[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 185 (Friday, September 24, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58449-58450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23927]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. RM2010-13; Order No. 537]


Postal Rates

AGENCY:  Postal Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 58450]]

SUMMARY:  This notice establishes a docket to solicit comments on the 
analyses, arguments, and proposals concerning technical issues related 
to workshare discount design. The proceeding will allow certain issues 
raised in an earlier proceeding to be fully addressed.

DATES:  Comments are due: November 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 FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by telephone for advice on alternatives to 
electronic filing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4d3e39283d252823633e252c3f2b202c230d3d3f2e632a223b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ff8c8b9a8f979a91d18c979e8d99929e91bf8f8d9cd1989089">[email protected]</span></a> or 202-789-6820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order No. 536 resolves several important 
threshold legal and policy issues underlying the design of workshare 
discounts. The Commission concluded that the pricing constraint on 
workshare discounts established in 39 U.S.C. 3622(e) may apply within 
or across products, as that term is defined and employed in the Postal 
Accountability and Enhancement Act.\1\ It concludes that subsection 
3622(e) implements a substantial portion of the policies that underlay 
the Efficient Component Pricing rule as that principle has been 
articulated in prior regulatory practice. It also concludes that 
identifying the groups of mail between which worksharing relationships 
should be recognized for purposes of subsection 3622(e) requires 
identification of mail that serves the same market and is distinguished 
from other mail serving that market predominantly by the costs that 
worksharing activity avoids. The selection of an appropriate base or 
reference group from which the costs avoided by worksharing are to be 
calculated depends on what components of the base group are likely to 
shift to the workshared group in response to changes in their relative 
prices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pub. L. 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006) (PAEA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applying these principles to mail classes, Order No. 536 concludes 
that there is a worksharing relationship between presort First-Class 
Mail and single-piece First-Class Mail that is metered or bears 
Information Based Indicia (IBI). In this docket, the Commission 
solicits comments on the appropriate base group for measuring First-
Class Mail workshare discounts. Commenters should feel free to discuss 
the merits of the current Bulk Metered Mail (BMM) base category as well 
as a number of already suggested alternatives, including IBI mail, a 
weighted average of BMM and IBI mail, ``Qualified PC Postage'' mail, or 
some other group of single-piece First-Class Mail. It also solicits 
comments on the specific cost characteristics that the base category 
selected should have.
    Order No. 536 also concludes that Saturation Mail is not in a 
worksharing relationship with other groups of Standard Mail. 
Accordingly, there is no need to further examine the issue of 
identifying an appropriate reference category for pricing Saturation 
Mail in a follow-on proceeding.
    Order No. 536 contemplates that this follow-on proceeding will also 
consider technical proposals to revise or refine the manner in which 
avoided costs are modeled. The Postal Service's comments in Docket No. 
RM2009-3, for example, mention its intention to propose changes to the 
way some cost pools are classified for purposes of cost avoidance 
analysis (whether they should be treated as proportional, fixed, or 
non-worksharing related). The comments of the American Postal Workers 
Union, AFL-CIO in that docket express a more general desire to re-
evaluate and modify the current method of classifying avoided cost 
pools.
    In Docket No. RM2009-3, various parties expressed an intent to 
propose changes to the way delivery and other costs are estimated in 
calculating the costs avoided by presort First-Class Mail. Comments 
suggested de-averaging rates for First-Class Mail by indicia, the use 
of two Cost and Revenue Analysis adjustment factors to develop 
workshare discounts, and a form of pre-barcoding discount that would 
recognize the savings generated by single-piece First-Class Mail that 
is CASS-certified and bears an Intelligent Mail barcode. All of these 
issues are eligible for consideration in this docket.
    It is ordered:
    1. The Commission establishes Docket No.RM2010-13 to consider 
analyses, arguments, and proposals concerning technical issues that 
relate to the design of workshare discounts, as described in the body 
of this order.
    2. Comments are due on or before November 15, 2010.
    3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Emmett Rand 
Costich to represent the interests of the general public in this 
proceeding.
    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this notice in 
the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Shoshana M. Grove,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23927 Filed 9-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-S


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>