Proposal To Revise Service Standards for First-Class Mail, Periodicals, and Standard Mail, 58433-58436 [2011-24149]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
months did not exceed four million
megawatt-hours.59
55. Proposed Reliability Standard
PRC–023–2 modifies currently existing
Reliability Standard PRC–023–1 which
requires applicable entities to set
protective relays according to specific
criteria, to communicate about such
settings with specified entities, and to
conduct assessments to determine the
applicability of the Standard to 100–200
kV facilities. The proposed standard
modifies PRC–023–1 by (1) Increasing
communication and documentation
requirements, (2) extending the
applicability of the Standard to formerly
excluded relays, and (3) standardizing
the terms of the assessment whose terms
were formerly not specified. In addition,
proposed PRC–023–2 extends the
current requirement that planning
coordinators annually assess which
100–200 kV circuits must be brought
into compliance with the Standard and
will require planning coordinators to
carry out the assessment with respect to
some sub-100 kV facilities.
56. Comparison of the NERC
compliance registry with data submitted
to the Energy Information
Administration on Form EIA–861
indicates that perhaps as many 103
transmission owners, 329 distribution
providers, 46 generation owners, and 8
planning coordinators qualify as small
entities. However, under NERC’s
compliance registration program,
entities may be registered for multiple
functions, so these numbers incorporate
some double counting. The net number
of registered entities that qualify as
small entities responding to this rule
will be approximately 339 entities
registered as a transmission owner, a
distribution provider, or a generation
owner that is also a transmission owner
and/or a distribution provider, and 8
planning coordinators. The proposed
rule directly affects each of the small
entities. Therefore, FERC has
determined that this proposed rule will
have an impact on a substantial number
of small entities. However, the
Commission has determined that the
impact on entities affected by the
proposed rule will not be significant.
The Commission estimates that in order
to comply with the Standard’s
modification of existing requirements
each of the small entities registered as
planning coordinators will face a cost of
$2,680 and each of the remaining small
entities (transmission owners,
distribution providers, or generation
owners that are also transmission
owners and/or distribution providers)
will face a cost of $3,512. Accordingly,
59 13
CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n. 1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:46 Sep 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
the Commission determines that the
incremental cost of Reliability Standard
PRC–023–2 (going from PRC–023–1 to
PRC–023–2) is minimal, and should not
present a significant operating cost to
any of the small entities.
57. Based on this understanding, the
Commission certifies that this
Reliability Standard will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
58. The Commission invites comment
from members of the public regarding
the accuracy of the certification
provided here, the economic analysis,
and its underlying assumptions.
VII. Comment Procedures
59. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
notice to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due November 21, 2011.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM11–16–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
60. Commenters may submit
comments, identified by Docket No.
RM11–16–000 and in accordance with
the requirements posted on the
Commission’s Web site, https://www.
ferc.gov. Comments may be submitted
by any of the following methods:
• Agency Web site: Documents
created electronically using word
processing software should be filed in
native applications or print-to-PDF
format, and not in a scanned format, at
https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
efiling.asp.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters
unable to file comments electronically
must mail or hand deliver their
comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. These
requirements can be found on the
Commission’s Web site, see, e.g., the
‘‘Quick Reference Guide for Paper
Submissions,’’ available at https://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp or
via phone from FERC Online Support at
(202) 502–6652 or toll-free at 1 (866)
208–3676.
61. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58433
VIII. Document Availability
62. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov)
and in FERC’s Public Reference Room
during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.
to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
63. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field.
64. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll
free at 1 (866) 208–3676) or e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-mail the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–24167 Filed 9–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 121
Proposal To Revise Service Standards
for First-Class Mail, Periodicals, and
Standard Mail
Postal ServiceTM.
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Postal Service seeks
public comment on a proposal to revise
the service standard regulations
contained in 39 CFR part 121. Among
other things, the proposal involves
eliminating the expectation of overnight
service for First-Class Mail and
Periodicals, and, for each of these
classes, narrowing the two-day delivery
range and enlarging the three-day
delivery range. One major effect of the
proposal would be to facilitate a
significant consolidation of the Postal
Service’s processing and transportation
networks.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
58434
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Comments must be received on
or before October 21, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be mailed to Manager, Industry
Engagement and Outreach, United
States Postal Service, 475 L’Enfant
Plaza, SW., Room 4617, Washington, DC
20260. Comments also may be
transmitted via e-mail 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Frost, Industry Engagement
and Outreach, 202–268–8093; or Emily
Rosenberg, Network Analytics, 202–
268–5585.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal
Service’s processing and transportation
networks were developed, over many
decades of growing mail volumes,
largely to achieve service standards for
First-Class Mail and Periodicals,
particularly their overnight service
standards. In Section 302 of the Postal
Accountability and Enhancement Act of
2006, Congress found that the Postal
Service’s networks were larger than
necessary and directed the Postal
DATES:
Service to consolidate its infrastructure
to better align with changing conditions.
Since then, the Postal Service has
vigorously pursued operational
consolidation opportunities to reduce
excess capacity in its networks.
During the same time period,
however, mail volumes have declined
substantially, such that the Postal
Service’s processing and transportation
networks exhibit more excess capacity
in relation to current and projected mail
volumes than previously anticipated. As
a result of the sharp revenue declines
associated with falling volumes, as well
as other statutorily mandated costs, the
Postal Service has experienced
significant financial losses for the past
four years. Unfortunately, further
network consolidations (beyond those
that have already been performed or are
currently under study), which are
necessary to align the Postal Service’s
infrastructure with current and
projected mail volumes and to bring
operating costs in line with revenues,
will for the most part be unachievable
without a relaxation of certain service
standards for First-Class Mail,
Periodicals, and Standard Mail. The
Postal Service is therefore exploring a
proposal (the Proposal) to revise these
service standards.
I. Proposed Service Standard Revisions
The Postal Service established its
current service standards for marketdominant products on December 19,
2007, in accordance with 39 U.S.C.
3691. The service standards for FirstClass Mail, as set forth in 39 CFR 121.1,
range from 1 to 3 delivery days for mail
that travels within the contiguous
United States, and 1 to 5 delivery days
for mail that originates or destinates in
Alaska, Hawaii, or the U.S. territories.
One aspect of the Proposal would be to
revise 39 CFR 121.1 such that the
service standards for First-Class Mail
that travels within the contiguous
United States would become 2 to 3
delivery days. Similarly, the service
standards for First-Class Mail that
originates or destinates in Alaska,
Hawaii, or the U.S. territories would
become 2 to 5 delivery days.
In other words, the Postal Service
would eliminate the expectation of
overnight service for First-Class Mail,
narrow the two-day delivery range, and
enlarge the three-day delivery range.
These changes would apply to all FirstClass Mail, including letters, flats, and
parcels.1 The potential impact of the
Proposal on First-Class Mail is
illustrated below:
PROPORTION OF FIRST-CLASS MAIL VOLUME BY SERVICE STANDARD
Current
(percent)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
1-day
2-day
3-day
4-day
5-day
..............................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................
Because service standards for a
portion of Periodicals are linked to
First-Class Mail service standards, the
Postal Service would revise the
Periodicals service standards as well. As
specified in 39 CFR 121.2, the service
standards for Periodicals presently
range from 1 to 9 delivery days within
the contiguous United States. Under the
Proposal, the service standards for both
end-to-end and destination-entry
Periodicals within the contiguous
United States would be revised to a
range of 2 to 9 delivery days.
The substantial consolidation of the
mail processing network made possible
by the above service standard revisions
would result in the elimination of some
facilities at which Standard Mail users
currently enter mail. In particular, it is
possible that Area Distribution Centers
(ADCs) would no longer be available for
entering mail. Therefore, it is possible
that the Proposal could require a
revision to the current service standard
for end-to-end Standard Mail entered at
ADCs, as set forth in 39 CFR 121.3(a)(2).
The exact nature of this revision is
presently unclear.
In addition, although the service
standards for other Postal Service
products would not be revised, all
Postal Service products could
experience changes in specific 3-digit
1 As the Postal Service stated when it established
the current service standards, ‘‘there are finite
limits in the level of service standard differentiation
that can be effectively managed on the workroom
floors of a complex logistical network.’’ Modern
Service Standards for Market-Dominant Products,
72 FR 72221 (Dec. 19, 2007). Therefore, any service
standard revisions adopted by the Postal Service
will continue to apply at the class level.
2 While competitive products’ service standards
are not published, the transit times for competitive
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:46 Sep 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Proposed
(percent)
41.5
26.6
31.6
0.3
<0.1
0
50.6
49.1
0.3
<0.1
ZIP Code origin-destination pairs’
transit times. The changed transit times
would remain within the current ranges
set forth in each product’s service
standards.2
II. Changes to Mail Processing and
Transportation Networks
If the Postal Service were to revise
service standards as described above, it
could significantly improve operating
efficiency and lower the operating costs
of its mail processing and transportation
networks. To meet overnight service
standards for First-Class Mail,
processing facilities currently initiate
their primary and secondary sortation
products would remain within the overall ranges
that are marketed for those products (such as 1–2
delivery days for Express Mail, and 1–3 delivery
days for Priority Mail).
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
cycles well into the evening and early
morning hours. In particular, processing
facilities generally run their Delivery
Point Sequencing programs (DPS)
between 12:30 a.m. and 7 a.m. DPS is
the sortation of the next day’s
destinating letter- and flat-shaped mail
pieces into the precise order in which
they will be delivered on carrier routes.
After mail is run through DPS, it is
transported to delivery units, where it is
taken by carriers for delivery. The
processing window for DPS operations
is set late in the night so that all
originating First-Class Mail collected
from a processing facility’s overnight
service area on a particular day can
reach the facility before DPS is run that
night. This is done to ensure that the
portion of the originating First-Class
Mail that destinates in the facility’s
service area is run through DPS that
night and delivered by carriers the next
day, fulfilling that mail’s overnight
service standard. Thus, the arrival time
of First-Class Mail with an overnight
service standard largely dictates the
start time for DPS processing.
By eliminating overnight service
standards for First-Class Mail, and thus
eliminating the need for processing
facilities to wait into the night for mail
collected during the day to reach the
facilities, the Postal Service could move
the time for its primary and secondary
sortations to much earlier in the day.
Under the Proposal, the Postal Service
would institute earlier critical entry
times and redesign its network so that
mail that needs to be processed on a
particular day would reach mail
processing facilities by 8 a.m.
Consequently, the Postal Service could
begin running DPS at noon. Thus, DPS
could be run for 16 hours (12 p.m. to 4
a.m.) instead of 6.5 hours (12:30 a.m. to
7 a.m.) each day.
The Postal Service could also reduce
the amount of manual casing that occurs
at delivery units. Currently, some FirstClass Mail Flats and Periodicals whose
zones are processed on the Flats
Sequencing System (FSS) arrive at mail
processing facilities too late to be sorted
by FSS. Because some of these mail
pieces have an overnight service
standard, they are sorted on the same
night to the carrier route level and then
transported to delivery units. As a
result, these pieces require manual
casing at delivery units. Under the
revised service standards, such pieces
would arrive at processing facilities in
time for the next day’s FSS sortation,
thereby eliminating manual casing of
such pieces at delivery units.
The Postal Service believes that, with
the longer processing windows and
other changes described above, it could
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:46 Sep 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
consolidate mail processing operations
from over 500 locations currently to
fewer than 200 locations, resulting in
lower facilities costs and significant
labor workhour savings.3 It could also
reduce the total amount of machinery
needed to run DPS, on a national level,
by approximately one-half. This would
allow for greater reliance on machinery
that incurs lower maintenance costs.
In addition, the Postal Service could
improve the efficiency of its
transportation network. To meet the
current service standards, a large
proportion of the Postal Service’s mail
trucks operate at low levels of capacity.
With a reduced number of processing
locations and longer processing
windows, the Postal Service could
reduce the number of mail trucks it
needs and ensure that more of those
trucks operate at higher levels of
capacity.
The Postal Service believes that the
consolidations and reductions described
above would result in an infrastructure
that better aligns with current and
projected mail volumes and would lead
to significant cost containment
opportunities.
III. Effects of the Proposal
The Postal Service has listed briefly
below several major effects that the
Proposal may have:
• The reduced availability of
locations at which drop ship discounts
may be applied could require changes to
commercial mailers’ transportation
networks. For national mailers, this
could result in cost savings, given that
they would transport mail to fewer
locations. For regional and local
mailers, the reduced availability of
business mail entry units and drop ship
locations could cause additional costs, if
they have to transport mail over longer
distances.
• Commercial mailers who use
products that have zone-based pricing
may experience price changes, if the
locations at which they currently enter
mail are eliminated and the nearest
available locations are within different
3-digit ZIP Codes.
• Commercial mailers of First-Class
Mail, Periodicals, and Standard Mail
who seek to have their mail reach
recipients on specific delivery days may
have to restructure their production
cycles to align with the changed critical
3 The effects of the Proposal would be limited to
the approximately 460 Processing and Distribution
Centers, Customer Service Facilities, Logistics and
Distribution Centers, Surface Transfer Centers, and
associated Annexes. The Proposal should not affect
Network Distribution Centers, Air Mail Centers,
Remote Encoding Centers, and International Service
Centers.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58435
entry times and reduced number of
entry points.
• While some commercial mailers
could effectively maintain same-day
processing and overnight delivery by
restructuring their production cycles to
align with the changed critical entry
times, this would not be possible for
retail First-Class Mail customers,
because mail pieces dropped off at blue
collection boxes and other retail
collection points before 8 a.m. would
not be collected and transported to
processing locations in time for sameday processing.
• The longer processing windows
could enhance the reliability of the
Postal Service in meeting the revised
service standards.
IV. Request for Comments
The Postal Service requests comments
on all aspects of the Proposal. In
particular, the Postal Service solicits
comments on the effects that the
Proposal could have on senders and
recipients of First-Class Mail,
Periodicals, and Standard Mail, as well
as any potential effects on users of other
mail classes. Mail users are encouraged
to comment on the nature and extent of
costs or savings they might experience
as a result of the changes described in
this notice, as well as any additional
possible benefits they foresee.
Comments explaining how mail users
might change their mailing practices or
reliance on the mail if the Proposal is
implemented also are encouraged. The
provision of empirical data supporting
any cost-benefit analysis also would be
useful. In addition, the Postal Service
seeks suggestions on how to modify the
Proposal to better serve mail users.
Further, the Postal Service requests mail
users’ views regarding the application of
the policies and requirements of title 39
of the U.S. Code, particularly sections
101, 403, 404, and 3691, to the Proposal
and to service standard revisions
generally.
The Postal Service intends to consider
comments received in response to this
notice as it determines whether and
how to amend its service standard
regulations. This request for comments
is being pursued in concert with other
customer and public outreach activities,
through mailer and other organizations,
and through consultation with
individual customers and groups of
customers. If the Postal Service should
decide to move forward with the
Proposal, it will publish a proposed rule
in the Federal Register and solicit
public comment. It also would request
an advisory opinion from the Postal
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
58436
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Commission pursuant to 39
U.S.C. 3661(b).
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2011–24149 Filed 9–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (e-mail)
luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1218]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) proposes to make
determinations of BFEs and modified
BFEs for each community listed below,
in accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified
BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR
60.3, are the minimum that are required.
They should not be construed to mean
that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The
community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or
pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities.
These proposed elevations are used to
meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are
used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new
buildings built after these elevations are
made final, and for the contents in those
buildings.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments are requested on
the proposed Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed
BFE modifications for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose
of this proposed rule is to seek general
information and comment regarding the
proposed regulatory flood elevations for
the reach described by the downstream
and upstream locations in the table
below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are
a part of the floodplain management
measures that the community is
required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to
qualify or remain qualified for
participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition,
these elevations, once finalized, will be
used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings and
the contents in those buildings.
DATES: Comments are to be submitted
on or before December 20, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The corresponding
preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map
SUMMARY:
State
(FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each
community is available for inspection at
the community’s map repository. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
You may submit comments, identified
by Docket No. FEMA–B–1218, to Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (e-mail)
luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov.
City/town/county
Source of flooding
Comments on any aspect of the Flood
Insurance Study and FIRM, other than
the proposed BFEs, will be considered.
A letter acknowledging receipt of any
comments will not be sent.
National Environmental Policy Act.
This proposed rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44
CFR part 10, Environmental
Consideration. An environmental
impact assessment has not been
prepared.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood
elevation determinations are not within
the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review. This proposed
rule is not a significant regulatory action
under the criteria of section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism.
This proposed rule involves no policies
that have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards of Executive Order
12988.
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67
Administrative practice and
procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 67—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 67
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,
3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.
§ 67.4
[Amended]
2. The tables published under the
authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
* Elevation in feet (NGVD)
+ Elevation in feet (NAVD)
# Depth in feet above
ground
∧ Elevation in meters
(MSL)
Location**
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Existing
Modified
Unincorporated Areas of Washington County, Alabama
Alabama ................
17:46 Sep 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Tombigbee River ..............
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Approximately 1,056 feet downstream of
the railroad.
None
+35
Approximately 2.1 miles upstream of the
railroad.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Unincorporated
Areas of Washington County.
None
+36
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58433-58436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24149]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 121
Proposal To Revise Service Standards for First-Class Mail,
Periodicals, and Standard Mail
AGENCY: Postal Service\TM\.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Postal Service seeks public comment on a proposal to
revise the service standard regulations contained in 39 CFR part 121.
Among other things, the proposal involves eliminating the expectation
of overnight service for First-Class Mail and Periodicals, and, for
each of these classes, narrowing the two-day delivery range and
enlarging the three-day delivery range. One major effect of the
proposal would be to facilitate a significant consolidation of the
Postal Service's processing and transportation networks.
[[Page 58434]]
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 21, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to Manager, Industry
Engagement and Outreach, United States Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Room 4617, Washington, DC 20260. Comments also may be
transmitted via e-mail 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Frost, Industry Engagement and
Outreach, 202-268-8093; or Emily Rosenberg, Network Analytics, 202-268-
5585.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal Service's processing and
transportation networks were developed, over many decades of growing
mail volumes, largely to achieve service standards for First-Class Mail
and Periodicals, particularly their overnight service standards. In
Section 302 of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006,
Congress found that the Postal Service's networks were larger than
necessary and directed the Postal Service to consolidate its
infrastructure to better align with changing conditions. Since then,
the Postal Service has vigorously pursued operational consolidation
opportunities to reduce excess capacity in its networks.
During the same time period, however, mail volumes have declined
substantially, such that the Postal Service's processing and
transportation networks exhibit more excess capacity in relation to
current and projected mail volumes than previously anticipated. As a
result of the sharp revenue declines associated with falling volumes,
as well as other statutorily mandated costs, the Postal Service has
experienced significant financial losses for the past four years.
Unfortunately, further network consolidations (beyond those that have
already been performed or are currently under study), which are
necessary to align the Postal Service's infrastructure with current and
projected mail volumes and to bring operating costs in line with
revenues, will for the most part be unachievable without a relaxation
of certain service standards for First-Class Mail, Periodicals, and
Standard Mail. The Postal Service is therefore exploring a proposal
(the Proposal) to revise these service standards.
I. Proposed Service Standard Revisions
The Postal Service established its current service standards for
market-dominant products on December 19, 2007, in accordance with 39
U.S.C. 3691. The service standards for First-Class Mail, as set forth
in 39 CFR 121.1, range from 1 to 3 delivery days for mail that travels
within the contiguous United States, and 1 to 5 delivery days for mail
that originates or destinates in Alaska, Hawaii, or the U.S.
territories. One aspect of the Proposal would be to revise 39 CFR 121.1
such that the service standards for First-Class Mail that travels
within the contiguous United States would become 2 to 3 delivery days.
Similarly, the service standards for First-Class Mail that originates
or destinates in Alaska, Hawaii, or the U.S. territories would become 2
to 5 delivery days.
In other words, the Postal Service would eliminate the expectation
of overnight service for First-Class Mail, narrow the two-day delivery
range, and enlarge the three-day delivery range. These changes would
apply to all First-Class Mail, including letters, flats, and
parcels.\1\ The potential impact of the Proposal on First-Class Mail is
illustrated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As the Postal Service stated when it established the current
service standards, ``there are finite limits in the level of service
standard differentiation that can be effectively managed on the
workroom floors of a complex logistical network.'' Modern Service
Standards for Market-Dominant Products, 72 FR 72221 (Dec. 19, 2007).
Therefore, any service standard revisions adopted by the Postal
Service will continue to apply at the class level.
Proportion of First-Class Mail Volume by Service Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Proposed
(percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-day.............................. 41.5 0
2-day.............................. 26.6 50.6
3-day.............................. 31.6 49.1
4-day.............................. 0.3 0.3
5-day.............................. <0.1 <0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because service standards for a portion of Periodicals are linked
to First-Class Mail service standards, the Postal Service would revise
the Periodicals service standards as well. As specified in 39 CFR
121.2, the service standards for Periodicals presently range from 1 to
9 delivery days within the contiguous United States. Under the
Proposal, the service standards for both end-to-end and destination-
entry Periodicals within the contiguous United States would be revised
to a range of 2 to 9 delivery days.
The substantial consolidation of the mail processing network made
possible by the above service standard revisions would result in the
elimination of some facilities at which Standard Mail users currently
enter mail. In particular, it is possible that Area Distribution
Centers (ADCs) would no longer be available for entering mail.
Therefore, it is possible that the Proposal could require a revision to
the current service standard for end-to-end Standard Mail entered at
ADCs, as set forth in 39 CFR 121.3(a)(2). The exact nature of this
revision is presently unclear.
In addition, although the service standards for other Postal
Service products would not be revised, all Postal Service products
could experience changes in specific 3-digit ZIP Code origin-
destination pairs' transit times. The changed transit times would
remain within the current ranges set forth in each product's service
standards.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ While competitive products' service standards are not
published, the transit times for competitive products would remain
within the overall ranges that are marketed for those products (such
as 1-2 delivery days for Express Mail, and 1-3 delivery days for
Priority Mail).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Changes to Mail Processing and Transportation Networks
If the Postal Service were to revise service standards as described
above, it could significantly improve operating efficiency and lower
the operating costs of its mail processing and transportation networks.
To meet overnight service standards for First-Class Mail, processing
facilities currently initiate their primary and secondary sortation
[[Page 58435]]
cycles well into the evening and early morning hours. In particular,
processing facilities generally run their Delivery Point Sequencing
programs (DPS) between 12:30 a.m. and 7 a.m. DPS is the sortation of
the next day's destinating letter- and flat-shaped mail pieces into the
precise order in which they will be delivered on carrier routes. After
mail is run through DPS, it is transported to delivery units, where it
is taken by carriers for delivery. The processing window for DPS
operations is set late in the night so that all originating First-Class
Mail collected from a processing facility's overnight service area on a
particular day can reach the facility before DPS is run that night.
This is done to ensure that the portion of the originating First-Class
Mail that destinates in the facility's service area is run through DPS
that night and delivered by carriers the next day, fulfilling that
mail's overnight service standard. Thus, the arrival time of First-
Class Mail with an overnight service standard largely dictates the
start time for DPS processing.
By eliminating overnight service standards for First-Class Mail,
and thus eliminating the need for processing facilities to wait into
the night for mail collected during the day to reach the facilities,
the Postal Service could move the time for its primary and secondary
sortations to much earlier in the day. Under the Proposal, the Postal
Service would institute earlier critical entry times and redesign its
network so that mail that needs to be processed on a particular day
would reach mail processing facilities by 8 a.m. Consequently, the
Postal Service could begin running DPS at noon. Thus, DPS could be run
for 16 hours (12 p.m. to 4 a.m.) instead of 6.5 hours (12:30 a.m. to 7
a.m.) each day.
The Postal Service could also reduce the amount of manual casing
that occurs at delivery units. Currently, some First-Class Mail Flats
and Periodicals whose zones are processed on the Flats Sequencing
System (FSS) arrive at mail processing facilities too late to be sorted
by FSS. Because some of these mail pieces have an overnight service
standard, they are sorted on the same night to the carrier route level
and then transported to delivery units. As a result, these pieces
require manual casing at delivery units. Under the revised service
standards, such pieces would arrive at processing facilities in time
for the next day's FSS sortation, thereby eliminating manual casing of
such pieces at delivery units.
The Postal Service believes that, with the longer processing
windows and other changes described above, it could consolidate mail
processing operations from over 500 locations currently to fewer than
200 locations, resulting in lower facilities costs and significant
labor workhour savings.\3\ It could also reduce the total amount of
machinery needed to run DPS, on a national level, by approximately one-
half. This would allow for greater reliance on machinery that incurs
lower maintenance costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The effects of the Proposal would be limited to the
approximately 460 Processing and Distribution Centers, Customer
Service Facilities, Logistics and Distribution Centers, Surface
Transfer Centers, and associated Annexes. The Proposal should not
affect Network Distribution Centers, Air Mail Centers, Remote
Encoding Centers, and International Service Centers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Postal Service could improve the efficiency of its
transportation network. To meet the current service standards, a large
proportion of the Postal Service's mail trucks operate at low levels of
capacity. With a reduced number of processing locations and longer
processing windows, the Postal Service could reduce the number of mail
trucks it needs and ensure that more of those trucks operate at higher
levels of capacity.
The Postal Service believes that the consolidations and reductions
described above would result in an infrastructure that better aligns
with current and projected mail volumes and would lead to significant
cost containment opportunities.
III. Effects of the Proposal
The Postal Service has listed briefly below several major effects
that the Proposal may have:
The reduced availability of locations at which drop ship
discounts may be applied could require changes to commercial mailers'
transportation networks. For national mailers, this could result in
cost savings, given that they would transport mail to fewer locations.
For regional and local mailers, the reduced availability of business
mail entry units and drop ship locations could cause additional costs,
if they have to transport mail over longer distances.
Commercial mailers who use products that have zone-based
pricing may experience price changes, if the locations at which they
currently enter mail are eliminated and the nearest available locations
are within different 3-digit ZIP Codes.
Commercial mailers of First-Class Mail, Periodicals, and
Standard Mail who seek to have their mail reach recipients on specific
delivery days may have to restructure their production cycles to align
with the changed critical entry times and reduced number of entry
points.
While some commercial mailers could effectively maintain
same-day processing and overnight delivery by restructuring their
production cycles to align with the changed critical entry times, this
would not be possible for retail First-Class Mail customers, because
mail pieces dropped off at blue collection boxes and other retail
collection points before 8 a.m. would not be collected and transported
to processing locations in time for same-day processing.
The longer processing windows could enhance the
reliability of the Postal Service in meeting the revised service
standards.
IV. Request for Comments
The Postal Service requests comments on all aspects of the
Proposal. In particular, the Postal Service solicits comments on the
effects that the Proposal could have on senders and recipients of
First-Class Mail, Periodicals, and Standard Mail, as well as any
potential effects on users of other mail classes. Mail users are
encouraged to comment on the nature and extent of costs or savings they
might experience as a result of the changes described in this notice,
as well as any additional possible benefits they foresee. Comments
explaining how mail users might change their mailing practices or
reliance on the mail if the Proposal is implemented also are
encouraged. The provision of empirical data supporting any cost-benefit
analysis also would be useful. In addition, the Postal Service seeks
suggestions on how to modify the Proposal to better serve mail users.
Further, the Postal Service requests mail users' views regarding the
application of the policies and requirements of title 39 of the U.S.
Code, particularly sections 101, 403, 404, and 3691, to the Proposal
and to service standard revisions generally.
The Postal Service intends to consider comments received in
response to this notice as it determines whether and how to amend its
service standard regulations. This request for comments is being
pursued in concert with other customer and public outreach activities,
through mailer and other organizations, and through consultation with
individual customers and groups of customers. If the Postal Service
should decide to move forward with the Proposal, it will publish a
proposed rule in the Federal Register and solicit public comment. It
also would request an advisory opinion from the Postal
[[Page 58436]]
Regulatory Commission pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3661(b).
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2011-24149 Filed 9-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
