47168 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

1 Docket No. ACR2015, Annual Compliance 

Determination Report, Fiscal Year 2015, March 28, 

2016, at 165 (FY 2015 ACD). 

2 Docket No. ACR2015, Third Response of the 

United States Postal Service to Commission 

Requests for Additional Information in the FY 2015 

Annual Compliance Determination, Report 

Regarding Information about Flats Data Systems, 

July 26, 2016 (120-Day Response). 3 Docket No. ACR2015, Commission Information 

Request No. 1, September 27, 2016 (CIR No. 1). 4See Docket No. ACR2015, Order Scheduling 

Technical Conference, September 27, 2016 (Order 

No. 3539). 5 Docket No. ACR2015, Response of the United 

States Postal Service to Commission Information 

Request No. 1, November 28, 2016 (Response to CIR 

No. 1). 6 Docket No. ACR2016, Annual Compliance 

Determination Report, March 28, 2017, at 170. 

requested a six-month extension of the 

comment period for Notice No. 164. In 

its letter, Laffort USA noted the 

proposed rulemaking requested 

comments ‘‘on many other topics of 

great relevance to the U.S. wine 

industry,’’ and that it the comment 

period ‘‘covered the entire holiday 

season.’’ The Laffort USA letter is 

posted as Comment 5 to Notice No. 164 

within Docket No. TTB–2016–0010 on 

the Regulations.gov Web site at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

In response to these requests, TTB is 

reopening the comment period for 

Notice No. 164 for an additional 90 

days. TTB notes that the wine treating 

materials discussed in the regulatory 

amendments in Notice No. 164 have 

been previously approved 

administratively for use by wine 

industry members in the treatment of 

their wine. TTB believes that a 90-day 

reopening of the comment period for 

Notice No. 164 will allow all interested 

parties to fully consider the regulatory 

amendments proposed in that 

document. 

Therefore, comments on Notice No. 

164 are now due to TTB on or before 

January 9, 2018. Comments on Notice 

No. 164 may be submitted as described 

above in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. 

Drafting Information 

Michael Hoover of the Regulations 

and Rulings Division drafted this 

document. 

Signed: September 28, 2017. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2017–21809 Filed 10–10–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3050 

[Docket No. RM2018–1; Order No. 4142] 

Data Enhancements and Reporting 

Requirements for Flats 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is initiating 

a proceeding to explore enhancements 

to the Postal Service’s data systems and 

to facilitate the development of 

consistent reporting requirements. This 

document informs the public of the 

filing, invites public comment, and 

takes other administrative steps. 

DATES: Comments are due: December 4, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http://

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. Background 

III. Next Step 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

The Commission initiates this 

proceeding to explore potential 

enhancements to the Postal Service’s 

data systems and to facilitate the 

development of consistent reporting 

requirements. These data enhancements 

and reporting requirements will be used 

to measure, track, and report the cost 

and service performance issues 

concerning flat-shaped mailpieces 

(flats). 

II. Background 

In the FY 2015 ACD, the Commission 

identified and analyzed six ‘‘pinch 

points’’ that contribute to cost and 

service issues for flats: 1

• Bundle processing 

• Low productivity on automated 

equipment 

• Manual sorting 

• Productivity and service issues in 

allied operations 

• Increased transportation time and cost 

• Last mile/delivery 

Using data available at the time, the 

Commission identified and discussed 

flats cost and/or service issues for each 

individual pinch point. See FY 2015 

ACD at 165–180. However, the 

Commission acknowledged that there 

was a ‘‘lack of comprehensive data’’ 

which prevents the Postal Service and 

the Commission from measuring the 

impact of specific initiatives designed to 

improve cost and service issues for flats. 

Id. at 180. 

The Commission directed the Postal 

Service to identify a method to measure, 

track, and report the cost and service 

performance issues relating to each 

individual pinch point identified by the 

Commission at the most granular level 

practicable. Id. at 181. To increase 

transparency, the Commission requested 

certain information in support of the 

identified method: Available data to 

support methods to measure, track and 

report on cost and service issues related 

to flats, information on the cost to 

produce and aggregate current data, 

additional data that would be needed to 

support a method to measure, track and 

report on cost and service issues related 

to flats and the cost to produce that 

data, and the identification of 

information necessary to develop, 

implement, monitor, and quantify 

results for a comprehensive plan to 

improve flats service performance and 

cost coverage if an ideal data system 

were available. Id. 

The Postal Service responded to the 

Commission’s Chapter 6 directive on 

July 26, 2016.2 The Postal Service 

provided an extensive discussion of 

data systems that could be used to 

measure certain aspects of individual 

pinch points; however, it did not 

provide a specific method for each 

pinch point to measure, track, and 

report on cost and service issues related 

to flats. To redirect the Postal Service’s 

response, the Commission issued 

Commission Information Request No. 

1.3 In Order No. 3539, the Commission 

scheduled an off-the-record technical 

conference on October 21, 2016, to 

determine the status of the Postal 

Service’s proposed methods as 

requested in the original Commission 

Directive.4 The Postal Service filed its 

response to CIR No. 1 on November 28, 

2016.5 In both its 120-Day Response and 

in its Response to CIR No. 1, the Postal 

Service provided general information 

related to all pinch points, and 

information specific to each individual 

pinch point. The Postal Service’s 

responses were informative; however, 

the Commission found that neither 

response addressed the Commission’s 

original and main request to develop a 

method to measure, track, and report the 

cost and service performance issues 

relating to the individual pinch points.6

The Postal Service stated that the 

information it provided is ‘‘the first step 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 47169 

in an evolutionary process to develop a 

set of data reports that the Commission 

and the Postal Service can agree add 

value to the question of how best to 

track and report on metrics that will 

ultimately lead to improvements in the 

service and efficiency of flats 

processing.’’ Response to CIR No. 1 at 3. 

III. Next Steps 

Although the Postal Service discussed 

its data systems and proposed metrics 

for certain pinch points, the Postal 

Service did not explain how it will use 

this information to report on issues 

relating to flats. The Commission finds 

that measuring various cost and service 

impacts associated with flats will 

provide greater insight into the issues. 

Tracking these issues over time will 

assist the Commission and the Postal 

Service with developing solutions to 

reduce cost and improve service 

performance of flats. Reporting on these 

measures and tracking will enhance the 

transparency and ability of stakeholders 

with vested interests to participate in 

the development of a plan to improve 

flats cost and service issues. 

At this stage in the docket, and given 

the information already provided by the 

Postal Service, the Commission seeks to 

better understand the data collected by 

the Postal Service and the capabilities of 

the systems that collect that data. In the 

information request filed along with this 

Order, the Commission requests that the 

Postal Service provide additional 

information about certain data systems 

and reports. The information request 

seeks, among other things, information 

about the capabilities of the data 

systems, information about planned 

improvements to the data systems, and 

ideas as to how certain data systems 

could be used to measure the impact on 

flats costs and service performance 

issues. The Commission also requests 

certain summary data reports that are 

available from the various data systems. 

Responses to the information request 

should be submitted no later than 60 

days from the date of this Order. If the 

Postal Service identifies any other data 

or information that would be helpful to 

the goal of measuring cost and service 

impacts on flats, the Postal Service 

should also submit it with the requested 

information. 

Once the information is received and 

analyzed, the Commission intends to 

schedule a technical conference to 

review the data submitted by the Postal 

Service and to better understand the 

capabilities of the Postal Service’s 

systems. As explained above, the 

Commission intends to use information 

provided by the Postal Service in this 

proceeding to develop a detailed 

proposal of data enhancements and 

reporting requirements for consideration 

in this docket. The Commission will 

invite public comment on the detailed 

proposal before adopting any final rule. 

The Commission anticipates that this 

information will lead to the 

development of measureable goals to 

decrease the costs and improve the 

service performance of flats. 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. RM2018–1 to explore data 

enhancements and to facilitate the 

development of consistent reporting 

requirements that will be used to 

evaluate the cost and service 

performance issues associated with 

flats. 

2. Responses to the Commission 

Information Request No. 1, in this 

docket, should be provided 60 days 

from the date of this Order. 

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

Commission appoints Katalin K. 

Clendenin 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. 

Stacy L. Ruble, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2017–21855 Filed 10–10–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0513; FRL–9968–11– 

Region 7] 

Approval of Missouri Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Infrastructure 

SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual 

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

elements of a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision from the State of Missouri 

for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate 

Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) and two 

state statutes into the SIP to address the 

requirements relating to conflicts of 

interest found in section 128 of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). Section 110 of the 

CAA requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

new or revised NAAQS promulgated by 

EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred 

to as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. The 

infrastructure requirements are designed 

to ensure that the structural components 

of each state’s air quality management 

program are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA. In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

Federal Register, we are approving the 

state’s SIP revisions as a direct final rule 

without a prior proposed rule. If we 

receive no adverse comment, we will 

not take further action on this proposed 

rule. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

November 13, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2017–0513, to 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://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tracey Casburn, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

(913) 551–7016, or by email at 

casburn.tracey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document proposes to take action on 

State of Missouri Infrastructure SIP 

Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. We have published a direct 

final rule approving the state’s SIP 

revisions in the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register, because we view this as a 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS