Public Inquiry, 36246-36248 [2021-14636]
Download as PDF
36246
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 129 / Friday, July 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules
(h) No Reporting Requirement
(i) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or
responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the certification office,
send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a
principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain instructions
from a manufacturer, the instructions must
be accomplished using a method approved
by the Manager, New York ACO Branch,
FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA
DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval
must include the DAO-authorized signature.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(j) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) TCCA AD
CF–2021–04, dated February 15, 2021; for
related information. This MCAI may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2021–0560.
(2) For more information about this AD,
contact Siddeeq Bacchus, Aerospace
Engineer, Mechanical Systems and
Administrative Services Section, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
516–228–7362; fax 516–794–5531; email 9avs-nyaco-cos@faa.gov.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 CoˆteVertu Road West, Dorval, Que´bec H4S 1Y9,
Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514–
855–7401; email thd.crj@
aero.bombardier.com; internet https://
www.bombardier.com. You may view this
service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
206–231–3195.
Issued on July 2, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–14611 Filed 7–8–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jul 08, 2021
carry letters. See 18 U.S.C. 1693–1699;
39 U.S.C. 601–606.1
39 CFR Chapter III
Section 601 provides specific
instances (exceptions) where letters may
be carried out of the mail (i.e., not
[Docket No. PI2021–2; Order No. 5930]
subject to the letter monopoly). Section
Public Inquiry
601(a) sets forth the conditions under
which a letter may be carried out of the
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
mail, which include requiring that the
ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed
letter be enclosed in an envelope, that
rulemaking.
the proper amount of postage is affixed
to the envelope, and that the postage is
SUMMARY: The Commission seeks further
canceled. 39 U.S.C. 601(a).
input from the public about what
Section 601(b) provides additional
regulations promulgated by the
exceptions such that the letter
Commission may be necessary to carry
monopoly does not apply to letters
out the requirements of agency law.
charged more than six times the current
This document informs the public of
rate for the first ounce of a Single-Piece
this proceeding, invites public
First Class Letter or to letters weighing
comment, and takes other
more than 12.5 ounces. See 39 U.S.C.
administrative steps.
601(b)(1), (b)(2). The ‘‘grandfather
DATES: Comments are due: August 26,
clause’’ in Section 601(b)(3) references
2021.
exceptions from prior Postal Service
regulations that permitted private
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
carriage as in effect on July 1, 2005. 39
electronically via the Commission’s
U.S.C. 601(b)(3); see also 39 CFR 310.1
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit and 39 CFR 320.2–320.8 (2005).
Section 601(c), which is the subject of
comments electronically should contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER this proceeding, directs the Commission
(rather than the Postal Service) to
INFORMATION CONTACT section by
promulgate any regulations necessary to
telephone for advice on filing
carry out this section. 39 U.S.C. 601(c).
alternatives.
This Public Inquiry seeks to answer how
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
the Commission shall meet this
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
statutory requirement.
202–789–6820.
Prior to the Postal Accountability and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Enhancement Act (PAEA) of 2006, the
Postal Service issued regulations that
Table of Contents
purported to suspend the PES.2 The
I. Introduction
PAEA included the term ‘‘purport’’ to
II. Background
describe the Postal Service’s efforts to
III. Discussion
suspend the PES, reflecting some
IV. Comments
disagreement between the Postal Service
V. Ordering Paragraphs
and policymakers about the Postal
I. Introduction
Service’s authority to promulgate such
regulations prior to the PAEA.3 PostIn this docket, the Commission seeks
PAEA,
the law clearly cedes such
further input from the public about
authority to the Commission. These
what regulations promulgated by the
regulations defined the term ‘‘letter’’ as
Commission may be necessary to carry
‘‘a message directed to a specific person
out the requirements of 39 U.S.C. 601.
or address and recorded in or on a
Section 601 describes instances when
tangible object,’’ subject to several
letters may be carried out of the mail,
provisions. 39 CFR 310.1(a) (2005). The
or when the letter monopoly does not
regulations also described several
apply to a mailpiece. In particular, the
Commission seeks to determine whether statutory exceptions to the letter
monopoly, such as when the letter
regulations promulgated by the
accompanies and relates to cargo or
Commission are needed to carry out
when a special messenger is used. See
those statutory exemptions.
39 CFR 310.3 (2005). In addition, the
II. Background
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
Although the service information
identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this
AD specifies to submit certain information to
the manufacturer, this AD does not include
that requirement.
Jkt 253001
The Postal Service has exclusive
rights in the carriage and delivery of
letters under certain circumstances.
This letter monopoly is codified in the
Private Express Statutes (PES), which
are a group of civil and criminal statutes
that make it unlawful for any entity
other than the Postal Service to send or
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1 Although these provisions of the U.S. Code are
customarily referred to collectively as the ‘‘Private
Express Statutes,’’ they do not all relate to private
expresses or prohibit carriage of letters out of the
mails.
2 See Postal Accountability and Enhancement
Act, Public Law 109–435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006); see
also 39 CFR 310, 320 (2005).
3 See H.R. Rep. No. 109–66, 109th Cong., 1st
Sess., pt. 1, at 58 (2005) (H.R. Rep. No. 109–66).
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 129 / Friday, July 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
regulations purported to establish
administrative suspensions of the PES
(39 CFR 310.1(a)(7) n.1, 320 (2005)),
including suspensions for certain data
processing materials or for extremely
urgent letters. See 39 CFR 320.2, 320.6
(2005).
These regulations were originally
promulgated by the Postal Service in
1974 and were amended several times
prior to enactment of the PAEA.4 In
2003, the President’s Commission on
the United States Postal Service
recommended that the scope of the
letter monopoly should be clarified and
periodically reviewed by a Postal
Regulatory Board.5 In 2006, Congress
passed the PAEA, which, inter alia,
added new price and weight limits to
the postal monopoly, repealed the
Postal Service’s purported authority to
adopt administrative suspension of the
monopoly, and repealed the Postal
Service’s authority to implement
provisions of the criminal code defining
the scope of the monopoly.6
In addition to adding price and
weight limits as exceptions (Sections
601(b)(1), (b)(2)), Congress also added a
‘‘grandfather clause’’ in Section
601(b)(3) to authorize the continuation
of private activities that the Postal
Service had purportedly permitted by
regulations to be carried out of the mail.
The House Report on the PAEA explains
that this paragraph protects mailers and
private carriers who had relied upon the
regulations adopted as of the date of the
bill. See H.R. Rep. No. 109–66 at 58.
Congress also eliminated the Postal
Service’s authority to adopt any
regulations creating exceptions or
defining the scope of the postal
monopoly. See 39 U.S.C. 401(2),
404(a)(1), 601. Congress instead gave the
Commission the authority to promulgate
‘‘[a]ny regulations necessary to carry out
this section [601].’’ 7 To date, the
4 See Comprehensive Standards for Permissible
Private Carriage, 39 FR 33211 (Sept. 16, 1974).
5 Report of the President’s Commission on the
United States Postal Service, Embracing the Future:
Making the Tough Choices to Preserve Universal
Mail Service, July 31, 2003, at 71 (President’s
Commission). The President’s Commission
recommended ‘‘transforming the narrowly focused
Postal Rate Commission [ ] into an independent
Postal Regulatory Board.’’ Id. at XIII.
6 See H.R. Rep. No. 109–66 at 57. Congress stated
that ‘‘the bill clarifies the scope of the statutory
monopoly that historically has been defined solely
by the [Postal Service].’’ Id. at 58.
7 39 U.S.C. 601(c). See Docket Nos. MC2012–14
and R2012–8, Order Approving Addition of
Valassis Direct Mail, Inc. Negotiated Service
Agreement to the Market Dominant Product List,
August 23, 2012, at 6–7 (Order No. 1448) (citing
Section 601(c) and stating that the Postal Service no
longer has authority to issue regulations
interpreting or defining the postal monopoly); see
also Docket No. MC2012–13, Order Conditionally
Granting Request to Transfer Parcel Post to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jul 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
Commission has not promulgated any
regulations pursuant to Section 601(c).
In Docket No. RM2020–4, the
Commission issued an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking to seek input from
the public about what regulations
promulgated by the Commission may be
necessary to carry out the requirements
of 39 U.S.C. 601.8 In particular, the
Commission sought comments on
fourteen issues, such as whether the
statutory requirements of Section 601
are clear and concise, whether any
terms in the statute required further
definition, and whether consumers and
competitors can easily determine when
a mailpiece is subject to monopoly
protections. Order No. 5422 at 7–8.
Prior to the comment deadline, the
Commission issued two Chairman’s
Information Requests, regarding certain
Postal Service regulations.9 In its
response, the Postal Service explained
that it had not issued regulations or
other administrative directives in
connection with Sections 601(b)(1) and
(2) since the effective date of amended
Section 601(b).10 The Postal Service also
provided information regarding
alternative payment agreements
pursuant to 39 CFR 310.2(b).11 In
addition, the Postal Service provided
information regarding advisory opinions
pursuant to 39 CFR 310.6. Docket No.
RM2020–4, Response to CHIR No. 1,
question 2.
Comments were received from The
Berkshire Company; Taxpayers
Protection Alliance; American
Consumer Institute Center for Citizen
Research; United Parcel Service, Inc.;
FedEx Corporation; Netflix, Inc.; Small
Business & Entrepreneurship Council;
the National Postal Policy Council and
the National Association of Presort
Mailers; the Association for Postal
Competitive Product List, July 20, 2012, at 6–7
(Order No. 1411) (‘‘As a result of the PAEA, the
Postal Service no longer has authority to issue
regulations interpreting or defining the postal
monopoly. The Commission now has the authority
to promulgate such regulations.’’). Order No. 1411
at 7 n.13.
8 See Docket No. RM2020–4, Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking to Consider Regulations to
Carry Out the Statutory Requirements of 39 U.S.C.
601, February 7, 2020 (Order No. 5422).
9 Docket No. RM2020–4, Chairman’s Information
Request No. 1, March 4, 2020 (Docket No. RM2020–
4, CHIR No. 1); Docket No. RM2020–4, Chairman’s
Information Request No. 2, April 1, 2020 (Docket
No. RM2020–4, CHIR No. 2).
10 Docket No. RM2020–4, Responses of the United
States Postal Service to Questions 1–3 of
Chairman’s Information Request No. 1, March 11,
2020, question 1 (Docket No. RM2020–4, Response
to CHIR No. 1).
11 Docket No. RM2020–4, Response to CHIR No.
1, question 3; see also Response of the United States
Postal Service to Chairman’s Information Request
No. 2, April 3, 2020, question 1 (Docket No.
RM2020–4, Response to CHIR No. 2).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36247
Commerce; the Postal Service; and the
Public Representative.12 Based on the
comments received, the Commission
found it necessary to gather more
information from the public before
promulgating regulations under Section
601 and therefore, that proceeding is
held in abeyance until the conclusion of
this inquiry.13
III. Discussion
In this proceeding, the Commission
seeks to focus its inquiry on the
statutory exemptions in Sections 601(a)
and (b), and what regulations under
Section 601(c), if any, are needed to
carry out those exemptions. In
particular, the Commission limits this
inquiry to two issues: (1) Whether Postal
Service regulations administering
current Sections 601(a), 601(b)(1), and
601(b)(2) should be adopted by the
Commission; and (2) what private
carrier services are within the scope of
Section 601(b)(3).
First, the Commission is interested in
identifying Postal Service regulations
that administer Sections 601(a),
601(b)(1), and 601(b)(2) and if the
Commission should adopt them. Section
601(a) provides for the private carriage
of letters when, among other things, the
letter is in an envelope that is properly
addressed, the proper amount of postage
is affixed to the envelope, and the
postage is canceled in ink by the sender.
39 U.S.C. 601(a). Sections 601(b)(1) and
(b)(2) further provide that a letter must
meet price and weight requirements in
order to be carried out of the mail. 39
U.S.C. 601(b)(1), 601(b)(2).
Prior to the PAEA, the Postal Service
issued regulations concerning the
restrictions on the private carriage of
12 Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of The
Berkshire Company in Response to Order No. 5442,
April 6, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of
Taxpayers Protection Alliance, April 6, 2020;
Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of American
Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research
Regarding Docket No. RM2020–4 Submitted to the
United States Postal Regulatory Commission, April
6, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of
United Parcel Service, Inc. on Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking to Consider Regulations to
Carry Out the Statutory Requirements of 39 U.S.C.
601, April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4,
Comments of FedEx Corporation, April 7, 2020;
Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of Netflix, Inc.,
April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, April
7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of the
National Postal Policy Council and the National
Association of Presort Mailers, April 7, 2020;
Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of the
Association for Postal Commerce, April 7, 2020;
Docket No. RM2020–4, Comments of the United
States Postal Service in Response to Order No.
5422, April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020–4, Public
Representative Comments, April 7, 2020.
13 Docket No. RM2020–4, Order Holding
Rulemaking in Abeyance, July 2, 2021 (Order No.
5929).
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
36248
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 129 / Friday, July 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
letters. Several of these regulations were
modified and superseded by the
adoption of the PAEA. For example, the
PAEA supersedes a Postal Service
regulation that allows private carriage if
the amount paid is ‘‘at least three
dollars or twice the applicable U.S.
postage for First-Class Mail (including
priority mail) whichever is greater.’’ 39
CFR 320.6(c). In addition, a Postal
Service regulation closely tracks the
language in Section 601(a) but also
allows for alternative payment
agreements in written agreements
between customers and the Postal
Service. 39 CFR 310.2(b). The
Commission is specifically interested in
whether certain Postal Service
regulations implement the current
statutory exemptions found in Sections
601(a), 601(b)(1), and 601(b)(2), and
whether the Commission should adopt
or revise these and other regulations to
clarify the statutory exemptions.
Second, the Commission is interested
in identifying what private carrier
services are within the scope of Section
601(b)(3). See 39 U.S.C. 601(b)(3). The
‘‘grandfather clause’’ in Section
601(b)(3) authorized the continuation of
private activities that the Postal Service
had purportedly permitted by
regulations to be carried out of the mail.
Specifically, it allows private carriage
that is within the scope of specific
purported suspensions to the letter
monopoly. 39 CFR 310.1 (2005)
included twelve putative exceptions to
the definition of ‘‘letter’’ and/or
purported suspensions of the letter
monopoly. 39 CFR 320.2–8 (2005)
provided seven additional purported
suspensions of the PES, including for
certain data processing materials, for
certain letters of college and university
organizations, and for certain
international-ocean carrier-related
documents. The Commission seeks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jul 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
comments on what services were
‘‘described by regulations of the United
States Postal Service . . . that purport to
permit private carriage by suspension of
the operation of this section’’ as of July
1, 2005. See 39 U.S.C. 601(b)(3).
Additionally, the Commission seeks
suggestions regarding what regulations
may be needed to enumerate in clear
terms all instances where private carrier
services are within the scope of Section
601(b)(3).
For both issues, the goal of the
Commission is to determine whether it
is necessary to clarify the statutory
exemptions regarding the letter
monopoly. The Commission seeks
information as to how best to resolve
any ambiguities in the application of the
exceptions. The Commission also
inquires whether consolidating
regulations and definitions under one
section, rescinding redundant and/or
conflicting sections, or standardizing
the terminology used in the regulations
would be helpful.
IV. Comments
The Commission invites interested
persons to identify whether there are
any Postal Service regulations that the
Commission should adopt to carry out
the requirements of Section 601 and if
so, whether the Commission should
revise those regulations. In addition, the
Commission seeks comments that
identify what private carrier services are
within the scope of Section 601(b)(3)
and whether regulations are needed to
clearly enumerate those services.
Commenters are encouraged to provide
specific suggestions on revisions or
recommend new regulations.
The Commission recognizes that
comments on these issues have been
provided in Docket No. RM2020–4.
However, given the length of time since
those comments were received and the
breadth of different topics covered by
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
the previous advance notice of proposed
rulemaking, the Commission finds it
prudent to solicit updated comments to
assist in focusing this proceeding on a
few particular issues. Commenters who
previously submitted comments in
Docket No. RM2020–4 may provide
updated comments in this proceeding.
The Commission envisions that the
comments provided in this proceeding
will help inform any proposed rules that
may be issued in Docket No. RM2020–
4.
Comments are due August 26, 2021.
Material filed in this docket will be
available for review on the
Commission’s website, https://
www.prc.gov.
Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth E.
Richardson will serve as the officer of
the Commission (Public Representative)
to represent the interests of the general
public in this docket.
V. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. PI2021–2 for the purpose of
considering potential regulations under
39 U.S.C. 601.
2. Interested persons may submit
written comments on potential
regulations no later than August 26,
2021.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth
E. Richardson will serve as the officer of
the Commission (Public Representative)
to represent the interests of the general
public in this proceeding.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this Notice in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–14636 Filed 7–8–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 129 (Friday, July 9, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36246-36248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14636]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Chapter III
[Docket No. PI2021-2; Order No. 5930]
Public Inquiry
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission seeks further input from the public about what
regulations promulgated by the Commission may be necessary to carry out
the requirements of agency law. This document informs the public of
this proceeding, invites public comment, and takes other administrative
steps.
DATES: Comments are due: August 26, 2021.
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: David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202-789-6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Discussion
IV. Comments
V. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
In this docket, the Commission seeks further input from the public
about what regulations promulgated by the Commission may be necessary
to carry out the requirements of 39 U.S.C. 601. Section 601 describes
instances when letters may be carried out of the mail, or when the
letter monopoly does not apply to a mailpiece. In particular, the
Commission seeks to determine whether regulations promulgated by the
Commission are needed to carry out those statutory exemptions.
II. Background
The Postal Service has exclusive rights in the carriage and
delivery of letters under certain circumstances. This letter monopoly
is codified in the Private Express Statutes (PES), which are a group of
civil and criminal statutes that make it unlawful for any entity other
than the Postal Service to send or carry letters. See 18 U.S.C. 1693-
1699; 39 U.S.C. 601-606.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although these provisions of the U.S. Code are customarily
referred to collectively as the ``Private Express Statutes,'' they
do not all relate to private expresses or prohibit carriage of
letters out of the mails.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 601 provides specific instances (exceptions) where letters
may be carried out of the mail (i.e., not subject to the letter
monopoly). Section 601(a) sets forth the conditions under which a
letter may be carried out of the mail, which include requiring that the
letter be enclosed in an envelope, that the proper amount of postage is
affixed to the envelope, and that the postage is canceled. 39 U.S.C.
601(a).
Section 601(b) provides additional exceptions such that the letter
monopoly does not apply to letters charged more than six times the
current rate for the first ounce of a Single-Piece First Class Letter
or to letters weighing more than 12.5 ounces. See 39 U.S.C. 601(b)(1),
(b)(2). The ``grandfather clause'' in Section 601(b)(3) references
exceptions from prior Postal Service regulations that permitted private
carriage as in effect on July 1, 2005. 39 U.S.C. 601(b)(3); see also 39
CFR 310.1 and 39 CFR 320.2-320.8 (2005).
Section 601(c), which is the subject of this proceeding, directs
the Commission (rather than the Postal Service) to promulgate any
regulations necessary to carry out this section. 39 U.S.C. 601(c). This
Public Inquiry seeks to answer how the Commission shall meet this
statutory requirement.
Prior to the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) of
2006, the Postal Service issued regulations that purported to suspend
the PES.\2\ The PAEA included the term ``purport'' to describe the
Postal Service's efforts to suspend the PES, reflecting some
disagreement between the Postal Service and policymakers about the
Postal Service's authority to promulgate such regulations prior to the
PAEA.\3\ Post-PAEA, the law clearly cedes such authority to the
Commission. These regulations defined the term ``letter'' as ``a
message directed to a specific person or address and recorded in or on
a tangible object,'' subject to several provisions. 39 CFR 310.1(a)
(2005). The regulations also described several statutory exceptions to
the letter monopoly, such as when the letter accompanies and relates to
cargo or when a special messenger is used. See 39 CFR 310.3 (2005). In
addition, the
[[Page 36247]]
regulations purported to establish administrative suspensions of the
PES (39 CFR 310.1(a)(7) n.1, 320 (2005)), including suspensions for
certain data processing materials or for extremely urgent letters. See
39 CFR 320.2, 320.6 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, Public Law
109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006); see also 39 CFR 310, 320 (2005).
\3\ See H.R. Rep. No. 109-66, 109th Cong., 1st Sess., pt. 1, at
58 (2005) (H.R. Rep. No. 109-66).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These regulations were originally promulgated by the Postal Service
in 1974 and were amended several times prior to enactment of the
PAEA.\4\ In 2003, the President's Commission on the United States
Postal Service recommended that the scope of the letter monopoly should
be clarified and periodically reviewed by a Postal Regulatory Board.\5\
In 2006, Congress passed the PAEA, which, inter alia, added new price
and weight limits to the postal monopoly, repealed the Postal Service's
purported authority to adopt administrative suspension of the monopoly,
and repealed the Postal Service's authority to implement provisions of
the criminal code defining the scope of the monopoly.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Comprehensive Standards for Permissible Private
Carriage, 39 FR 33211 (Sept. 16, 1974).
\5\ Report of the President's Commission on the United States
Postal Service, Embracing the Future: Making the Tough Choices to
Preserve Universal Mail Service, July 31, 2003, at 71 (President's
Commission). The President's Commission recommended ``transforming
the narrowly focused Postal Rate Commission [ ] into an independent
Postal Regulatory Board.'' Id. at XIII.
\6\ See H.R. Rep. No. 109-66 at 57. Congress stated that ``the
bill clarifies the scope of the statutory monopoly that historically
has been defined solely by the [Postal Service].'' Id. at 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to adding price and weight limits as exceptions
(Sections 601(b)(1), (b)(2)), Congress also added a ``grandfather
clause'' in Section 601(b)(3) to authorize the continuation of private
activities that the Postal Service had purportedly permitted by
regulations to be carried out of the mail. The House Report on the PAEA
explains that this paragraph protects mailers and private carriers who
had relied upon the regulations adopted as of the date of the bill. See
H.R. Rep. No. 109-66 at 58. Congress also eliminated the Postal
Service's authority to adopt any regulations creating exceptions or
defining the scope of the postal monopoly. See 39 U.S.C. 401(2),
404(a)(1), 601. Congress instead gave the Commission the authority to
promulgate ``[a]ny regulations necessary to carry out this section
[601].'' \7\ To date, the Commission has not promulgated any
regulations pursuant to Section 601(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 39 U.S.C. 601(c). See Docket Nos. MC2012-14 and R2012-8,
Order Approving Addition of Valassis Direct Mail, Inc. Negotiated
Service Agreement to the Market Dominant Product List, August 23,
2012, at 6-7 (Order No. 1448) (citing Section 601(c) and stating
that the Postal Service no longer has authority to issue regulations
interpreting or defining the postal monopoly); see also Docket No.
MC2012-13, Order Conditionally Granting Request to Transfer Parcel
Post to the Competitive Product List, July 20, 2012, at 6-7 (Order
No. 1411) (``As a result of the PAEA, the Postal Service no longer
has authority to issue regulations interpreting or defining the
postal monopoly. The Commission now has the authority to promulgate
such regulations.''). Order No. 1411 at 7 n.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Docket No. RM2020-4, the Commission issued an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking to seek input from the public about what
regulations promulgated by the Commission may be necessary to carry out
the requirements of 39 U.S.C. 601.\8\ In particular, the Commission
sought comments on fourteen issues, such as whether the statutory
requirements of Section 601 are clear and concise, whether any terms in
the statute required further definition, and whether consumers and
competitors can easily determine when a mailpiece is subject to
monopoly protections. Order No. 5422 at 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Docket No. RM2020-4, Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to Consider Regulations to Carry Out the Statutory
Requirements of 39 U.S.C. 601, February 7, 2020 (Order No. 5422).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to the comment deadline, the Commission issued two Chairman's
Information Requests, regarding certain Postal Service regulations.\9\
In its response, the Postal Service explained that it had not issued
regulations or other administrative directives in connection with
Sections 601(b)(1) and (2) since the effective date of amended Section
601(b).\10\ The Postal Service also provided information regarding
alternative payment agreements pursuant to 39 CFR 310.2(b).\11\ In
addition, the Postal Service provided information regarding advisory
opinions pursuant to 39 CFR 310.6. Docket No. RM2020-4, Response to
CHIR No. 1, question 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Docket No. RM2020-4, Chairman's Information Request No. 1,
March 4, 2020 (Docket No. RM2020-4, CHIR No. 1); Docket No. RM2020-
4, Chairman's Information Request No. 2, April 1, 2020 (Docket No.
RM2020-4, CHIR No. 2).
\10\ Docket No. RM2020-4, Responses of the United States Postal
Service to Questions 1-3 of Chairman's Information Request No. 1,
March 11, 2020, question 1 (Docket No. RM2020-4, Response to CHIR
No. 1).
\11\ Docket No. RM2020-4, Response to CHIR No. 1, question 3;
see also Response of the United States Postal Service to Chairman's
Information Request No. 2, April 3, 2020, question 1 (Docket No.
RM2020-4, Response to CHIR No. 2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments were received from The Berkshire Company; Taxpayers
Protection Alliance; American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen
Research; United Parcel Service, Inc.; FedEx Corporation; Netflix,
Inc.; Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council; the National Postal
Policy Council and the National Association of Presort Mailers; the
Association for Postal Commerce; the Postal Service; and the Public
Representative.\12\ Based on the comments received, the Commission
found it necessary to gather more information from the public before
promulgating regulations under Section 601 and therefore, that
proceeding is held in abeyance until the conclusion of this
inquiry.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Docket No. RM2020-4, Comments of The Berkshire Company in
Response to Order No. 5442, April 6, 2020; Docket No. RM2020-4,
Comments of Taxpayers Protection Alliance, April 6, 2020; Docket No.
RM2020-4, Comments of American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen
Research Regarding Docket No. RM2020-4 Submitted to the United
States Postal Regulatory Commission, April 6, 2020; Docket No.
RM2020-4, Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. on Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking to Consider Regulations to Carry Out the
Statutory Requirements of 39 U.S.C. 601, April 7, 2020; Docket No.
RM2020-4, Comments of FedEx Corporation, April 7, 2020; Docket No.
RM2020-4, Comments of Netflix, Inc., April 7, 2020; Docket No.
RM2020-4, Comments of Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council,
April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020-4, Comments of the National Postal
Policy Council and the National Association of Presort Mailers,
April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020-4, Comments of the Association for
Postal Commerce, April 7, 2020; Docket No. RM2020-4, Comments of the
United States Postal Service in Response to Order No. 5422, April 7,
2020; Docket No. RM2020-4, Public Representative Comments, April 7,
2020.
\13\ Docket No. RM2020-4, Order Holding Rulemaking in Abeyance,
July 2, 2021 (Order No. 5929).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion
In this proceeding, the Commission seeks to focus its inquiry on
the statutory exemptions in Sections 601(a) and (b), and what
regulations under Section 601(c), if any, are needed to carry out those
exemptions. In particular, the Commission limits this inquiry to two
issues: (1) Whether Postal Service regulations administering current
Sections 601(a), 601(b)(1), and 601(b)(2) should be adopted by the
Commission; and (2) what private carrier services are within the scope
of Section 601(b)(3).
First, the Commission is interested in identifying Postal Service
regulations that administer Sections 601(a), 601(b)(1), and 601(b)(2)
and if the Commission should adopt them. Section 601(a) provides for
the private carriage of letters when, among other things, the letter is
in an envelope that is properly addressed, the proper amount of postage
is affixed to the envelope, and the postage is canceled in ink by the
sender. 39 U.S.C. 601(a). Sections 601(b)(1) and (b)(2) further provide
that a letter must meet price and weight requirements in order to be
carried out of the mail. 39 U.S.C. 601(b)(1), 601(b)(2).
Prior to the PAEA, the Postal Service issued regulations concerning
the restrictions on the private carriage of
[[Page 36248]]
letters. Several of these regulations were modified and superseded by
the adoption of the PAEA. For example, the PAEA supersedes a Postal
Service regulation that allows private carriage if the amount paid is
``at least three dollars or twice the applicable U.S. postage for
First-Class Mail (including priority mail) whichever is greater.'' 39
CFR 320.6(c). In addition, a Postal Service regulation closely tracks
the language in Section 601(a) but also allows for alternative payment
agreements in written agreements between customers and the Postal
Service. 39 CFR 310.2(b). The Commission is specifically interested in
whether certain Postal Service regulations implement the current
statutory exemptions found in Sections 601(a), 601(b)(1), and
601(b)(2), and whether the Commission should adopt or revise these and
other regulations to clarify the statutory exemptions.
Second, the Commission is interested in identifying what private
carrier services are within the scope of Section 601(b)(3). See 39
U.S.C. 601(b)(3). The ``grandfather clause'' in Section 601(b)(3)
authorized the continuation of private activities that the Postal
Service had purportedly permitted by regulations to be carried out of
the mail. Specifically, it allows private carriage that is within the
scope of specific purported suspensions to the letter monopoly. 39 CFR
310.1 (2005) included twelve putative exceptions to the definition of
``letter'' and/or purported suspensions of the letter monopoly. 39 CFR
320.2-8 (2005) provided seven additional purported suspensions of the
PES, including for certain data processing materials, for certain
letters of college and university organizations, and for certain
international-ocean carrier-related documents. The Commission seeks
comments on what services were ``described by regulations of the United
States Postal Service . . . that purport to permit private carriage by
suspension of the operation of this section'' as of July 1, 2005. See
39 U.S.C. 601(b)(3). Additionally, the Commission seeks suggestions
regarding what regulations may be needed to enumerate in clear terms
all instances where private carrier services are within the scope of
Section 601(b)(3).
For both issues, the goal of the Commission is to determine whether
it is necessary to clarify the statutory exemptions regarding the
letter monopoly. The Commission seeks information as to how best to
resolve any ambiguities in the application of the exceptions. The
Commission also inquires whether consolidating regulations and
definitions under one section, rescinding redundant and/or conflicting
sections, or standardizing the terminology used in the regulations
would be helpful.
IV. Comments
The Commission invites interested persons to identify whether there
are any Postal Service regulations that the Commission should adopt to
carry out the requirements of Section 601 and if so, whether the
Commission should revise those regulations. In addition, the Commission
seeks comments that identify what private carrier services are within
the scope of Section 601(b)(3) and whether regulations are needed to
clearly enumerate those services. Commenters are encouraged to provide
specific suggestions on revisions or recommend new regulations.
The Commission recognizes that comments on these issues have been
provided in Docket No. RM2020-4. However, given the length of time
since those comments were received and the breadth of different topics
covered by the previous advance notice of proposed rulemaking, the
Commission finds it prudent to solicit updated comments to assist in
focusing this proceeding on a few particular issues. Commenters who
previously submitted comments in Docket No. RM2020-4 may provide
updated comments in this proceeding. The Commission envisions that the
comments provided in this proceeding will help inform any proposed
rules that may be issued in Docket No. RM2020-4.
Comments are due August 26, 2021. Material filed in this docket
will be available for review on the Commission's website, https://www.prc.gov.
Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth E. Richardson will serve as the
officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the
interests of the general public in this docket.
V. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. PI2021-2 for the purpose
of considering potential regulations under 39 U.S.C. 601.
2. Interested persons may submit written comments on potential
regulations no later than August 26, 2021.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth E. Richardson will serve as
the officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the
interests of the general public in this proceeding.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Notice in
the Federal Register.
By the Commission.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14636 Filed 7-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P