Settlement Conference, 23786-23790 [2013-09373]
Download as PDF
23786
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 / Notices
Notice.
NARA is giving public notice
that the agency has submitted to OMB
for approval the information collection
described in this notice. The public is
invited to comment on the proposed
information collections pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted to OMB at the address below
on or before May 22, 2013 to be assured
of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mr.
Nicholas A. Fraser, Desk Officer for
NARA, Office of Management and
Budget, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202–395–
5167; or electronically mailed to
Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov.
SUMMARY:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the proposed information
collection and supporting statement
should be directed to Tamee Fechhelm
at telephone number 301–837–1694 or
fax number 301–713–7409.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–13), NARA invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to comment on proposed
information collections. NARA
published a notice of proposed
collection for this information collection
on February 24, 2010 (75 FR 8407 and
8408). No comments were received.
NARA has submitted the described
information collection to OMB for
approval.
In response to this notice, comments
and suggestions should address one or
more of the following points: (a)
Whether the proposed information
collection is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of NARA;
(b) the accuracy of NARA’s estimate of
the burden of the proposed information
collection; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including the use of
information technology; and (e) whether
small businesses are affected by this
collection. In this notice, NARA is
soliciting comments concerning the
following information collection:
Title: Identification Card Request.
OMB number: 3095–0057.
Agency form number: NA Form 6006.
Type of review: Regular.
Affected public: Individuals or
households, Business or other for-profit,
Federal government.
Estimated number of respondents:
1,500.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Apr 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
Estimated time per response: 3
minutes.
Frequency of response: On occasion.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
75 hours.
Abstract: The collection of
information is necessary as to comply
with HSPD–12 requirements. Use of the
form is authorized by 44 U.S.C 2104. At
the NARA College Park facility,
individuals receive a proximity card
with the identification badge that is
electronically coded to permit access to
secure zones ranging from a general
nominal level to stricter access levels for
classified records zones. The proximity
card system is part of the security
management system that meets the
accreditation standards of the
Government intelligence agencies for
storage of classified information and
serves to comply with E.O. 12958.
Dated: April 11, 2013.
Michael L. Wash,
Executive for Information Services/CIO.
[FR Doc. 2013–09379 Filed 4–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7515–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. C2009–1R; Order No. 1700]
Settlement Conference
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is noticing a
recent order convening a settlement
conference between GameFly, Inc. and
the Postal Service. This notice informs
the public of this development and
takes other administrative steps,
including appointment of a settlement
coordinator.
SUMMARY:
Settlement conference: April 23,
2013 at 10:00 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
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.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
at 202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. GameFly Motion, Postal Service Reply,
and GameFly Response
IV. Analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
V. Settlement Procedures
I. Introduction
The latest issues in this docket come
before the Commission on remand from
the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia.1 Following the
issuance of the Court’s mandate, on
March 7, 2013, GameFly, Inc. (GameFly)
filed a motion requesting the
Commission to establish standards and
procedures for proceedings on remand.2
The Postal Service replied to the
GameFly Motion and GameFly filed a
response.3 For the reasons discussed
below, the Commission defers action on
these filings and will convene a
settlement conference to pursue the
possibility of the parties agreeing to a
mutually acceptable resolution of the
remaining issues in the remanded
proceeding. The settlement conference
will convene at 10:00 a.m. April 23,
2013 in the Commission’s hearing room.
II. Background
Proceedings in this docket were
instituted by GameFly’s filing of a
complaint under 39 U.S.C. 3662. In its
complaint, GameFly alleged that rates
and services offered by the Postal
Service to certain DVD mailers violated
prohibitions on undue or unreasonable
discrimination under 39 U.S.C. 101(d),
403(c), 404(b), and 3622(b)(8).4
GameFly, which is in the business of
renting video game DVDs, alleged that
the Postal Service discriminated against
GameFly by not providing the same
treatment to GameFly’s mail as it did to
the mail of Netflix and Blockbuster
(which are primarily in the business of
renting movie DVDs). Id. at 12. GameFly
alleged further that the Postal Service
manually culled and processed Netflix
and Blockbuster’s mail, allowing them
to mail one-ounce First-Class letters
without paying a non-machinable
surcharge or exposing their DVDs to the
risk of breakage on automated machines.
1 GameFly, Inc. v. Postal Regulatory Commission,
704 F.3d 145 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (GameFly).
2 Docket No. C2009–1, Motion of GameFly, Inc.,
to Establish Standards and Procedures to Govern
Proceedings on Remand, March 7, 2013 (GameFly
Motion).
3 See United States Postal Service Reply in
Opposition to Motion of GameFly, Inc., to Establish
Standards and Procedures to Govern Proceedings
on Remand, March 14, 2013 (Postal Service Reply);
Response of GameFly, Inc., to March 14 USPS
Opposition to GameFly Motion to Establish
Standards and Proceedings on Remand, March 18,
2013 (GameFly Response). Accompanying the
GameFly Response was a motion requesting leave
to respond to the Postal Service Reply. Motion of
GameFly, Inc., for Leave to Respond to March 14
USPS Opposition to March 7 GameFly Motion,
March 18, 2013. The motion for leave to respond
is granted.
4 Docket No. C2009–1, Complaint of GameFly,
Inc., April 23, 2009, at 1 (Complaint).
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 / Notices
Id. at 8–9. GameFly asserted that, unlike
Netflix and Blockbuster, it decided to
add a protective cardboard insert and
mail its DVDs as two-ounce First-Class
flats in order to avoid automated
machines and reduce the risk of
breakage. Id. at 5. At the time the
Complaint was filed, the First-Class oneounce letter rate was $0.42 and the
First-Class two-ounce flat rate was
$1.00. Id. at 6.
Determination of undue
discrimination. After extensive
discovery, testimony, filings, and
hearings, the Commission issued an
order in which it determined that the
Postal Service had unduly
discriminated against GameFly.5 The
Commission reached this conclusion by
using a three-part test that considered
whether: (1) GameFly had been offered
less favorable rates or terms and
conditions than another mailer; (2)
GameFly was similarly situated to the
other mailer; and (3) there was no
rational or legitimate basis for the Postal
Service to deny it the more favorable
rates or terms or conditions provided to
the other mailer. Id. at 28. The
Commission determined that all three
prongs of the test had been satisfied. Id.
at 108.
GameFly’s proposed remedies.
Although it found that the Postal
Service had unduly discriminated
against GameFly, the Commission
rejected the two remedies suggested by
GameFly. The first was an operational
remedy that would have required the
Postal Service to offer ‘‘a measurable
and enforceable level of manual culling
and processing of DVD mailers sent at
machinable letter rates.’’ Id. at 110. The
Commission explained that it was
reluctant to assume responsibility for
oversight of Postal Service operations at
the level proposed by GameFly and
wary of the ‘‘significant administrative
costs’’ that the Postal Service could
incur attempting to enforce a particular
level of manual culling and processing.
Id. at 111.
GameFly’s second proposed remedy
was a rate-based remedy, under which
the Postal Service would have been
required to publish a reduced rate for
flat-shaped DVD mailers designed to
produce the same average contribution
per piece for both flat-shaped and lettershaped DVD mail (the ‘‘equal
contribution remedy’’). Id. The
Commission rejected this second
proposed remedy because the models
used by GameFly’s witness in support of
this remedy were ‘‘not sufficiently
accurate’’ to establish an appropriate
5 Order on Complaint, April 20, 2011, at 108
(Order No. 718).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Apr 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
rate. Id. at 112. The Commission stated
a preference for allowing the Postal
Service, rather than the Commission, to
‘‘exercise statutory flexibility’’ in
ratemaking and expressed concern that
the rate-based remedy ‘‘fails to directly
address the consequences of the
preferential treatment afforded Netflix.’’
Id. at 112–113.
Commission remedy. In lieu of
GameFly’s proposed remedies, the
Commission opted to establish a ‘‘niche
classification’’ for round-trip DVD mail.
Id. at 113. Order No. 718 added a
‘‘Letter Round-Trip Mailer’’ category
and a ‘‘Flat Round-Trip Mailer’’
category to the Mail Classification
Schedule (MCS). Id. Appendix B. The
Letter Round-Trip Mailer category
allowed round-trip DVD mailers to send
one-ounce letter-shaped mail at the
single-piece machinable letter rate and
prevented the Postal Service from
applying a non-machinable surcharge to
such mail. Id. at 1. The Flat Round-Trip
Mailer category allowed round-trip DVD
mailers to send flat-shaped mail of up
to two ounces at the one-ounce singlepiece First-Class flats rate. Id. at 2. The
Commission characterized this remedy
as providing GameFly with treatment
comparable to the treatment the Postal
Service gave Netflix. Id. at 114.
However, the remedy also resulted in a
higher rate and a higher per-piece
contribution for round-trip DVD mail
sent as flats. Id. at 115. The Commission
found the higher rates and contribution
to be justified by ‘‘cost differences and
by general pricing differences between
First-Class Mail flat and letter
products.’’ Id.
D.C. Circuit Opinion. Unsatisfied with
the remedy imposed by Order No. 718,
GameFly filed an appeal with the Court.
The Postal Service elected not to appeal
the Commission’s finding of undue
discrimination, but did participate in
the appellate proceedings in support of
the remedy prescribed by Order No.
718.
The Court rejected the Commission’s
remedy because it left in place part of
the discrimination it was attempting to
remedy without explaining why the
‘‘residual discrimination’’ was due or
reasonable. 704 F.3d at 149. The
residual discrimination identified by the
Court consisted of continuing
differences in the terms of service
offered to DVD mailers of letter-shaped
and flat-shaped mail. The Court
explained that the Commission ‘‘cannot
justify the terms of service
discrimination its remedy leaves in
place (providing manual letter
processing to Netflix but not to
GameFly) based on the companies’ use
of different mailers when the use of
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23787
different mailers is itself the product of
the service discrimination.’’ Id.
The Court vacated the Commission’s
order and remanded the case to the
Commission to ‘‘either remedy all
discrimination or explain why any
residual discrimination is due or
reasonable under § 403.’’ Id. It expressed
the opinion that the Commission would
‘‘surely consider’’ GameFly’s proposed
remedies on remand, but noted that
‘‘there may be a range of other possible
remedies which would withstand
appellate review.’’ Id.
III. GameFly Motion, Postal Service
Reply, and GameFly Response
In response to GameFly, the parties
filed a series of documents setting out
their respective positions and
expectations for proceedings on remand.
The first of these was the GameFly
Motion, followed by the Postal Service
Reply and the GameFly Response.
GameFly Motion. The GameFly
Motion begins by outlining the issues
that GameFly considers to have been
resolved by the Court’s Opinion.
GameFly Motion at 1–8. It then sets
forth a new proposed remedy and
several possible alternatives, as well as
the standards and procedures that
GameFly asserts should be used to
evaluate any alternative remedies. Id. at
8–18.
GameFly’s new remedy would require
the Postal Service to charge the FirstClass Mail letter rate for all round-trip
DVD mailers, whether they choose to
mail letters or flats. Id. at 9. GameFly
characterizes this remedy as ‘‘the next
best alternative’’ to requiring the Postal
Service to provide GameFly’s mail with
the same degree of manual processing
that Netflix receives for its letter-shaped
DVD mail. Id. at 11. In proposing this
remedy, GameFly withdraws its
previous request for the equal
contribution remedy. Id. GameFly
argues that the Commission should
impose its new remedy immediately,
without re-opening the record in this
docket. Id. at 13.
GameFly also identifies two
alternatives to its new, preferred
remedy. The first of these alternatives
would allow the Postal Service 30 days
to propose a rate for DVD mailers that
is the same for both flats and letters but
higher than the preferred remedy’s FirstClass Mail letter rate. Id. at 14. GameFly
asserts that the Postal Service should be
required to provide certain additional
information to support any such
proposed rate. Id. If the Postal Service
were to choose not to submit a proposed
new rate within 30 days, GameFly
would have the Commission establish a
new rate for both letter- and flat-shaped
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
23788
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 / Notices
DVD mail at the First-Class Mail letter
rate. Id.
GameFly’s second proposed
alternative remedy is an operational
remedy that would require the Postal
Service to either provide the same level
of manual processing to Netflix and
GameFly mail or to discontinue manual
processing of Netflix mail. Id. at 15.
GameFly argues that the record in this
docket ‘‘imposes a heavy presumption’’
against an operational remedy, citing
potential problems with enforcement.
Id. at 15–16. GameFly suggests that if
the Commission adopts an operational
remedy, the Postal Service should be
required to provide certain information
in support of that remedy. Id. at 17–18.
Postal Service reply. The Postal
Service Reply rejects the remedies
proposed in the GameFly Motion,
arguing instead that the Commission
should maintain its original remedy, but
explain better why that remedy
addresses any residual discrimination.
Postal Service Reply at 2, 10–14. The
Postal Service also takes issue with
GameFly’s list of settled issues,
asserting that GameFly is attempting to
eliminate the Commission’s discretion
and authority by preventing the
Commission from re-opening the record
and obtaining additional guidance. Id. at
2.
The Postal Service asserts that the
record contains sufficient evidence for
the Commission to explain to the
Court’s satisfaction that its original
remedy was sound and that any
remaining discrimination is due to local
operational decisions dictated by
differences in the volume, density, and
appearance of Netflix’s and GameFly’s
mail. Id. at 11–12.
The Postal Service argues further that
any rate-based remedy would require
the Commission to re-open the record to
conform with ‘‘statutory and regulatory
provisions governing the establishment
of rates and classifications under the
[Postal Accountability and
Enhancement Act]’’ and to respect the
Postal Service’s authority to direct its
own operational policies. Id. at 6. It
states that the record in this docket
lacks sufficient evidence to support
GameFly’s proposed rate-based remedy.
Id. at 6–7. The Postal Service warns that
GameFly’s remedy would ‘‘inevitably
lead to questions about the presence and
effects of discrimination embodied in all
rates, and the Mail Classification
Schedule in general.’’ Id. at 8.
Finally, the Postal Service argues that
the record does not reflect changes in
the processing of DVD mail and ‘‘major
parts of the operating environment’’ that
have occurred since the record in this
docket was established. Id. at 9.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Apr 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
GameFly response. GameFly responds
to the Postal Service Reply by reiterating
its position that the Postal Service is not
permitted to relitigate factual issues
resolved by Order No. 718 (either before
the Commission or before the Court in
a future appeal) or the findings of
GameFly. GameFly Response at 4–6.
GameFly concedes that there may be
alternative remedies available that
would require the Commission to reopen the record. Id. at 8. However,
GameFly asserts that the degree to
which the record should be re-opened
will depend on the particular alternative
remedy. Id. For instance, GameFly
believes that its first alternative remedy
(price equalization at a rate established
by the Postal Service) would require
little additional information, but that its
second alternative remedy (operational
directives) may require ‘‘more elaborate
fact-finding.’’ Id. at 8–9.
GameFly contends that, rather than
attempting to place substantive limits
on potential remedies, it is proposing
filing requirements designed to elicit the
information necessary to support an
alternative remedy. Id. at 9. It asserts
that each of these filing requirements is
reasonable in light of the nature of the
proposed alternative remedies. Id. at 10.
In particular, it asserts that because the
Postal Service argued against an
operational remedy in earlier
proceedings in this docket, the Postal
Service must make additional showings
if it now believes an operational remedy
is justified. Id.
Finally, GameFly argues that a
remedy that equalized rates for letterand flat-shaped DVD mailers is neither
discriminatory against other flat-shaped
mail nor likely to have a significant
impact on the Postal Service’s financial
situation. Id. at 11–12.
IV. Analysis
The Commission has before it several
remedies which the parties believe
would satisfy the court’s directive to
‘‘either remedy all discrimination or
explain why any residual
discrimination is due or reasonable
under § 403.’’ 704 F.3d at 149. GameFly
prefers a remedy that establishes an
identical rate for round-trip DVD letter
and flats mail that is equal to the FirstClass Mail letter rate. GameFly Motion
at 8–13. The Postal Service vigorously
opposes GameFly’s preferred remedy
and encourages the Commission to
stand by the remedy prescribed by
Order No. 718. Postal Service Reply at
4–5, 10–11 (‘‘there is sufficient evidence
in the existing record to support the
original remedy, and the Commission
has the authority to conduct
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
proceedings for that purpose, if
necessary.’’).
The Court has given the Commission
sufficient latitude to consider both of
these remedies, as well as others
including the two remedies originally
proposed by GameFly. 704 F.3d at 149
(‘‘Upon rehearing, the Commission will
surely consider those [i.e., GameFly’s
earlier] remedies, but there may be a
range of other possible remedies which
would withstand appellate review.’’;
‘‘The Commission must either remedy
all discrimination or explain why any
residual discrimination is due or
reasonable under § 403.’’).
The Commission is considering
various remedies, each of which is
intended to satisfy the Court’s directive.
The Commission has identified, at least
preliminarily, the following options: 6
GameFly proposed remedies:
• An equal rate remedy;
• An equal contribution remedy;
Postal Service proposed remedy:
• Original remedy set forth in Order
No. 718 with additional explanation as
to why the residual discrimination is
justified; Remedies identified by the
Commission:
• A remedy that retains the Letter
Round-Trip DVD Mailer and Flat
Round-Trip DVD Mailer categories
created by Order No. 718, imposes a
requirement that the Postal Service
manually process all letter-shaped DVD
mail, and establishes an enforcement
mechanism to ensure manual processing
is occurring at a certain level;
• An operational remedy that would
eliminate all special treatment of DVDs
and impose rates that apply to the
mailpiece, e.g., the non-machinable
surcharge and second ounce rates; and
• An operational remedy that would
require manual handling of all lettershaped DVDs subject to certain
standards.
The Appendix provides a brief
description of these alternatives. The
options outlined above do not foreclose
the parties from fashioning their own
mutually agreeable relief.
The parties take different positions on
whether, and to what extent, further
administrative hearings (including
additional discovery) might be
necessary to resolve the remedy issue.
GameFly advocates the immediate
imposition of its preferred rate-based
remedy on the basis of the existing
record. GameFly Motion at 12. The
Postal Service appears to advocate a reopening of the record to revisit many of
6 There is no significance to the order in which
the options are presented. As noted below, the
Commission has made no decision about any
possible remedy.
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
the issues decided in Order No. 718.
Postal Service Reply at 5–8.7
Given the significant differences
between their positions on remand, the
parties could be headed toward further
prolonged administrative and appellate
review proceedings. Such a result is
neither in the public interest nor the
best interest of a sound administrative
process. This prolonged proceeding has
already consumed substantial resources
of the parties and the Commission.
There is no assurance that a
Commission imposed remedy will be
satisfactory to both parties. The
Commission believes that it is in the
public interest and prudent for all
concerned to explore the possibility of
resolving the remedy issue by
settlement. Accordingly, the
Commission is convening a settlement
conference to be attended by
representatives of GameFly, the Postal
Service, intervenors, and the Public
Representative previously appointed to
this proceeding.
The Commission takes this step with
the hope that a better sense of the
remedies under consideration on
remand may allow the parties to address
their differences and reach a mutually
agreeable outcome. As yet, the
Commission has made no decision on a
possible remedy and expresses no
preference among those described in
this Order. It fully expects that the
parties will make the most of this
opportunity to fashion a remedy
acceptable to both without the
unnecessary use of time or resources.
V. Settlement Procedures
Initial meeting. Pursuant to 39 CFR
3030.40, the Commission will convene
a settlement conference on April 23,
2013. To facilitate discussions, the
Commission appoints James Waclawski
as settlement coordinator. In discussing
the possibility of settlement, the parties
are free to consider the remedies
identified above and any others they
deem appropriate. Among the factors
they should bear in mind is the
desirability of avoiding an unnecessary
re-opening of the record.
Expeditious proceedings. Time is of
the essence. The purpose of these
settlement discussions is to allow the
parties an opportunity to identify a
mutually agreeable remedy as
expeditiously as possible. The
Commission has no desire to delay
7 Without,
at this juncture, ruling on the propriety
of revisiting any of these subjects in the context of
developing a remedy, the Commission notes that its
finding of undue discrimination, which was not
challenged by the Postal Service in the appellate
proceedings, is final and has not been remanded by
the Court for further Commission consideration.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Apr 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
23789
unnecessarily the resolution of the
outstanding issues in this docket. To
that end, the Commission directs the
settlement coordinator to discourage
dilatory behavior by the parties and to
notify the Commission as soon as
possible if he determines that
negotiations between the parties are
unlikely to be fruitful. The settlement
coordinator shall file a report on the
progress of settlement not later than 20
days after the issuance of this Order.
Should the parties fail to agree on an
appropriate remedy, the Commission
will rule on the GameFly Motion and
will proceed with all reasonable
dispatch to complete the remand
proceeding and satisfy its obligation
‘‘either to remedy all discrimination or
to explain why any discrimination it left
in place was due or reasonable under
§ 403(c).’’ 704 F.3d at 148. Whether
further administrative proceedings will
be needed to create a record adequate to
support the remedy ultimately selected
by the Commission is a matter that will
be determined by further order of the
Commission.
It is ordered:
1. The Commission convenes a
settlement conference at its offices at
10:00 a.m. on April 23, 2013, for the
purpose of reaching agreement on a
remedy of the undue discrimination
previously found to exist by Order No.
718.
2. The Commission directs GameFly
and the Postal Service to immediately
engage in settlement negotiations with
the goal of expeditiously resolving this
controversy based on the potential
remedies and considerations discussed
in this Order.
3. The Commission appoints James
Waclawski as settlement coordinator
concerning the settlement discussions
ordered herein and to coordinate those
discussions.
4. The Commission directs the
settlement coordinator to file a report
not later than 20 days after the date of
this order.
5. Emmett Rand Costich, previously
appointed in this proceeding as Public
Representative, shall continue in that
capacity to represent the interests of the
general public.
6. The Commission directs the
Secretary of the Commission to arrange
for publication of this Order in the
Federal Register.
equalized either at the current first ounce
letter rates or at rates higher than the FirstClass Mail letter rate.
b. An Equal Contribution Remedy
An equal contribution remedy would
reduce rates for flat-shaped DVD mail to a
level that would produce an equal
contribution for letter- and flat-shaped DVD
mail. The Commission rejected GameFly’s
proposed equal contribution remedy, in part,
on the limitations of the then-current record.8
This option may require the parties to
develop supplemental or revised cost data to
address the deficiencies of the then-record
data.
Appendix—Summary Descriptions of
Potential Remedies
8 Order No. 718 at 112, ¶ 5019 (‘‘Even if the
Commission were to accept GameFly’s contention
that the cost differences do not justify the extent of
the difference in rates paid by the mailers, such
estimates are not sufficiently accurate to be used to
design a rate for flat-shaped round-trip DVD mailers
in the manner suggested by GameFly’s rate-based
remedy.’’).
I. GameFly Proposed Remedies
a. Equal Rate Treatment
Rates for letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail
at the First-Class Mail letter rate would be
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
II. Postal Service Proposed Remedy
A remedy that would require an
explanation of why any residual
discrimination is due or reasonable, such as
the Commission’s original remedy. This
would preserve the remedy adopted in Order
No. 718, permitting DVD mailers either to
send one-ounce letter-shaped mail without
paying a non-machinable surcharge or to
send flat-shaped mail of up to two-ounces at
the applicable one-ounce single-piece FirstClass flat rates. Order No. 718 at 1–2. This
remedy could require the Commission to
provide a more extensive and persuasive
explanation of the rationale for any
remaining discrimination in order to
withstand further appellate review.
III. Remedies Identified by the Commission
a. Retain the Letter Round-Trip DVD
Mailer and Flat Round-Trip DVD Mailer
categories, impose a requirement that the
Postal Service manually process all lettershaped DVD mail, and establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure manual
processing is occurring at a certain level.
This remedy would retain the Letter
Round-Trip Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
Mailer categories and rates as established in
Order No. 718. It would require the Postal
Service to provide manual processing for all
letter-shaped DVD mail and it would
establish an enforcement mechanism to
ensure that a certain level of manual
processing was in fact provided. Mailers who
are satisfied with the prescribed level of
manual processing could send their DVDs as
letter mail. Mailers who are not satisfied with
the prescribed level of manual processing
could send DVDs as flats and would get the
second ounce free. If this remedy were
adopted, mailers could choose the type of
mail service that gives them the level of
protection they desire.
b. An operational remedy that would
eliminate all special treatment of DVDs and
impose rates that apply to the mailpiece, e.g.
the non-machinable surcharge and second
ounce rates.
This remedy eliminating all special
treatment of DVDs would require the Postal
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
23790
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 / Notices
Service to collect a non-machinable
surcharge on all letter-shaped DVD mail. The
Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat RoundTrip Mailer categories established in Order
No. 718 would be eliminated and the Postal
Service would impose the full charge for the
second ounce of First-Class DVD flats mail.
c. An operational remedy that would
require manual handling of all letter-shaped
DVDs subject to certain standards.
The remedy would require the Postal
Service to provide uniform manual
processing to all letter-shaped DVD mail, e.g.,
the type afforded Netflix’s mail. The nonmachinable surcharge would not be imposed.
However, the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and
Flat Round-Trip Mailer categories would not
be retained. While manual processing of DVD
letter mail would be made available to all
mailers on a non-discriminatory basis, it
nevertheless would recognize that
operational factors can affect the feasibility of
providing manual processing at any point in
time and that individual mailers cannot be
guaranteed the exact same level of manual
processing. This recognition that manual
processing levels may fluctuate and vary
from mailer to mailer distinguishes this
operational remedy from the GameFly
operational remedy that would require that
each mailer receive the same level of manual
processing. Enforcement of the requirement
that such manual processing be provided on
a non-discriminatory basis could be
facilitated by requiring the Postal Service to
monitor and report manual processing levels,
e.g., based on IMb scans.
Appendix—Summary Descriptions of
Potential Remedies
I. GameFly Proposed Remedies
a. Equal Rate Treatment
Rates for letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail
at the First-Class Mail letter rate would be
equalized either at the current first ounce
letter rates or at rates higher than the FirstClass Mail letter rate.
b. An Equal Contribution Remedy
An equal contribution remedy would
reduce rates for flat-shaped DVD mail to a
level that would produce an equal
contribution for letter- and flat-shaped DVD
mail. The Commission rejected GameFly’s
proposed equal contribution remedy, in part,
on the limitations of the then-current record.9
This option may require the parties to
develop supplemental or revised cost data to
address the deficiencies of the then-record
data.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
II. Postal Service Proposed Remedy
A remedy that would require an
explanation of why any residual
discrimination is due or reasonable, such as
the Commission’s original remedy. This
would preserve the remedy adopted in Order
9 Order No. 718 at 112, ¶ 5019 (‘‘Even if the
Commission were to accept GameFly’s contention
that the cost differences do not justify the extent of
the difference in rates paid by the mailers, such
estimates are not sufficiently accurate to be used to
design a rate for flat-shaped round-trip DVD mailers
in the manner suggested by GameFly’s rate-based
remedy.’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Apr 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
No. 718, permitting DVD mailers either to
send one-ounce letter-shaped mail without
paying a non-machinable surcharge or to
send flat-shaped mail of up to two-ounces at
the applicable one-ounce single-piece FirstClass flat rates. Order No. 718 at 1–2. This
remedy could require the Commission to
provide a more extensive and persuasive
explanation of the rationale for any
remaining discrimination in order to
withstand further appellate review.
III. Remedies Identified by the Commission
a. Retain the Letter Round-Trip DVD
Mailer and Flat Round-Trip DVD Mailer
categories, impose a requirement that the
Postal Service manually process all lettershaped DVD mail, and establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure manual
processing is occurring at a certain level.
This remedy would retain the Letter
Round-Trip Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
Mailer categories and rates as established in
Order No. 718. It would require the Postal
Service to provide manual processing for all
letter-shaped DVD mail and it would
establish an enforcement mechanism to
ensure that a certain level of manual
processing was in fact provided. Mailers who
are satisfied with the prescribed level of
manual processing could send their DVDs as
letter mail. Mailers who are not satisfied with
the prescribed level of manual processing
could send DVDs as flats and would get the
second ounce free. If this remedy were
adopted, mailers could choose the type of
mail service that gives them the level of
protection they desire.
b. An operational remedy that would
eliminate all special treatment of DVDs and
impose rates that apply to the mailpiece, e.g.
the non-machinable surcharge and second
ounce rates.
This remedy eliminating all special
treatment of DVDs would require the Postal
Service to collect a non-machinable
surcharge on all letter-shaped DVD mail. The
Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat RoundTrip Mailer categories established in Order
No. 718 would be eliminated and the Postal
Service would impose the full charge for the
second ounce of First-Class DVD flats mail.
c. An operational remedy that would
require manual handling of all letter-shaped
DVDs subject to certain standards.
The remedy would require the Postal
Service to provide uniform manual
processing to all letter-shaped DVD mail, e.g.,
the type afforded Netflix’s mail. The nonmachinable surcharge would not be imposed.
However, the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and
Flat Round-Trip Mailer categories would not
be retained.
While manual processing of DVD letter
mail would be made available to all mailers
on a non-discriminatory basis, it nevertheless
would recognize that operational factors can
affect the feasibility of providing manual
processing at any point in time and that
individual mailers cannot be guaranteed the
exact same level of manual processing. This
recognition that manual processing levels
may fluctuate and vary from mailer to mailer
distinguishes this operational remedy from
the GameFly operational remedy that would
require that each mailer receive the same
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
level of manual processing. Enforcement of
the requirement that such manual processing
be provided on a non-discriminatory basis
could be facilitated by requiring the Postal
Service to monitor and report manual
processing levels, e.g., based on IMb scans.
By the Commission.
Shoshana M. Grove,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–09373 Filed 4–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor
Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549–0213.
Extension:
Rule 15b1–1 and Form BD; SEC File No.
270–19, OMB Control No. 3235–0012.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (‘‘PRA’’), the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(‘‘OMB’’) a request for approval of
extension of the previously approved
collection of information provided for in
Rule 15b1–1(17 CFR 240.15b1–1) and
Form BD (17 CFR 249.501) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17
U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
Form BD is the application form used
by firms to apply to the Commission for
registration as a broker-dealer, as
required by Rule 15b1–1. Form BD also
is used by firms other than banks and
registered broker-dealers to apply to the
Commission for registration as a
municipal securities dealer or a
government securities broker-dealer. In
addition, Form BD is used to change
information contained in a previous
Form BD filing that becomes inaccurate.
The total industry-wide annual time
burden imposed by Form BD is
approximately 5,941 hours, based on
approximately 15,890 responses (288
initial filings + 15,602 amendments).
Each application filed on Form BD
requires approximately 2.75 hours to
complete and each amended Form BD
requires approximately 20 minutes to
complete. (288 × 2.75 hours = 792
hours; 15,602 × 0.33 hours = 5,149
hours; 792 hours + 5,149 hours = 5,941
hours.) The staff believes that a brokerdealer would have a Compliance
Manager complete and file both
applications and amendments on Form
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 77 (Monday, April 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23786-23790]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09373]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. C2009-1R; Order No. 1700]
Settlement Conference
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a recent order convening a
settlement conference between GameFly, Inc. and the Postal Service.
This notice informs the public of this development and takes other
administrative steps, including appointment of a settlement
coordinator.
DATES: Settlement conference: April 23, 2013 at 10:00 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing
Online system at https://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: Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
at 202-789-6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. GameFly Motion, Postal Service Reply, and GameFly Response
IV. Analysis
V. Settlement Procedures
I. Introduction
The latest issues in this docket come before the Commission on
remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia.\1\ Following the issuance of the Court's mandate, on March 7,
2013, GameFly, Inc. (GameFly) filed a motion requesting the Commission
to establish standards and procedures for proceedings on remand.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ GameFly, Inc. v. Postal Regulatory Commission, 704 F.3d 145
(D.C. Cir. 2013) (GameFly).
\2\ Docket No. C2009-1, Motion of GameFly, Inc., to Establish
Standards and Procedures to Govern Proceedings on Remand, March 7,
2013 (GameFly Motion).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service replied to the GameFly Motion and GameFly filed
a response.\3\ For the reasons discussed below, the Commission defers
action on these filings and will convene a settlement conference to
pursue the possibility of the parties agreeing to a mutually acceptable
resolution of the remaining issues in the remanded proceeding. The
settlement conference will convene at 10:00 a.m. April 23, 2013 in the
Commission's hearing room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See United States Postal Service Reply in Opposition to
Motion of GameFly, Inc., to Establish Standards and Procedures to
Govern Proceedings on Remand, March 14, 2013 (Postal Service Reply);
Response of GameFly, Inc., to March 14 USPS Opposition to GameFly
Motion to Establish Standards and Proceedings on Remand, March 18,
2013 (GameFly Response). Accompanying the GameFly Response was a
motion requesting leave to respond to the Postal Service Reply.
Motion of GameFly, Inc., for Leave to Respond to March 14 USPS
Opposition to March 7 GameFly Motion, March 18, 2013. The motion for
leave to respond is granted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
Proceedings in this docket were instituted by GameFly's filing of a
complaint under 39 U.S.C. 3662. In its complaint, GameFly alleged that
rates and services offered by the Postal Service to certain DVD mailers
violated prohibitions on undue or unreasonable discrimination under 39
U.S.C. 101(d), 403(c), 404(b), and 3622(b)(8).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Docket No. C2009-1, Complaint of GameFly, Inc., April 23,
2009, at 1 (Complaint).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GameFly, which is in the business of renting video game DVDs,
alleged that the Postal Service discriminated against GameFly by not
providing the same treatment to GameFly's mail as it did to the mail of
Netflix and Blockbuster (which are primarily in the business of renting
movie DVDs). Id. at 12. GameFly alleged further that the Postal Service
manually culled and processed Netflix and Blockbuster's mail, allowing
them to mail one-ounce First-Class letters without paying a non-
machinable surcharge or exposing their DVDs to the risk of breakage on
automated machines.
[[Page 23787]]
Id. at 8-9. GameFly asserted that, unlike Netflix and Blockbuster, it
decided to add a protective cardboard insert and mail its DVDs as two-
ounce First-Class flats in order to avoid automated machines and reduce
the risk of breakage. Id. at 5. At the time the Complaint was filed,
the First-Class one-ounce letter rate was $0.42 and the First-Class
two-ounce flat rate was $1.00. Id. at 6.
Determination of undue discrimination. After extensive discovery,
testimony, filings, and hearings, the Commission issued an order in
which it determined that the Postal Service had unduly discriminated
against GameFly.\5\ The Commission reached this conclusion by using a
three-part test that considered whether: (1) GameFly had been offered
less favorable rates or terms and conditions than another mailer; (2)
GameFly was similarly situated to the other mailer; and (3) there was
no rational or legitimate basis for the Postal Service to deny it the
more favorable rates or terms or conditions provided to the other
mailer. Id. at 28. The Commission determined that all three prongs of
the test had been satisfied. Id. at 108.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Order on Complaint, April 20, 2011, at 108 (Order No. 718).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GameFly's proposed remedies. Although it found that the Postal
Service had unduly discriminated against GameFly, the Commission
rejected the two remedies suggested by GameFly. The first was an
operational remedy that would have required the Postal Service to offer
``a measurable and enforceable level of manual culling and processing
of DVD mailers sent at machinable letter rates.'' Id. at 110. The
Commission explained that it was reluctant to assume responsibility for
oversight of Postal Service operations at the level proposed by GameFly
and wary of the ``significant administrative costs'' that the Postal
Service could incur attempting to enforce a particular level of manual
culling and processing. Id. at 111.
GameFly's second proposed remedy was a rate-based remedy, under
which the Postal Service would have been required to publish a reduced
rate for flat-shaped DVD mailers designed to produce the same average
contribution per piece for both flat-shaped and letter-shaped DVD mail
(the ``equal contribution remedy''). Id. The Commission rejected this
second proposed remedy because the models used by GameFly's witness in
support of this remedy were ``not sufficiently accurate'' to establish
an appropriate rate. Id. at 112. The Commission stated a preference for
allowing the Postal Service, rather than the Commission, to ``exercise
statutory flexibility'' in ratemaking and expressed concern that the
rate-based remedy ``fails to directly address the consequences of the
preferential treatment afforded Netflix.'' Id. at 112-113.
Commission remedy. In lieu of GameFly's proposed remedies, the
Commission opted to establish a ``niche classification'' for round-trip
DVD mail. Id. at 113. Order No. 718 added a ``Letter Round-Trip
Mailer'' category and a ``Flat Round-Trip Mailer'' category to the Mail
Classification Schedule (MCS). Id. Appendix B. The Letter Round-Trip
Mailer category allowed round-trip DVD mailers to send one-ounce
letter-shaped mail at the single-piece machinable letter rate and
prevented the Postal Service from applying a non-machinable surcharge
to such mail. Id. at 1. The Flat Round-Trip Mailer category allowed
round-trip DVD mailers to send flat-shaped mail of up to two ounces at
the one-ounce single-piece First-Class flats rate. Id. at 2. The
Commission characterized this remedy as providing GameFly with
treatment comparable to the treatment the Postal Service gave Netflix.
Id. at 114. However, the remedy also resulted in a higher rate and a
higher per-piece contribution for round-trip DVD mail sent as flats.
Id. at 115. The Commission found the higher rates and contribution to
be justified by ``cost differences and by general pricing differences
between First-Class Mail flat and letter products.'' Id.
D.C. Circuit Opinion. Unsatisfied with the remedy imposed by Order
No. 718, GameFly filed an appeal with the Court. The Postal Service
elected not to appeal the Commission's finding of undue discrimination,
but did participate in the appellate proceedings in support of the
remedy prescribed by Order No. 718.
The Court rejected the Commission's remedy because it left in place
part of the discrimination it was attempting to remedy without
explaining why the ``residual discrimination'' was due or reasonable.
704 F.3d at 149. The residual discrimination identified by the Court
consisted of continuing differences in the terms of service offered to
DVD mailers of letter-shaped and flat-shaped mail. The Court explained
that the Commission ``cannot justify the terms of service
discrimination its remedy leaves in place (providing manual letter
processing to Netflix but not to GameFly) based on the companies' use
of different mailers when the use of different mailers is itself the
product of the service discrimination.'' Id.
The Court vacated the Commission's order and remanded the case to
the Commission to ``either remedy all discrimination or explain why any
residual discrimination is due or reasonable under Sec. 403.'' Id. It
expressed the opinion that the Commission would ``surely consider''
GameFly's proposed remedies on remand, but noted that ``there may be a
range of other possible remedies which would withstand appellate
review.'' Id.
III. GameFly Motion, Postal Service Reply, and GameFly Response
In response to GameFly, the parties filed a series of documents
setting out their respective positions and expectations for proceedings
on remand. The first of these was the GameFly Motion, followed by the
Postal Service Reply and the GameFly Response.
GameFly Motion. The GameFly Motion begins by outlining the issues
that GameFly considers to have been resolved by the Court's Opinion.
GameFly Motion at 1-8. It then sets forth a new proposed remedy and
several possible alternatives, as well as the standards and procedures
that GameFly asserts should be used to evaluate any alternative
remedies. Id. at 8-18.
GameFly's new remedy would require the Postal Service to charge the
First-Class Mail letter rate for all round-trip DVD mailers, whether
they choose to mail letters or flats. Id. at 9. GameFly characterizes
this remedy as ``the next best alternative'' to requiring the Postal
Service to provide GameFly's mail with the same degree of manual
processing that Netflix receives for its letter-shaped DVD mail. Id. at
11. In proposing this remedy, GameFly withdraws its previous request
for the equal contribution remedy. Id. GameFly argues that the
Commission should impose its new remedy immediately, without re-opening
the record in this docket. Id. at 13.
GameFly also identifies two alternatives to its new, preferred
remedy. The first of these alternatives would allow the Postal Service
30 days to propose a rate for DVD mailers that is the same for both
flats and letters but higher than the preferred remedy's First-Class
Mail letter rate. Id. at 14. GameFly asserts that the Postal Service
should be required to provide certain additional information to support
any such proposed rate. Id. If the Postal Service were to choose not to
submit a proposed new rate within 30 days, GameFly would have the
Commission establish a new rate for both letter- and flat-shaped
[[Page 23788]]
DVD mail at the First-Class Mail letter rate. Id.
GameFly's second proposed alternative remedy is an operational
remedy that would require the Postal Service to either provide the same
level of manual processing to Netflix and GameFly mail or to
discontinue manual processing of Netflix mail. Id. at 15. GameFly
argues that the record in this docket ``imposes a heavy presumption''
against an operational remedy, citing potential problems with
enforcement. Id. at 15-16. GameFly suggests that if the Commission
adopts an operational remedy, the Postal Service should be required to
provide certain information in support of that remedy. Id. at 17-18.
Postal Service reply. The Postal Service Reply rejects the remedies
proposed in the GameFly Motion, arguing instead that the Commission
should maintain its original remedy, but explain better why that remedy
addresses any residual discrimination. Postal Service Reply at 2, 10-
14. The Postal Service also takes issue with GameFly's list of settled
issues, asserting that GameFly is attempting to eliminate the
Commission's discretion and authority by preventing the Commission from
re-opening the record and obtaining additional guidance. Id. at 2.
The Postal Service asserts that the record contains sufficient
evidence for the Commission to explain to the Court's satisfaction that
its original remedy was sound and that any remaining discrimination is
due to local operational decisions dictated by differences in the
volume, density, and appearance of Netflix's and GameFly's mail. Id. at
11-12.
The Postal Service argues further that any rate-based remedy would
require the Commission to re-open the record to conform with
``statutory and regulatory provisions governing the establishment of
rates and classifications under the [Postal Accountability and
Enhancement Act]'' and to respect the Postal Service's authority to
direct its own operational policies. Id. at 6. It states that the
record in this docket lacks sufficient evidence to support GameFly's
proposed rate-based remedy. Id. at 6-7. The Postal Service warns that
GameFly's remedy would ``inevitably lead to questions about the
presence and effects of discrimination embodied in all rates, and the
Mail Classification Schedule in general.'' Id. at 8.
Finally, the Postal Service argues that the record does not reflect
changes in the processing of DVD mail and ``major parts of the
operating environment'' that have occurred since the record in this
docket was established. Id. at 9.
GameFly response. GameFly responds to the Postal Service Reply by
reiterating its position that the Postal Service is not permitted to
relitigate factual issues resolved by Order No. 718 (either before the
Commission or before the Court in a future appeal) or the findings of
GameFly. GameFly Response at 4-6.
GameFly concedes that there may be alternative remedies available
that would require the Commission to re-open the record. Id. at 8.
However, GameFly asserts that the degree to which the record should be
re-opened will depend on the particular alternative remedy. Id. For
instance, GameFly believes that its first alternative remedy (price
equalization at a rate established by the Postal Service) would require
little additional information, but that its second alternative remedy
(operational directives) may require ``more elaborate fact-finding.''
Id. at 8-9.
GameFly contends that, rather than attempting to place substantive
limits on potential remedies, it is proposing filing requirements
designed to elicit the information necessary to support an alternative
remedy. Id. at 9. It asserts that each of these filing requirements is
reasonable in light of the nature of the proposed alternative remedies.
Id. at 10. In particular, it asserts that because the Postal Service
argued against an operational remedy in earlier proceedings in this
docket, the Postal Service must make additional showings if it now
believes an operational remedy is justified. Id.
Finally, GameFly argues that a remedy that equalized rates for
letter- and flat-shaped DVD mailers is neither discriminatory against
other flat-shaped mail nor likely to have a significant impact on the
Postal Service's financial situation. Id. at 11-12.
IV. Analysis
The Commission has before it several remedies which the parties
believe would satisfy the court's directive to ``either remedy all
discrimination or explain why any residual discrimination is due or
reasonable under Sec. 403.'' 704 F.3d at 149. GameFly prefers a remedy
that establishes an identical rate for round-trip DVD letter and flats
mail that is equal to the First-Class Mail letter rate. GameFly Motion
at 8-13. The Postal Service vigorously opposes GameFly's preferred
remedy and encourages the Commission to stand by the remedy prescribed
by Order No. 718. Postal Service Reply at 4-5, 10-11 (``there is
sufficient evidence in the existing record to support the original
remedy, and the Commission has the authority to conduct proceedings for
that purpose, if necessary.'').
The Court has given the Commission sufficient latitude to consider
both of these remedies, as well as others including the two remedies
originally proposed by GameFly. 704 F.3d at 149 (``Upon rehearing, the
Commission will surely consider those [i.e., GameFly's earlier]
remedies, but there may be a range of other possible remedies which
would withstand appellate review.''; ``The Commission must either
remedy all discrimination or explain why any residual discrimination is
due or reasonable under Sec. 403.'').
The Commission is considering various remedies, each of which is
intended to satisfy the Court's directive. The Commission has
identified, at least preliminarily, the following options: \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ There is no significance to the order in which the options
are presented. As noted below, the Commission has made no decision
about any possible remedy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GameFly proposed remedies:
An equal rate remedy;
An equal contribution remedy;
Postal Service proposed remedy:
Original remedy set forth in Order No. 718 with
additional explanation as to why the residual discrimination is
justified; Remedies identified by the Commission:
A remedy that retains the Letter Round-Trip DVD
Mailer and Flat Round-Trip DVD Mailer categories created by Order No.
718, imposes a requirement that the Postal Service manually process all
letter-shaped DVD mail, and establishes an enforcement mechanism to
ensure manual processing is occurring at a certain level;
An operational remedy that would eliminate all special
treatment of DVDs and impose rates that apply to the mailpiece, e.g.,
the non-machinable surcharge and second ounce rates; and
An operational remedy that would require manual handling
of all letter-shaped DVDs subject to certain standards.
The Appendix provides a brief description of these alternatives.
The options outlined above do not foreclose the parties from fashioning
their own mutually agreeable relief.
The parties take different positions on whether, and to what
extent, further administrative hearings (including additional
discovery) might be necessary to resolve the remedy issue. GameFly
advocates the immediate imposition of its preferred rate-based remedy
on the basis of the existing record. GameFly Motion at 12. The Postal
Service appears to advocate a re-opening of the record to revisit many
of
[[Page 23789]]
the issues decided in Order No. 718. Postal Service Reply at 5-8.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Without, at this juncture, ruling on the propriety of
revisiting any of these subjects in the context of developing a
remedy, the Commission notes that its finding of undue
discrimination, which was not challenged by the Postal Service in
the appellate proceedings, is final and has not been remanded by the
Court for further Commission consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the significant differences between their positions on
remand, the parties could be headed toward further prolonged
administrative and appellate review proceedings. Such a result is
neither in the public interest nor the best interest of a sound
administrative process. This prolonged proceeding has already consumed
substantial resources of the parties and the Commission. There is no
assurance that a Commission imposed remedy will be satisfactory to both
parties. The Commission believes that it is in the public interest and
prudent for all concerned to explore the possibility of resolving the
remedy issue by settlement. Accordingly, the Commission is convening a
settlement conference to be attended by representatives of GameFly, the
Postal Service, intervenors, and the Public Representative previously
appointed to this proceeding.
The Commission takes this step with the hope that a better sense of
the remedies under consideration on remand may allow the parties to
address their differences and reach a mutually agreeable outcome. As
yet, the Commission has made no decision on a possible remedy and
expresses no preference among those described in this Order. It fully
expects that the parties will make the most of this opportunity to
fashion a remedy acceptable to both without the unnecessary use of time
or resources.
V. Settlement Procedures
Initial meeting. Pursuant to 39 CFR 3030.40, the Commission will
convene a settlement conference on April 23, 2013. To facilitate
discussions, the Commission appoints James Waclawski as settlement
coordinator. In discussing the possibility of settlement, the parties
are free to consider the remedies identified above and any others they
deem appropriate. Among the factors they should bear in mind is the
desirability of avoiding an unnecessary re-opening of the record.
Expeditious proceedings. Time is of the essence. The purpose of
these settlement discussions is to allow the parties an opportunity to
identify a mutually agreeable remedy as expeditiously as possible. The
Commission has no desire to delay unnecessarily the resolution of the
outstanding issues in this docket. To that end, the Commission directs
the settlement coordinator to discourage dilatory behavior by the
parties and to notify the Commission as soon as possible if he
determines that negotiations between the parties are unlikely to be
fruitful. The settlement coordinator shall file a report on the
progress of settlement not later than 20 days after the issuance of
this Order.
Should the parties fail to agree on an appropriate remedy, the
Commission will rule on the GameFly Motion and will proceed with all
reasonable dispatch to complete the remand proceeding and satisfy its
obligation ``either to remedy all discrimination or to explain why any
discrimination it left in place was due or reasonable under Sec.
403(c).'' 704 F.3d at 148. Whether further administrative proceedings
will be needed to create a record adequate to support the remedy
ultimately selected by the Commission is a matter that will be
determined by further order of the Commission.
It is ordered:
1. The Commission convenes a settlement conference at its offices
at 10:00 a.m. on April 23, 2013, for the purpose of reaching agreement
on a remedy of the undue discrimination previously found to exist by
Order No. 718.
2. The Commission directs GameFly and the Postal Service to
immediately engage in settlement negotiations with the goal of
expeditiously resolving this controversy based on the potential
remedies and considerations discussed in this Order.
3. The Commission appoints James Waclawski as settlement
coordinator concerning the settlement discussions ordered herein and to
coordinate those discussions.
4. The Commission directs the settlement coordinator to file a
report not later than 20 days after the date of this order.
5. Emmett Rand Costich, previously appointed in this proceeding as
Public Representative, shall continue in that capacity to represent the
interests of the general public.
6. The Commission directs the Secretary of the Commission to
arrange for publication of this Order in the Federal Register.
Appendix--Summary Descriptions of Potential Remedies
I. GameFly Proposed Remedies
a. Equal Rate Treatment
Rates for letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail at the First-Class
Mail letter rate would be equalized either at the current first
ounce letter rates or at rates higher than the First-Class Mail
letter rate.
b. An Equal Contribution Remedy
An equal contribution remedy would reduce rates for flat-shaped
DVD mail to a level that would produce an equal contribution for
letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail. The Commission rejected GameFly's
proposed equal contribution remedy, in part, on the limitations of
the then-current record.\8\ This option may require the parties to
develop supplemental or revised cost data to address the
deficiencies of the then-record data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Order No. 718 at 112, ] 5019 (``Even if the Commission were
to accept GameFly's contention that the cost differences do not
justify the extent of the difference in rates paid by the mailers,
such estimates are not sufficiently accurate to be used to design a
rate for flat-shaped round-trip DVD mailers in the manner suggested
by GameFly's rate-based remedy.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Postal Service Proposed Remedy
A remedy that would require an explanation of why any residual
discrimination is due or reasonable, such as the Commission's
original remedy. This would preserve the remedy adopted in Order No.
718, permitting DVD mailers either to send one-ounce letter-shaped
mail without paying a non-machinable surcharge or to send flat-
shaped mail of up to two-ounces at the applicable one-ounce single-
piece First-Class flat rates. Order No. 718 at 1-2. This remedy
could require the Commission to provide a more extensive and
persuasive explanation of the rationale for any remaining
discrimination in order to withstand further appellate review.
III. Remedies Identified by the Commission
a. Retain the Letter Round-Trip DVD Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
DVD Mailer categories, impose a requirement that the Postal Service
manually process all letter-shaped DVD mail, and establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure manual processing is occurring at a
certain level.
This remedy would retain the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat
Round-Trip Mailer categories and rates as established in Order No.
718. It would require the Postal Service to provide manual
processing for all letter-shaped DVD mail and it would establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure that a certain level of manual
processing was in fact provided. Mailers who are satisfied with the
prescribed level of manual processing could send their DVDs as
letter mail. Mailers who are not satisfied with the prescribed level
of manual processing could send DVDs as flats and would get the
second ounce free. If this remedy were adopted, mailers could choose
the type of mail service that gives them the level of protection
they desire.
b. An operational remedy that would eliminate all special
treatment of DVDs and impose rates that apply to the mailpiece, e.g.
the non-machinable surcharge and second ounce rates.
This remedy eliminating all special treatment of DVDs would
require the Postal
[[Page 23790]]
Service to collect a non-machinable surcharge on all letter-shaped
DVD mail. The Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat Round-Trip Mailer
categories established in Order No. 718 would be eliminated and the
Postal Service would impose the full charge for the second ounce of
First-Class DVD flats mail.
c. An operational remedy that would require manual handling of
all letter-shaped DVDs subject to certain standards.
The remedy would require the Postal Service to provide uniform
manual processing to all letter-shaped DVD mail, e.g., the type
afforded Netflix's mail. The non-machinable surcharge would not be
imposed. However, the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
Mailer categories would not be retained. While manual processing of
DVD letter mail would be made available to all mailers on a non-
discriminatory basis, it nevertheless would recognize that
operational factors can affect the feasibility of providing manual
processing at any point in time and that individual mailers cannot
be guaranteed the exact same level of manual processing. This
recognition that manual processing levels may fluctuate and vary
from mailer to mailer distinguishes this operational remedy from the
GameFly operational remedy that would require that each mailer
receive the same level of manual processing. Enforcement of the
requirement that such manual processing be provided on a non-
discriminatory basis could be facilitated by requiring the Postal
Service to monitor and report manual processing levels, e.g., based
on IMb scans.
Appendix--Summary Descriptions of Potential Remedies
I. GameFly Proposed Remedies
a. Equal Rate Treatment
Rates for letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail at the First-Class
Mail letter rate would be equalized either at the current first
ounce letter rates or at rates higher than the First-Class Mail
letter rate.
b. An Equal Contribution Remedy
An equal contribution remedy would reduce rates for flat-shaped
DVD mail to a level that would produce an equal contribution for
letter- and flat-shaped DVD mail. The Commission rejected GameFly's
proposed equal contribution remedy, in part, on the limitations of
the then-current record.\9\ This option may require the parties to
develop supplemental or revised cost data to address the
deficiencies of the then-record data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Order No. 718 at 112, ] 5019 (``Even if the Commission were
to accept GameFly's contention that the cost differences do not
justify the extent of the difference in rates paid by the mailers,
such estimates are not sufficiently accurate to be used to design a
rate for flat-shaped round-trip DVD mailers in the manner suggested
by GameFly's rate-based remedy.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Postal Service Proposed Remedy
A remedy that would require an explanation of why any residual
discrimination is due or reasonable, such as the Commission's
original remedy. This would preserve the remedy adopted in Order No.
718, permitting DVD mailers either to send one-ounce letter-shaped
mail without paying a non-machinable surcharge or to send flat-
shaped mail of up to two-ounces at the applicable one-ounce single-
piece First-Class flat rates. Order No. 718 at 1-2. This remedy
could require the Commission to provide a more extensive and
persuasive explanation of the rationale for any remaining
discrimination in order to withstand further appellate review.
III. Remedies Identified by the Commission
a. Retain the Letter Round-Trip DVD Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
DVD Mailer categories, impose a requirement that the Postal Service
manually process all letter-shaped DVD mail, and establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure manual processing is occurring at a
certain level.
This remedy would retain the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat
Round-Trip Mailer categories and rates as established in Order No.
718. It would require the Postal Service to provide manual
processing for all letter-shaped DVD mail and it would establish an
enforcement mechanism to ensure that a certain level of manual
processing was in fact provided. Mailers who are satisfied with the
prescribed level of manual processing could send their DVDs as
letter mail. Mailers who are not satisfied with the prescribed level
of manual processing could send DVDs as flats and would get the
second ounce free. If this remedy were adopted, mailers could choose
the type of mail service that gives them the level of protection
they desire.
b. An operational remedy that would eliminate all special
treatment of DVDs and impose rates that apply to the mailpiece, e.g.
the non-machinable surcharge and second ounce rates.
This remedy eliminating all special treatment of DVDs would
require the Postal Service to collect a non-machinable surcharge on
all letter-shaped DVD mail. The Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat
Round-Trip Mailer categories established in Order No. 718 would be
eliminated and the Postal Service would impose the full charge for
the second ounce of First-Class DVD flats mail.
c. An operational remedy that would require manual handling of
all letter-shaped DVDs subject to certain standards.
The remedy would require the Postal Service to provide uniform
manual processing to all letter-shaped DVD mail, e.g., the type
afforded Netflix's mail. The non-machinable surcharge would not be
imposed. However, the Letter Round-Trip Mailer and Flat Round-Trip
Mailer categories would not be retained.
While manual processing of DVD letter mail would be made
available to all mailers on a non-discriminatory basis, it
nevertheless would recognize that operational factors can affect the
feasibility of providing manual processing at any point in time and
that individual mailers cannot be guaranteed the exact same level of
manual processing. This recognition that manual processing levels
may fluctuate and vary from mailer to mailer distinguishes this
operational remedy from the GameFly operational remedy that would
require that each mailer receive the same level of manual
processing. Enforcement of the requirement that such manual
processing be provided on a non-discriminatory basis could be
facilitated by requiring the Postal Service to monitor and report
manual processing levels, e.g., based on IMb scans.
By the Commission.
Shoshana M. Grove,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-09373 Filed 4-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P