New Competitive Postal Product, 36276-36277 [E9-17496]
Download as PDF
36276
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John P. Boska,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch I–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9–17386 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. CP2009–46 and CP2009–47;
Order No. 249]
New Competitive Postal Product
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a
recently-filed Postal Service request to
add two additional Global Plus 1
contracts to the Competitive Product
List. This notice addresses procedural
steps associated with these filings.
DATES: Comments are due July 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202–789–6820 and
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Notice of Filing
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Background
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
On July 13, 2009, the Postal Service
filed a notice, pursuant to 39 U.S.C.
3633 and 39 CFR 3015.5, announcing
that it has entered into two additional
Global Plus 1 contracts, which it states
fits within the previously established
Global Plus Contracts product.1 The
Postal Service states that the instant
contracts are functionally equivalent to
previously submitted Global Plus 1
contracts, are filed in accordance with
Order No. 85, and are supported by
Governors’ Decision No. 08–8 filed in
Docket No. CP2008–8.2 Notice at 1.
The Notice also states that in Docket
No. CP2008–8, the Governors have
established prices and classifications for
competitive products not of general
applicability for Global Plus Contracts.3
1 Notice of the United States Postal Service of
Filing Two Functionally Equivalent Global Plus 1
Contracts Negotiated Service Agreements, July 13,
2009 (Notice).
2 See Docket No. CP2008–8 through CP2008–10,
PRC Order No. 85, Order Concerning Global Plus
Negotiated Service Agreements, June 27, 2008.
3 See Docket No.CP2008–8, Notice of United
States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:04 Jul 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
The Postal Service states that the instant
contracts are the immediate successor
contracts to those in Docket Nos.
CP2008–9 and CP2008–10, both of
which are to expire soon, which the
Commission found to be functionally
equivalent in Order No. 85.
The Postal Service contends that the
instant contracts should be included
within the Global Plus 1 product on the
Competitive Product List. Id.
In support, the Postal Service has also
filed redacted versions of each contract
and related materials as Attachments 1–
A and 1–B. Redacted versions of the
certified statements required by 39 CFR
3015.5 are included as Attachments 2–
A and 2–B, respectively. The Postal
Service states that the contracts should
be included within the Global Plus 1
product and requests that the instant
contracts be considered the ‘‘baseline
contracts for future functional
equivalency analyses concerning this
product.’’ Id. at 2.
The instant contracts. The Postal
Service filed the instant contracts
pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5. The
contracts become effective August 1,
2009, unless regulatory reviews affect
that date, and have a one-year term.
The Postal Service maintains that
certain portions of each contract and
certified statement required by 39 CFR
3015.5(c)(2), containing names and
identifying information of the Global
Plus 1 customers, related financial
information, as well as the
accompanying analyses that provide
prices, terms, conditions, and financial
projections should remain under seal.
Id. at 3.
The Postal Service asserts the
contracts are functionally equivalent
because they share similar cost and
market characteristics and should be
classified as a single product. Id. at 3.
It states that while the precursor
contracts filed in Docket Nos. CP2008–
9 and CP2008–10 exhibited minor
distinctions based on differences in
customers’ negotiations, business needs
or relationship with the Postal Service,
the new versions of the agreements
differ primarily in the method used for
structuring the discounts offered. Id. at
4. The Postal Service also states that the
instant contracts’ customers are the
same Postal Qualified Wholesalers
(PQWs) as the parties to the contracts in
Docket Nos. CP2008–9 and CP2008–10.
The essence of the service to the PQW
customers is offering price-based
incentives to commit large amounts of
mail volume or postage revenue for
International Priority Airmail (IPA),
Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global
Plus Contracts, June 2, 2008, at 1.
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
International Surface Air Lift (ISAL),
Express Mail International (EMI), and
Priority Mail International (PMI).4
The Postal Service indicates that the
instant contracts have material
differences which include removing
retroactivity provisions; clarifying
aspects subject to regulatory oversight;
expanding entry locations; restructuring
price incentives, commitments, and
penalties; and clarifying the parties’
obligations in the event of termination.
Id. at 4–7.
The Postal Service maintains these
differences only add detail or amplify
processes included in prior Global Plus
1 contracts. It contends because the
contracts have the same cost attributes
and methodology as well as similar cost
and market characteristics, the
differences do not affect the
fundamental service being offered or the
essential structure of the contracts. Id. at
7–8. It states the contracts are
substantially similar both to one another
and to the precursor Global Plus 1
contracts. Therefore, it asserts these
contracts are ‘‘functionally equivalent in
all pertinent respects.’’ Id. at 8.
II. Notice of Filing
The Commission establishes Docket
Nos. CP2009–46 and CP2009–47 for
consideration of the matters related to
the contract identified in the Postal
Service’s Notice.
Interested persons may submit
comments on whether the instant
contracts are consistent with the
policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3622, or
3642. Comments are due no later than
July 23, 2009.
The public portions of these filings
can be accessed via the Commission’s
Web site (https://www.prc.gov).
The Commission appoints Michael J.
Ravnitzky to serve as Public
Representative in these dockets.
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is Ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
Nos. CP2009–46 and CP2009–47 for
consideration of the issues raised in
these dockets.
2. Comments by interested persons on
issues in these proceedings are due no
later than July 23, 2009.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Michael
J. Ravnitzky is appointed to serve as
officer of the Commission (Public
Representative) to represent the
4 The Postal Service states the commitments also
account for Global Bulk Economy and Global Direct
items mailed under a separate but related Global
Plus 2 contract with each customer. The Global Plus
2 contracts are the subject of a separate competitive
products proceeding.
E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM
22JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices
interests of the general public in these
proceedings.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this order in the Federal
Register.
Issued: July 16, 2009.
By the Commission.
Judith M. Grady,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–17496 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No.
28819; File No. 812–13578]
The Alger Funds, et al.; Notice of
Application
July 16, 2009.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’).
ACTION: Notice of an application for an
order pursuant to (a) section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940
(‘‘Act’’) granting an exemption from
sections 18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b)
section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act granting an
exemption from section 12(d)(1) of the
Act; (c) sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the
Act granting an exemption from sections
17(a)(1), 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Act;
and (d) section 17(d) of the Act and rule
17d–1 under the Act to permit certain
joint arrangements.
service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of
service. Hearing requests should state
the nature of the writer’s interest, the
reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the
Commission’s Secretary.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20549–
1090. Applicants, 111 Fifth Avenue,
New York, New York 10003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill
Ehrlich, Attorney Adviser, at (202) 551–
6819 or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief,
at (202) 551–6821 (Division of
Investment Management, Office of
Investment Company Regulation).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
following is a summary of the
application. The complete application
may be obtained via the Commission’s
Web site by searching for the file
number, or an applicant using the
Company name box, at https://
www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by
calling (202) 551–8090.
Applicants’ Representations
1. Each Trust is organized as a
Massachusetts business trust and is
registered under the Act as an open-end
management investment company. Each
Trust consists of one or more series
(‘‘Funds’’). FAM, a New York
corporation and an indirect whollyowned subsidiary of Alger Associates,
SUMMARY OF THE APPLICATION:
Inc., is registered as an investment
Applicants request an order that would
adviser under the Investment Advisers
permit certain registered open-end
Act of 1940 and serves as the
management investment companies to
investment adviser and administrator of
participate in a joint lending and
each Fund.1
borrowing facility.
2. Some Funds may make short-term
Applicants: The Alger Funds, The
loans to banks or other entities by
Alger American Fund, The Alger
purchasing bank time deposits. Other
Institutional Funds, The Alger Funds II
Funds may need to borrow money from
(formerly, The Spectra Funds), and
the same or similar banks for temporary
Alger China-U.S. Growth Fund
(formerly, The China-U.S. Growth Fund) purposes to satisfy redemption requests,
to cover unanticipated cash shortfalls
(each, a ‘‘Trust’’ and collectively, the
‘‘Trusts’’), and Fred Alger Management, such as a trade ‘‘fail’’ in which cash
payment for a security sold by a Fund
Inc. (‘‘FAM’’).
has been delayed, or for other temporary
Filing Dates: The application was
purposes. Currently, certain Funds have
filed on September 25, 2008 and
access to uncommitted bank loans from
amended on March 12, 2009, June 24,
their custodian bank for temporary
2009 and July 14, 2009.
Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An borrowing purposes.
order granting the application will be
1 Applicants request that the relief also apply to
issued unless the Commission orders a
hearing. Interested persons may request any other registered management investment
company that currently, or in the future, is part of
a hearing by writing to the
the same ‘‘group of investment companies’’ as the
Commission’s Secretary and serving
Trusts, as defined in section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the
Act (included in the term ‘‘Trusts’’). All entities that
applicants with a copy of the request,
currently intend to rely on the requested order have
personally or by mail. Hearing requests
been named as applicants. Any other entity that
should be received by the Commission
relies on the requested order in the future will
by 5:30 p.m. on August 10, 2009, and
comply with the terms and conditions set forth in
the application.
should be accompanied by proof of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:04 Jul 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36277
3. If Funds borrow from their
custodian, they pay interest on the loan
at a rate that is significantly higher than
the rate that is earned by other (nonborrowing) Funds on investments in
bank time deposits. Applicants assert
that this differential represents the
profit earned by the lender on loans and
is not attributable to any material
difference in the credit quality or risk of
such transactions. In addition, while
bank borrowings generally could supply
needed cash to cover unanticipated
redemptions and sales fails, the
borrowing Funds would incur
commitment fees and/or other charges
involved in obtaining a bank loan.
4. The Trusts seek to enter into master
interfund lending agreements
(‘‘Interfund Lending Agreements’’) with
each other on behalf of the Funds that
would permit each Fund to lend money
directly to and borrow directly from
other Funds through a credit facility for
temporary purposes (an ‘‘Interfund
Loan’’). Applicants believe that the
proposed credit facility would both
substantially reduce the Funds’
potential borrowing costs and enhance
the ability of the lending Funds to earn
higher rates of interest on their shortterm lendings. Although the proposed
credit facility would substantially
reduce the Funds’ need to borrow from
banks, the Funds would be free to
establish and maintain committed lines
of credit or other borrowing
arrangements with unaffiliated banks.
Alger Money Market Fund, a series of
The Alger Funds, will not participate as
a borrower in the proposed credit
facility. Additionally, a number of
Funds are barred by their fundamental
policies from participating as lenders in
the proposed credit facility.2
5. Applicants anticipate that the
proposed credit facility would provide a
borrowing Fund with significant savings
at times when the cash position of the
borrowing Fund is insufficient to meet
temporary cash requirements. This
situation could arise when shareholder
redemptions exceed anticipated
volumes and certain Funds have
insufficient cash on hand to satisfy such
redemptions. When the Funds liquidate
portfolio securities to meet redemption
requests, they often do not receive
payment in settlement for up to three
days (or longer for certain foreign
transactions). However, redemption
2 Each of Alger LargeCap Growth Fund, Alger
SmallCap Growth Institutional Fund, Alger MidCap
Growth Institutional Fund, Alger LargeCap Growth
Institutional Fund and Alger Capital Appreciation
Institutional Fund is prohibited from ‘‘making loans
to others, except through purchasing qualified debt
obligations, lending portfolio securities or entering
into repurchase agreements.’’
E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM
22JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36276-36277]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17496]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. CP2009-46 and CP2009-47; Order No. 249]
New Competitive Postal Product
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a recently-filed Postal Service
request to add two additional Global Plus 1 contracts to the
Competitive Product List. This notice addresses procedural steps
associated with these filings.
DATES: Comments are due July 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing
Online system at https://www.prc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202-789-6820 and stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Notice of Filing
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Background
On July 13, 2009, the Postal Service filed a notice, pursuant to 39
U.S.C. 3633 and 39 CFR 3015.5, announcing that it has entered into two
additional Global Plus 1 contracts, which it states fits within the
previously established Global Plus Contracts product.\1\ The Postal
Service states that the instant contracts are functionally equivalent
to previously submitted Global Plus 1 contracts, are filed in
accordance with Order No. 85, and are supported by Governors' Decision
No. 08-8 filed in Docket No. CP2008-8.\2\ Notice at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notice of the United States Postal Service of Filing Two
Functionally Equivalent Global Plus 1 Contracts Negotiated Service
Agreements, July 13, 2009 (Notice).
\2\ See Docket No. CP2008-8 through CP2008-10, PRC Order No. 85,
Order Concerning Global Plus Negotiated Service Agreements, June 27,
2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Notice also states that in Docket No. CP2008-8, the Governors
have established prices and classifications for competitive products
not of general applicability for Global Plus Contracts.\3\ The Postal
Service states that the instant contracts are the immediate successor
contracts to those in Docket Nos. CP2008-9 and CP2008-10, both of which
are to expire soon, which the Commission found to be functionally
equivalent in Order No. 85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Docket No.CP2008-8, Notice of United States Postal
Service of Governors' Decision Establishing Prices and
Classifications for Global Plus Contracts, June 2, 2008, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service contends that the instant contracts should be
included within the Global Plus 1 product on the Competitive Product
List. Id.
In support, the Postal Service has also filed redacted versions of
each contract and related materials as Attachments 1-A and 1-B.
Redacted versions of the certified statements required by 39 CFR 3015.5
are included as Attachments 2-A and 2-B, respectively. The Postal
Service states that the contracts should be included within the Global
Plus 1 product and requests that the instant contracts be considered
the ``baseline contracts for future functional equivalency analyses
concerning this product.'' Id. at 2.
The instant contracts. The Postal Service filed the instant
contracts pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5. The contracts become effective
August 1, 2009, unless regulatory reviews affect that date, and have a
one-year term.
The Postal Service maintains that certain portions of each contract
and certified statement required by 39 CFR 3015.5(c)(2), containing
names and identifying information of the Global Plus 1 customers,
related financial information, as well as the accompanying analyses
that provide prices, terms, conditions, and financial projections
should remain under seal. Id. at 3.
The Postal Service asserts the contracts are functionally
equivalent because they share similar cost and market characteristics
and should be classified as a single product. Id. at 3. It states that
while the precursor contracts filed in Docket Nos. CP2008-9 and CP2008-
10 exhibited minor distinctions based on differences in customers'
negotiations, business needs or relationship with the Postal Service,
the new versions of the agreements differ primarily in the method used
for structuring the discounts offered. Id. at 4. The Postal Service
also states that the instant contracts' customers are the same Postal
Qualified Wholesalers (PQWs) as the parties to the contracts in Docket
Nos. CP2008-9 and CP2008-10. The essence of the service to the PQW
customers is offering price-based incentives to commit large amounts of
mail volume or postage revenue for International Priority Airmail
(IPA), International Surface Air Lift (ISAL), Express Mail
International (EMI), and Priority Mail International (PMI).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Postal Service states the commitments also account for
Global Bulk Economy and Global Direct items mailed under a separate
but related Global Plus 2 contract with each customer. The Global
Plus 2 contracts are the subject of a separate competitive products
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service indicates that the instant contracts have
material differences which include removing retroactivity provisions;
clarifying aspects subject to regulatory oversight; expanding entry
locations; restructuring price incentives, commitments, and penalties;
and clarifying the parties' obligations in the event of termination.
Id. at 4-7.
The Postal Service maintains these differences only add detail or
amplify processes included in prior Global Plus 1 contracts. It
contends because the contracts have the same cost attributes and
methodology as well as similar cost and market characteristics, the
differences do not affect the fundamental service being offered or the
essential structure of the contracts. Id. at 7-8. It states the
contracts are substantially similar both to one another and to the
precursor Global Plus 1 contracts. Therefore, it asserts these
contracts are ``functionally equivalent in all pertinent respects.''
Id. at 8.
II. Notice of Filing
The Commission establishes Docket Nos. CP2009-46 and CP2009-47 for
consideration of the matters related to the contract identified in the
Postal Service's Notice.
Interested persons may submit comments on whether the instant
contracts are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3622, or
3642. Comments are due no later than July 23, 2009.
The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the
Commission's Web site (https://www.prc.gov).
The Commission appoints Michael J. Ravnitzky to serve as Public
Representative in these dockets.
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is Ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. CP2009-46 and CP2009-47
for consideration of the issues raised in these dockets.
2. Comments by interested persons on issues in these proceedings
are due no later than July 23, 2009.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Michael J. Ravnitzky is appointed to
serve as officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent
the
[[Page 36277]]
interests of the general public in these proceedings.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the
Federal Register.
Issued: July 16, 2009.
By the Commission.
Judith M. Grady,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17496 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P