS provides a level of service that 

supports lateral navigation for en route 

through non-precision instrument 

approaches. GPS is an internationally 

accepted navigation system, 

standardized by the International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO), and has 

been approved for use by many 

countries. Additional information 

concerning GPS can be found at 

www.gps.gov and www.pnt.gov. The 

U.S. government has committed to 

maintaining GPS services in accordance 

with the Standard Positioning Service 

Performance Standard of September 

2008. The U.S. is improving GPS 

services by adding a second frequency 

which will make GPS more resistant to 

unintentional radio frequency 

interference (RFI) sources. 

WAAS is a GPS augmentation system 

for aviation use that has been 

operational since 2003 and is used to 

improve the accuracy, integrity, and 

availability of GPS. WAAS also 

improves the availability of GPS to 

support PBN operations, even if several 

GPS satellites were to go out of service. 

WAAS is a satellite-based augmentation 

system (SBAS) standardized by ICAO. 

Compatible systems are operational in 

Japan and Europe, and other SBASs are 

in development in India and Russia. 

Even though basic and augmented 

GPS services enable all of the PBN 

capabilities for NextGen, the signals are 

vulnerable to scheduled and 

unscheduled outages. For example, the 

U.S. government regularly conducts 

scheduled testing in the NAS that 

impacts GPS use in selected regions. 

Unscheduled GPS outages have been 

caused by interference from intentional 

or unintentional sources of RFI. The 

FAA will ensure sufficient 

infrastructure is provided to mitigate the 

effects of scheduled GPS outages in 

designated areas and unscheduled 

outages which could otherwise 

significantly disrupt air commerce. 

The FAA also provides a network of 

distance measuring equipment (DME) 

that enable aircraft with suitable RNAV 

avionics to fly RNAV routes and 

terminal procedures where sufficient 

DME coverage exists. (See FAA 

Advisory Circular (AC) 90–100A, U.S. 

Terminal and En Route Area Navigation 

(RNAV) Operations.) In the near term, 

the FAA plans to enhance DME 

facilities to provide unrestricted RNAV 

operations for DME/DME and DME/ 

DME/Inertial Reference Unit (IRU) 

equipped aircraft operating in Class A 

airspace over the CONUS and in the 

vicinity of the Core 30 airports. Over the 

longer term, the FAA is investigating 

other APNT solutions to satisfy PNT 

requirements for all users in the event 

of a loss of GPS. 

Since VORs do not enable RNAV, 

RNP, or Automatic Dependent 

Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) 

operations, the FAA plans to reduce 

costs by drawing down the number of 

FAA-provided VORs. Currently, over 

80% of the 967 VORs in the NAS 

inventory are past their economic 

service life and cost the FAA more than 

$110M per year to operate. Likewise, 

replacement parts are becoming 

increasingly difficult to obtain. The 

replacement of all of the VORs would 

cost over $1.0B. Therefore, the FAA is 

planning a gradual discontinuance 

(removal from service) of VOR facilities 

in CONUS to a minimum operational 

network (MON). The MON would 

enable aircraft anywhere in the CONUS 

to proceed safely to a destination with 

a GPS-independent approach within 

100 nm. MON coverage is planned to be 

provided at altitudes above 5,000 feet 

above ground level (AGL). The FAA 

would also retain VORs to support 

international arrival airways from the 

Atlantic, Pacific, Caribbean, and at the 

Core 30 airports. The existing U.S. 

legacy navigation aids outside CONUS 

will be retained until a longer-term 

solution can be coordinated with users. 

The drawdown of VORs to a MON 

would be completed no later than 

January 1, 2020. 

In considering VORs for 

discontinuance, each facility will be 

evaluated on its own merits. The FAA 

will convene a working group that will 

develop a candidate list of VORs for 

discontinuance using relevant 

operational, safety, cost, and economic 

criteria. As part of the process, this 

working group will engage aviation 

industry stakeholders and other 

members of the public for input. 

Suitably equipped RNAV aircraft can 

continue to fly the existing Victor 

Airways and Jet Routes, Standard 

Terminal Arrivals (STAR), and 

Departure Procedures (DP) even if their 

associated VORs are not operating, by 

the use of RNAV substitution as 

described in AC 90–108, Use of Suitable 

Area Navigation (RNAV) Systems on 

Conventional Routes and Procedures. 

Existing airways, routes, and procedures 

eventually would be replaced by RNAV 

Q (high) and T (low) Routes, and RNAV 

STARs and DPs. VORs are also used for 

the Hazardous In-flight Weather 

Advisory Service (HIWAS) broadcast 

and voice communication with FAA 

Flight Service Stations. These services 

are not planned to be impacted by this 

proposal. 

WAAS supports vertically-guided 

approach operations, called Localizer 

Performance with Vertical guidance 

(LPV). These approaches are equivalent 

to Category I ILS, but do not require any 

radio navigation equipment at or near 

the airport. WAAS provides LPV 

coverage throughout CONUS, Alaska, 

and most of Canada and Mexico. By 

2016, the FAA expects to provide 

instrument approach procedures with 

LPV or localizer performance (LP) nonprecision lines of minima to all 

qualified instrument runways in 

CONUS and Alaska (see Advisory 

Circular AC 150/5300–13, Airport 

Design, Appendix 16). In order to 

maximize operational benefits and take 

advantage of the cost savings associated 

with WAAS, the FAA no longer intends 

to establish new Category I ILSs using 

Facilities and Equipment (F&E) funding. 

ILSs that are funded by grants from 

the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 

will continue as an eligible project per 

the authorizing statute. However, the 

FAA is considering programmatic 

changes under AIP that would favor 

WAAS for new precision approaches at 

airports, rather than ILS. The FAA 

Office of Airports will engage with 

airport stakeholders and associations on 

these potential changes. 

Existing ILSs would provide an 

alternative approach and landing 

capability in support of recovery and 

dispatch of aircraft during GPS outages. 

ILSs would provide the precision 

approach and landing segment for 

APNT. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 77941 

For all approach procedures, airports 

will continue to be required to meet 

airfield design and infrastructure 

requirements appropriate for the 

approach visibility levels set forth in AC 

150/5300–13. 

Future Plans 

Unaugmented GPS is capable of 

providing the accuracy and integrity 

required by the FAA’s ADS–B Out 

regulations (14 CFR 91.225 and 91.227) 

that were effective August 31, 2010 and 

have a compliance date of January 1, 

2020. However, at this time, WAAS 

augmentation is the only service that 

provides the 99.9 percent availability 

(equivalent to radar) needed for ADS–B. 

Operators that equip with other position 

sources, such as Receiver Autonomous 

Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) based GPS, 

may experience periods of 

unavailability that limit their access to 

the airspace. The FAA expects that 

positioning from GPS combined with 

future positioning sources such as the 

L5 GPS signal and/or other GNSS 

signals, and GPS tightly integrated with 

inertial navigation systems, will also 

provide 99.9 percent availability. 

The FAA is conducting research on 

APNT for service beyond 2020. The 

FAA will consider, in consultation with 

the users, whether the MON may be 

further reduced after an APNT solution 

is selected and available. The FAA is 

also evaluating the use of the GroundBased Augmentation System (GBAS) in 

addition to ILS to provide Category II/ 

III approach services. 

Review of Navigation Equipage 

Requirements 

FAA regulations addressing the 

operational requirements to carry 

navigation equipment in aircraft are set 

forth in 14 CFR parts 91, 121, 125, 129, 

and 135. Operators should be familiar 

with their specific requirements. The 

following paragraphs provide an 

overview of those requirements to assist 

in understanding the context for the 

radionavigation services described in 

this Notice. 

Suitable Equipage for the Route To Be 

Flown 

The aircraft equipage rules are 

performance-based and the aircraft must 

have equipment appropriate for the 

route to be flown, including en route, 

departure, arrival, and instrument 

approach procedures. Operators 

planning to fly a variety of different 

routes and procedures must carry 

equipment suitable for the different 

routes and procedures. 

FAA guidance describing the 

navigation equipment ‘‘suitable’’ to the 

route to be flown is provided in the 

Aeronautical Information Manual and in 

a series of advisory circulars (see AC 

Nos. 90–100, 90–101, 90–105, and 90– 

107). Equipment is considered suitable 

if it has been demonstrated to provide 

the accuracy, integrity and reliability for 

the operation and the necessary 

radionavigation service is provided for 

the planned route of flight. For 

conventional ground-based routes and 

procedures, suitable equipment can be 

directly inferred from the type of 

procedure (e.g., a VOR receiver would 

be suitable for operation on a Jet Route). 

RNAV systems, enabled by GPS, WAAS, 

or DME/DME/IRU (DDI), are suitable for 

a variety of operations including: 

Æ Operation on Victor Airways, Jet 

Routes, terminal arrivals, departures, 

and approach procedures, including the 

initial and missed approach portions of 

an ILS instrument approach (based on 

AC 90–108); 

Æ Operation on RNAV routes 

(Q routes and T routes); 

Æ Operation on RNAV arrivals and 

departures; 

Æ Operation on RNAV (GPS) 

approaches (excluding DDI); 

Æ Operation on RNAV (RNP) 

approaches (excluding DDI). 

Operators must ensure that 

performance requirements can be met 

for the intended operations during flight 

planning. Due to integrity limitations of 

unaugmented GPS, aircraft using 

unaugmented GPS navigation 

equipment under IFR must be equipped 

with an approved and operational 

alternate means of navigation so that the 

aircraft can proceed safely to a landing 

at a suitable airport. This limitation also 

applies to required alternates: When a 

planned alternate is required, that 

alternate cannot be predicated on GPS 

in any way (as the primary approach 

aid, or as the means to accomplish the 

initial, intermediate or missed approach 

of an ILS, RNAV, or VOR approach). 

General aviation aircraft using WAAS 

equipment under IFR do not require an 

alternate means of navigation, due to the 

improved reliability of WAAS. However 

in non-normal conditions resulting in 

the loss of WAAS services (for example 

catastrophic failure of the WAAS 

satellites), the FAA will advise WAAS 

users that the GPS-only restrictions 

should be applied until such time as 

WAAS service can be restored. Aircraft 

equipped only with WAAS would be 

supported by air traffic control in the 

event of a catastrophic failure of satellite 

navigation. 

The planned use of GPS or WAAS 

during periods when GPS may be 

unavailable (e.g., test events identified 

through NOTAM as areas in which GPS 

may be unavailable) is not appropriate. 

In those areas and during the test, 

aircraft must be equipped with other 

equipment suitable for the planned 

operation (route of flight, altitude, etc.). 

However, pilots may use GPS or WAAS 

during flight if onboard equipment 

indicates service is available. 

RNAV systems using multiple DME 

signals are also suitable for many of the 

same operations. DME has several 

limitations compared to GPS or WAAS: 

the coverage of the service is not 

universal, so the operator must verify 

that it is available over the planned 

route of flight; and DME navigation is 

not currently capable of providing the 

more precise accuracy that is needed for 

approach and departure operations. 

Two Independent Systems 

FAA regulations applicable to 

domestic operations for commerce or for 

hire require a second system capable of 

reversion or contingency operations 

during non-normal conditions, 

including regional- or system-wide 

effects that could reasonably occur. The 

rules applicable to those operations 

require two independent navigation 

systems appropriate to the route to be 

flown, or one system that is suitable and 

a second, independent backup 

capability that allows the operator to 

proceed safely and land at a different 

airport, and the aircraft must have 

sufficient fuel (reference 14 CFR 

121.349, 125.203, 129.17, and 135.165). 

These rules ensure the safety of the 

operation by preventing a single point of 

failure. 

The requirements for a second system 

apply to the entire set of equipment 

needed to achieve the navigation 

capability, not just the individual 

components of the system such as the 

radionavigation receiver. For example, 

in order to use two RNAV systems to 

comply with the requirements, the 

aircraft must be equipped with two 

independent radionavigation receivers 

and two independent navigation 

computers (e.g., flight management 

systems). Alternatively, to comply with 

the requirements using a single RNAV 

system with an installed and operable 

VOR capability, the VOR capability 

must be independent of the FMS. The 

MON described in this notice would 

continue to allow this equipage to fulfill 

the above requirements for operating 

within U.S. airspace. 

To satisfy the requirement for two 

independent navigation systems, if the 

primary navigation system is GPSbased, the second system must be 

independent of GPS (e.g., VOR or DDI). 

This allows continued navigation in 

case of failure of the GPS or WAAS 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
77942 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1Proposal to Revise Service Standards for FirstClass Mail, Periodicals, and Standard Mail, 76 FR 

58433 (Sept. 21, 2011). 2Request of the United States Postal Service for 

an Advisory Opinion on Changes in the Nature of 

Postal Services, Docket No. N2012–1 (Dec. 5, 2011). 

Documents pertaining to the Request are available 

at the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) Web 

site, http://www.prc.gov, under Docket No. N2012– 

1. 

services. Recognizing that GPS 

interference and test events resulting in 

the loss of GPS services have become 

more common, the FAA requires 

operators conducting IFR operations 

under 14 CFR 121.349, 125.203, 129.17 

and 135.165 to retain a non-GPS 

navigation capability consisting of 

either DME/DME, IRU or VOR for en 

route and terminal operations, and VOR 

and/or ILS for final approach. Since this 

system is to be used as a reversionary 

capability, single equipage is sufficient. 

Instructions for Submission of 

Comments 

Interested parties are invited to 

provide comments on the proposal. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented would be particularly helpful 

in developing reasoned decisions on the 

proposal. 

Communications should identify 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2011–1082 and be submitted in 

triplicate to the Docket Management 

Facility (see ADDRESSES section for 

address and phone number). 

All communications received on or 

before the specified closing date for 

comments will be considered before 

taking action on the proposal. The 

proposal contained in this action may 

be changed in light of comments 

received. All comments submitted will 

be available for examination in the 

public docket both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerned 

with this proposal will be filed in the 

docket. 

Availability of Proposal 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 1, 

2011. 

Phillip Leman, 

Acting Manager, Navigation Services. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31451 Filed 12–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 121 

Service Standards for MarketDominant Mail Products 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service seeks 

public comment on proposed revisions 

to the service standards for marketdominant mail products. The most 

significant revision would largely 

eliminate overnight service for FirstClass Mail. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be mailed to Manager, Industry 

Engagement and Outreach, United 

States Postal Service, 475 L’Enfant Plaza 

SW., Room 4107, Washington, DC 

20260–4107, or transmitted by email to 

industryfeedback@usps.com. Copies of 

all comments will be available for 

inspection and photocopying at the 

Postal Service Headquarters Library, 475 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., 11th Floor North, 

Washington, DC 20260, between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by 

appointment (please call (202) 268–5585 

to schedule an appointment). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wendy Hocking, Industry Engagement 

and Outreach, at (202) 268–8149; or 

Emily Rosenberg, Network Analytics, at 

(202) 268–5585. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Advance Notice 

III. Comments 

IV. Response to Comments 

V. Proposed Revisions to Service Standards 

A. Service Standards Generally 

B. First-Class Mail 

C. Periodicals 

D. Standard Mail and Package Services 

VI. Request for Comments 

I. Introduction 

On September 21, 2011, the Postal 

Service published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (the Advance 

Notice) in the Federal Register 

soliciting public comment on a 

conceptual proposal to revise service 

standards for market-dominant 

products.1 The comment period for the 

Advance Notice closed on October 21, 

2011. Having developed the concept 

into a concrete proposal, the Postal 

Service is now publishing and soliciting 

public comment on proposed revisions 

to the service standard regulations 

contained in 39 CFR part 121. Pursuant 

to 39 U.S.C. 3661(b), the Postal Service 

has also requested an advisory opinion 

from the Postal Regulatory Commission 

regarding the proposed revisions.2

II. Advance Notice 

In the Advance Notice, the Postal 

Service explained that the growing 

excess capacity in its mail processing 

network has led it to consider 

significantly consolidating that network. 

The excess capacity stems largely from 

falling mail volumes, particularly in 

First-Class Mail. Annual First-Class 

Mail volume peaked in 2001 at 103.7 

billion pieces; it has fallen about 30 

billion pieces since then, or 29 percent. 

The Postal Service’s mail processing 

network was designed principally to 

achieve First-Class Mail service 

standards, and the decline in First-Class 

Mail volume has made it difficult for the 

Postal Service to consolidate the 

network quickly enough to align with 

current volumes. 

The Postal Service stated in the 

Advance Notice that further changes to 

align the mail processing network will 

for the most part be unachievable 

without a relaxation of certain marketdominant service standards, particularly 

for First-Class Mail. The Postal Service 

set forth a proposal to eliminate the 

overnight service standard for FirstClass Mail, narrow the product’s twoday delivery range, and enlarge its 

three-day delivery range. The proposal 

also contemplated similar changes to 

the Periodicals service standards, 

because those service standards are 

linked to First-Class Mail service 

standards. The Postal Service further 

noted that the proposal could entail 

minor changes to Standard Mail service 

standards, and it stated that all Postal 

Service products could experience 

changes in specific 3-digit ZIP Code 

origin-destination pairs’ transit times. 

The Postal Service explained in the 

Advance Notice that the proposal could 

make possible a significant modification 

of the mail processing network, better 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1