Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Notices 53003 

1Request of the United States Postal Service to 

Transfer Commercial Standard Mail Parcels to the 

Competitive Product List, August 16, 2010 

(Request). 

2See Docket No. R2010–4, Exigent Request of the 

United States Postal Service, July 6, 2010. 

3As proposed in Docket No. R2010–4, current 

commercial and nonprofit Standard Mail NFMs 

would become Standard Mail Marketing Parcels. 

Because of addressing standards, some current 

customers using commercial Standard Mail NFMs 

for fulfillment would be required to use commercial 

Standard Mail Fulfillment Parcels. Request at 2–3. 

4 Id., Attachment C, Competitive Products, 

2115.2, Size and Weight Limitations; see also id., 

2115.6 Prices, Machinable Lightweight Parcels 

(greater than 3.3 ounces) and Irregular Lightweight 

Parcels (3.3 ounces or less) and (greater than 3.3 

ounces). 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21423 Filed 8–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–S 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket No.MC2010–36; Order No. 521] 

Product List Transfer 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a 

recently–filed Postal Service request to 

transfer commercial Standard Mail 

Fulfillment Parcels from the market 

dominant product list to the competitive 

product list. This notice addresses 

procedural steps associated with the 

filing. 

DATES: Comments are due September 

17, 2010; reply comments are due 

October 15, 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 the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

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 et seq., on August 16, 2010, 

the Postal Service filed a request to 

transfer its commercial Standard Mail 

Fulfillment Parcels product from the 

market dominant product list to the 

competitive product list in the Mail 

Classification Schedule (MCS) on file 

with the Commission.1

The Postal Service states that, to avoid 

confusion, this filing is based on the 

assumption that classification changes 

proposed in Docket No. R2010–4 will be 

approved by the Commission prior to 

consideration of this request.2 Request 

at 1, n.1. In that docket, the Postal 

Service proposes to segment Standard 

Mail parcels into two main categories: 

Marketing Parcels and Fulfillment 

Parcels. Current commercial and 

nonprofit Standard Mail Parcels would 

become Standard Mail Fulfillment 

Parcels.3 The Postal Service does not 

propose to transfer nonprofit Standard 

Mail Fulfillment Parcels. Request at 1, 

n.1. The Postal Service suggests that 

upon their transfer to the competitive 

product list, the Standard Mail 

Fulfillment Parcels would be classified 

as a ‘‘Lightweight’’ subcategory of the 

Parcel Select product. Id. at 1. The 

minimum weight would be less than 16 

ounces.4

As required by 39 CFR 3020.31 of the 

Commission’s rules, a copy of 

Governors’ Resolution No. 10–4 is 

included with the Request as 

Attachment A. Attachment B to the 

Request contains the Statement of 

Supporting Justification required by 39 

CFR 3020.32 of the Commission’s rules. 

Attachment C is the proposed draft MCS 

language and prices incorporating the 

language proposed in Docket No. 

R2010–4 as if already approved by the 

Commission with proposed additions 

and deletions for this Request. 

The Postal Service summarizes the 

required Statement of Supporting 

Justification by noting that the current 

classification of parcels weighing less 

than one pound as market dominant 

products, and parcels weighing more 

than one pound as competitive 

products, produces a misalignment in 

the marketplace. Competitors make no 

such distinction and can offer seamless 

shipping options. The transfer would 

allow the Postal Service to offer similar 

comprehensive shipping solutions 

including contracts covering all parcels 

regardless of weight. Id. at 3. 

The Postal Service’s Statement of 

Supporting Justification offers an 

explanation why the transfer to the 

competitive product list will not result 

in violation of the standards in 39 

U.S.C. 3633. Id., Attachment B, at 1. The 

Postal Service notes that in FY 2009, 

commercial Standard Mail Fulfillment 

Parcels and other Standard Mail parcel 

categories had a collective cost coverage 

of 75.23 percent. It requests a 23.3 

percent rate increase in Docket No. 

R2010–4 for Standard Mail parcel 

categories which, if approved, will yield 

a cost coverage in excess of 100 percent. 

Thus, it contends that commercial 

Standard Mail Parcels, if treated as a 

subcategory of Parcel Select, would 

satisfy 39 U.S.C. 3633(a)(1) and (2). Id. 

at 2. 

The Statement of Supporting 

Justification seeks to demonstrate, 

pursuant to 39 CFR 3020.32(d), that the 

requested change does not propose to 

classify as competitive a product over 

which the Postal Service exercises 

sufficient market power that it can, 

without losing a significant level of 

business, set the price of the product 

substantially above costs, raise prices 

significantly, decrease quality, or 

decrease output. Id. at 3–7. The 

Statement of Justification also seeks to 

explain the limited extent Standard 

Mail Fulfillment Parcels are either 

covered by the postal monopoly or 

within the scope of the exceptions or 

suspensions to the Private Express 

Statutes, noting that normally Standard 

Mail Fulfillment Parcels cannot contain 

items required to be sent by First–Class 

Mail. The Postal Service indicates an 

intention to promulgate mailing 

standards in its Domestic Mail Manual 

limiting the inclusion of letters in any 

Lightweight Parcel Select parcel unless 

covered by an exception or suspension 

to the Private Express Statues pursuant 

to 39 CFR parts 310 or 320. Id. at 7–9. 

Pursuant to 39 CFR 3032(f), the Postal 

Service states that the primary 

competitors to its Standard Mail 

Fulfillment Parcel services are the 

ground shipping services offered by 

UPS and FedEx and that each have the 

flexibility to price parcel products to 

maximize profitability. Id. at 9. The 

Postal Service states there is likely a 

distortionary effect on the marketplace 

because Standard Mail Fulfillment 

Parcels are priced below full cost 

coverage. Because of this market 

distortion, the ‘‘[Postal Service] has 

attempted to structure profitable 

contracts with large shippers for 

lightweight parcels but failed because 

its efforts were undercut by its own 

Standard Mail parcel prices.’’ Id. at 10. 

The Postal Service claims the transfer 

should ameliorate any distortionary 

effect on the current pricing structure. 

Id. The Postal Service states that it is 

also losing full network First–Class Mail 

package volume where its competitors 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
53004 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Notices 

offer products with the last mile service 

through the Postal Service. Id. 

The Postal Service states that the 

views of those who use the product are 

mainly concerned that the transfer will 

lead to price increases. In response, the 

Postal Service claims prices will need to 

be increased even absent a transfer to 

the competitive product list. It further 

states that one large customer supports 

transfer which offers the possibility of 

contracts for the product. The Postal 

Service states the transfer will allow 

contracts for complete shipping 

solutions and create mutually beneficial 

comprehensive solutions for shipping 

needs. Id. at 11. The Postal Service is 

not aware of any small business that 

offers products competing with 

commercial Standard Mail Fulfillment 

Parcels. Id. at 11–12. 

II. Notice of Filings 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. MC2010–36 to consider the Postal 

Service’s proposal to transfer 

commercial Standard Mail Fulfillment 

Parcels to the competitive product list. 

Interested persons may submit 

comments on whether the Postal 

Service’s filing in the captioned docket 

is consistent with the policies of 39 

U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, and 39 CFR 

3020 subpart B. Comments are due no 

later than September 17, 2010. Reply 

comments, if any, are due October 15, 

2010. The Postal Service’s filing can be 

accessed via the Commission’s Web site 

(http://www.prc.gov.) 

The Commission appoints James 

Waclawski to serve as Public 

Representative in this docket. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. MC2010–36 for consideration of the 

matters raised in this docket. 

2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, James 

Waclawski is appointed to serve as 

officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) to represent the 

interests of the general public in this 

proceeding. 

3. Comments by interested persons in 

these proceedings are due no later than 

September 17, 2010. 

4. Reply comments by interested 

persons in this proceeding are due no 

later than October 15, 2010. 

5. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21438 Filed 8–27–2010; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–S 

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 

Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended; 

Notice of Computer-Matching Program 

(Railroad Retirement Board—Office of 

Personnel Management) 

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board 

(RRB). 

ACTION: Notice of a renewal of an 

existing computer-matching program 

that expired on August 13, 2010. 

SUMMARY: As required by the Privacy 

Act of 1974, as amended, the RRB is 

issuing public notice of its renewal of an 

ongoing computer-matching program 

with the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM). The purpose of this 

notice is to advise individuals applying 

for or receiving benefits under the 

Railroad Retirement Act of the use made 

by RRB of this information obtained 

from OPM by means of a computer 

match. 

DATES: This matching program becomes 

effective as proposed without further 

notice on October 12, 2010. We will file 

a report of this computer-matching 

program with the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs of the Senate; the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform of 

the House of Representatives; and the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

comment on this publication by writing 

to Ms. Beatrice Ezerski, Secretary to the 

Board, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 

North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 

60611–2092. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Timothy Grant, Chief Privacy Officer, 

Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North 

Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611– 

2092, telephone 312–751–4869 or e-mail 

at tim.grant@rrb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. General 

The Computer-Matching and Privacy 

Protection Act of 1988, (Pub. L. 100– 

503), amended by the Privacy Act of 

1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a) as amended, 

requires a Federal agency participating 

in a computer-matching program to 

publish a notice in the Federal Register 

for all matching programs. 

The Privacy Act, as amended, 

regulates the use of computer-matching 

by Federal agencies when records 

contained in a Privacy Act System of 

Records are matched with other Federal, 

State, or local government records. It 

requires Federal agencies involved in 

computer-matching programs to: 

(1) Negotiate written agreements with 

the other agency or agencies 

participating in the matching programs; 

(2) Obtain the approval of the 

matching agreement by the Data 

Integrity Boards (DIB) of the 

participating Federal agencies; 

(3) Publish notice of the computer 

matching program in the Federal 

Register; 

(4) Furnish detailed reports about 

matching programs to Congress and 

OMB; 

(5) Notify applicants and beneficiaries 

that their records are subject to 

matching; and 

(6) Verify match findings before 

reducing, suspending, terminating, or 

denying a person’s benefits or 

payments. The last notice for this 

matching program was published at 73 

FR 2287–2288 (January 14, 2008). 

B. RRB Computer Matches Subject to 

the Privacy Act 

We have taken appropriate action to 

ensure that all of our computermatching programs comply with the 

requirements of the Privacy Act, as 

amended. 

Notice of Computer-Matching Program, 

RRB With the Office of Personnel 

Management (OMB) 

A. Name of Participating Agencies 

OPM and RRB. 

B. Purpose of the Matching Program 

The purpose of the match is to enable 

the RRB to (1) identify affected RRB 

annuitants who are in receipt of a 

Federal public pension benefit but who 

have not reported receipt of this benefit 

to the RRB, and (2) receive needed 

Federal public pension benefit 

information for affected RRB annuitants 

more timely and accurately. 

C. Authority for Conducting the Match 

Sections 3(a)(1), 4(a)(1) and 4(f)(1) of 

the Railroad Retirement Act, as 

amended, 45 U.S.C. 231b(a)(1), 

231c(a)(1) and 231c(f)(1) require that the 

RRB reduce the Railroad Retirement 

benefits of certain beneficiaries entitled 

to Railroad Retirement employee and/or 

spouse/widow benefits who are also 

entitled to a government pension based 

on their own non-covered earnings. We 

call this reduction a Public Service 

Pension (PSP) offset. 

Section 224 of the Social Security Act, 

as amended, 42 U.S.C. 424a, provides 

for the reduction of disability benefits 

when the disabled worker is also 

entitled to a public disability benefit 

(PDB). We call this a PDB offset. A civil 

service disability benefit is considered a 

PDB. Section 224(h)(1) requires any 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES