Product List Changes, 38683-38684 [2012-15775]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Notices
businesses that mail products directly to
foreign destinations using Express Mail
International, Priority Mail
International, or both. Id. at 4.
Governors’ Decision No. 08–7 (as GEPS
1) established prices and classifications
not of general applicability for GEPS
contracts. Id. at 1. A grouping for GEPS
3 contracts was later added to the
competitive product list as an outcome
of Docket Nos. MC2010–28 and
CP2010–71. The contract filed in Docket
No. CP2010–71 was designated as the
baseline agreement for purposes of
establishing whether subsequent
agreements proposed for inclusion
within the GEPS 3 grouping are
functionally equivalent. Id. at 1–2.
Contents of filing. The filing includes
a Notice, along with attachments;
material filed under seal (consisting of
the contract and supporting documents);
and Excel spreadsheets. In the Notice,
the Postal Service asserts that the
instant contract and the baseline
contract are functionally equivalent
because they share similar cost and
market characteristics. Id. at 3. It notes
that the pricing formula and
classification established in the
controlling Governors’ Decision No. 08–
7 ensure that each GEPS contract meets
the criteria of 39 U.S.C. 3633 and related
regulations. Id. The Postal Service
identifies differences between the
instant contract and the baseline
contract, but asserts that the differences
do not affect either the fundamental
service being offered or the fundamental
structure of the contract. Id. at 3–6. The
Postal Service also addresses pertinent
Mail Classification Schedule matters. Id.
at 3. It states that, based on the
discussion in its Notice and the
financial data provided under seal, the
instant GEPS 3 contract is in
compliance with the requirements of
39 U.S.C. 3633 and is functionally
equivalent to the baseline contract, and
therefore should be added to the GEPS
3 product grouping.
Supporting attachments include:
• Attachment 1—a redacted copy of
the instant contract;
• Attachment 2—the related
certification required under 39 CFR
3015.5(c)(2);
• Attachment 3—a redacted copy of
Governors’ Decision No. 08–7
(including attachments thereto); and
• Attachment 4—an application for
non-public treatment of the materials
filed under seal.
Expiration. The agreement is set to
expire one year after the Postal Service
notifies the customer that all necessary
approvals and reviews of the agreement
have been obtained, including a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:35 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
favorable conclusion by the
Commission. Id.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
II. Commission Action
The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2012–34 for consideration of
matters raised in the Notice. Interested
persons may submit comments on
whether the Postal Service’s contract is
consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C.
3632 and 3633. Comments are due no
later than June 29, 2012. The public
portions of the Postal Service’s filing
can be accessed via the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.prc.gov.
The Commission appoints Derrick D.
Dennis to represent the interest of the
general public (Public Representative)
in this case.
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2012–34 for consideration of
matters raised in the Postal Service’s
June 21, 2012 Notice.
2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the
Commission designates Derrick D.
Dennis to serve as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this case.
3. Comments by interested persons
are due no later than June 29, 2012.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this Order in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Ruth Ann Abrams,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–15771 Filed 6–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CP2012–35; Order No. 1376]
Product List Changes
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is noticing a
recently-filed Postal Service request to
enter into an additional Global
Expedited Package Services 3 contracts.
This notice addresses procedural steps
associated with this filing.
DATES: Comments are due: June 29,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
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.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38683
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel
at 202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Commission Action
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
Notice of filing. On June 21, 2012, the
Postal Service filed a notice announcing
that it is entering into an additional
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS) 3 contract.1 The Notice was filed
in accordance with 39 CFR 3015.5.
Notice at 1.
Background. Customers for GEPS
contracts are small- or medium-size
businesses that mail products directly to
foreign destinations using Express Mail
International, Priority Mail
International, or both. Id. at 4.
Governors’ Decision No. 08–7 (as GEPS
1) established prices and classifications
not of general applicability for GEPS
contracts. Id. at 1. A grouping for GEPS
3 contracts was later added to the
competitive product list as an outcome
of Docket Nos. MC2010–28 and
CP2010–71. The contract filed in Docket
No. CP2010–71 was designated as the
baseline agreement for purposes of
establishing whether subsequent
agreements proposed for inclusion
within the GEPS 3 grouping are
functionally equivalent. Id. at 1–2.
Contents of filing. The filing includes
a Notice, along with attachments;
material filed under seal (consisting of
the contract and supporting documents);
and Excel spreadsheets. In the Notice,
the Postal Service asserts that the
instant contract and the baseline
contract are functionally equivalent
because they share similar cost and
market characteristics. Id. at 3. It notes
that the pricing formula and
classification established in the
controlling Governors’ Decision No. 08–
7 ensure that each GEPS contract meets
the criteria of 39 U.S.C. 3633 and related
regulations. Id. The Postal Service
identifies differences between the
instant contract and the baseline
contract, but asserts that the differences
do not affect either the fundamental
service being offered or the fundamental
structure of the contract. Id. at 3–6. The
Postal Service also addresses pertinent
Mail Classification Schedule matters. Id.
at 3. It states that, based on the
1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing
a Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited
Package Services 3 Negotiated Service Agreement
and Application for Non-Public Treatment of
Materials Filed Under Seal, June 21, 2012 (Notice).
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
38684
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Notices
discussion in its Notice and the
financial data provided under seal, the
instant GEPS 3 contract is in
compliance with the requirements of
39 U.S.C. 3633 and is functionally
equivalent to the baseline contract, and
therefore should be added to the GEPS
3 product grouping.
Supporting attachments include:
• Attachment 1—a redacted copy of
the instant contract;
• Attachment 2—the related
certification required under 39 CFR
3015.5(c)(2);
• Attachment 3—a redacted copy of
Governors’ Decision No. 08–7
(including attachments thereto); and
• Attachment 4—an application for
non-public treatment of the contract and
certain supporting materials.
Expiration. The agreement is set to
expire one year after the Postal Service
notifies the customer that all necessary
approvals and reviews of the agreement
have been obtained, including a
favorable conclusion by the
Commission. Id.
II. Commission Action
The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2012–35 for consideration of
matters raised in the Notice. Interested
persons may submit comments on
whether the Postal Service’s contract is
consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C.
3632 and 3633. Comments are due no
later than June 29, 2012. The public
portions of the Postal Service’s filing
can be accessed via the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.prc.gov.
The Commission appoints Derrick D.
Dennis to represent the interest of the
general public (Public Representative)
in this case.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2012–35 for consideration of
matters raised in the Postal Service’s
June 21, 2012 Notice.
2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the
Commission designates Derrick D.
Dennis to serve as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this case.
3. Comments by interested persons
are due no later than June 29, 2012.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this Order in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Ruth Ann Abrams,
Acting Secretary.
POSTAL SERVICE
Product Change—Express Mail &
Priority Mail Negotiated Service
Agreement
Postal Service.TM
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Postal Service gives
notice of filing a request with the Postal
Regulatory Commission to add a
domestic shipping services contract to
the list of Negotiated Service
Agreements in the Mail Classification
Schedule’s Competitive Products List.
DATES: June 28, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
United States Postal Service® hereby
gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C.
3642 and 3632(b)(3), on June 21, 2012,
it filed with the Postal Regulatory
Commission a Request of the United
States Postal Service to Add Express
Mail & Priority Mail Contract 9 to
Competitive Product List. Documents
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket
Nos. MC2012–29, CP2012–38.
SUMMARY:
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2012–15780 Filed 6–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–67238; File No. SR–MSRB–
2012–04]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Order Granting Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, Relating to
Proposed Rule G–43, on Broker’s
Brokers; Proposed Amendments to
Rule G–8, on Books and Records, Rule
G–9, on Record Retention, and Rule G–
18, on Execution of Transactions; and
a Proposed Interpretive Notice on the
Duties of Dealers That Use the
Services of Broker’s Brokers
June 22, 2012.
I. Introduction
On March 5, 2012, the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board (‘‘MSRB’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange
Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a
[FR Doc. 2012–15775 Filed 6–27–12; 8:45 am]
1 15
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
2 17
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:35 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
Frm 00116
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
proposed rule change consisting of
proposed MSRB Rule G–43, on broker’s
brokers; amendments to MSRB Rule G–
8, on books and records; amendments to
MSRB Rule G–9, on record retention;
amendments to MSRB Rule G–18, on
execution of transactions; and a
proposed interpretive notice on duties
of dealers that use the services of
broker’s brokers (‘‘Proposed Notice’’).
The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2012.3 The
Commission received six comment
letters regarding the proposal.4 On May
3, 2012, the MSRB submitted a response
to the comment letters 5 and filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.6 On May 9, 2012, the
Commission designated a longer period
to act on the proposed rule change, until
June 22, 2012.7 This order grants
approval of the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto.
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
Broker’s brokers, who act as
intermediaries between selling dealers
and bidding dealers, serve an important
function in providing liquidity for
investors in the municipal securities
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66625
(March 20, 2012), 77 FR 17548 (‘‘Notice’’).
4 See Letters to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, from John Webber, Chief Compliance
Officer, Advisors Asset Management, Inc., dated
April 16, 2012 (‘‘AAM Letter’’); Michael Nicholas,
Chief Executive Officer, Bond Dealers of America,
dated April 16, 2012 (‘‘BDA Letter’’); Thomas S.
Vales, Chief Executive Officer, TMC Bonds, LLC,
received April 16, 2012 (‘‘TMC Letter’’); Mark J.
Epstein, President & Chief Executive Officer,
Hartfield, Titus & Donnelly, dated April 18, 2012
(‘‘HTD Letter’’); Paige W. Pierce, President & Chief
Executive Officer, RW Smith & Associates, Inc.,
received April 19, 2012 (‘‘RWS Letter’’); and August
J. Hoerrner, Senior Managing Director, Chapdelaine
Tullett Prebon, LLC, dated May 16, 2012 (‘‘CTP
Letter’’). The comment letters received by the
Commission are available at https://www.sec.gov/
comments/sr-msrb-2012–04/msrb201204.shtml.
5 See Letter to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, from Margaret C. Henry, General
Counsel, Market Regulation, MSRB, dated May 3,
2012 (‘‘MSRB Response’’).
6 Amendment No. 1 would partially amend the
text of the original proposed rule change to clarify
that (i) MSRB Rule G–43(c)(i)(N) would only
prohibit a broker’s broker from accepting a new bid
or a changed bid from a bidder in a bid-wanted after
the broker’s broker has notified that same bidder
whether its bid was the high bid (i.e., ‘‘being used’’)
in the same bid-wanted; and (ii) a municipal
security would be considered ‘‘traded’’ through a
broker’s broker within the meaning of MSRB Rule
G–43(d)(iv) when it has been purchased by the
broker’s broker from the seller and sold to the
bidder by the broker’s broker, as an intermediary.
Because the changes made in Amendment No. 1 do
not materially alter the substance of the proposed
rule change or raise any novel regulatory issues,
Amendment No. 1 is not subject to notice and
comment.
7 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66954, 77
FR 28653 (May 15, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38683-38684]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15775]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CP2012-35; Order No. 1376]
Product List Changes
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a recently-filed Postal Service
request to enter into an additional Global Expedited Package Services 3
contracts. This notice addresses procedural steps associated with this
filing.
DATES: Comments are due: June 29, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing
Online system at https://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
at 202-789-6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Commission Action
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
Notice of filing. On June 21, 2012, the Postal Service filed a
notice announcing that it is entering into an additional Global
Expedited Package Services (GEPS) 3 contract.\1\ The Notice was filed
in accordance with 39 CFR 3015.5. Notice at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing a
Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited Package Services 3
Negotiated Service Agreement and Application for Non-Public
Treatment of Materials Filed Under Seal, June 21, 2012 (Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background. Customers for GEPS contracts are small- or medium-size
businesses that mail products directly to foreign destinations using
Express Mail International, Priority Mail International, or both. Id.
at 4. Governors' Decision No. 08-7 (as GEPS 1) established prices and
classifications not of general applicability for GEPS contracts. Id. at
1. A grouping for GEPS 3 contracts was later added to the competitive
product list as an outcome of Docket Nos. MC2010-28 and CP2010-71. The
contract filed in Docket No. CP2010-71 was designated as the baseline
agreement for purposes of establishing whether subsequent agreements
proposed for inclusion within the GEPS 3 grouping are functionally
equivalent. Id. at 1-2.
Contents of filing. The filing includes a Notice, along with
attachments; material filed under seal (consisting of the contract and
supporting documents); and Excel spreadsheets. In the Notice, the
Postal Service asserts that the instant contract and the baseline
contract are functionally equivalent because they share similar cost
and market characteristics. Id. at 3. It notes that the pricing formula
and classification established in the controlling Governors' Decision
No. 08-7 ensure that each GEPS contract meets the criteria of 39 U.S.C.
3633 and related regulations. Id. The Postal Service identifies
differences between the instant contract and the baseline contract, but
asserts that the differences do not affect either the fundamental
service being offered or the fundamental structure of the contract. Id.
at 3-6. The Postal Service also addresses pertinent Mail Classification
Schedule matters. Id. at 3. It states that, based on the
[[Page 38684]]
discussion in its Notice and the financial data provided under seal,
the instant GEPS 3 contract is in compliance with the requirements of
39 U.S.C. 3633 and is functionally equivalent to the baseline contract,
and therefore should be added to the GEPS 3 product grouping.
Supporting attachments include:
Attachment 1--a redacted copy of the instant contract;
Attachment 2--the related certification required under 39
CFR 3015.5(c)(2);
Attachment 3--a redacted copy of Governors' Decision No.
08-7 (including attachments thereto); and
Attachment 4--an application for non-public treatment of
the contract and certain supporting materials.
Expiration. The agreement is set to expire one year after the
Postal Service notifies the customer that all necessary approvals and
reviews of the agreement have been obtained, including a favorable
conclusion by the Commission. Id.
II. Commission Action
The Commission establishes Docket No. CP2012-35 for consideration
of matters raised in the Notice. Interested persons may submit comments
on whether the Postal Service's contract is consistent with the
policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632 and 3633. Comments are due no later than
June 29, 2012. The public portions of the Postal Service's filing can
be accessed via the Commission's Web site at https://www.prc.gov.
The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to represent the interest
of the general public (Public Representative) in this case.
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. CP2012-35 for
consideration of matters raised in the Postal Service's June 21, 2012
Notice.
2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission designates Derrick D.
Dennis to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative)
to represent the interests of the general public in this case.
3. Comments by interested persons are due no later than June 29,
2012.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Order in the
Federal Register.
By the Commission.
Ruth Ann Abrams,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-15775 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P