Periodic Reporting, 46046-46049 [2024-11566]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
46046
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(7) Port Condition RECOVERY means
a condition set by the COTP when NWS
weather advisories indicate that
sustained gale force winds (39–54 mph/
34–47 knots) are no longer predicted for
the regulated area. This port condition
remains in effect until the regulated
areas are deemed safe and are reopened
to normal operations.
(c) Regulations. (1) Port Condition
WHISKEY. All vessels must exercise
due diligence in preparation for
potential storm impacts. All oceangoing
tank barges and their supporting tugs
and all self-propelled oceangoing
vessels over 500 gross tons (GT) must
make plans to depart no later than
setting of Port Condition YANKEE
unless authorized by the COTP. The
COTP may modify the geographic
boundaries of the regulated area and
actions to be taken under Port Condition
WHISKEY, based on the trajectory and
forecasted storm conditions.
(2) Port Condition X–RAY. All vessels
must ensure that potential flying debris
and hazardous materials are removed,
and that loose cargo and cargo
equipment is secured . Vessels at
facilities must carefully monitor their
moorings and cargo operations.
Additional anchor(s) must be made
ready to let go, and preparations must
be made to have a continuous anchor
watch during the storm. Engine(s) must
be made immediately available for
maneuvering. Also, vessels must
maintain a continuous listening watch
on VHF Channel 16. All oceangoing
tank barges and their supporting tugs
and all self-propelled oceangoing
vessels over 500 GT must prepare to
depart the port and anchorages within
the affected regulated area. These
vessels shall depart immediately upon
the setting of Port Condition YANKEE.
During this condition, slow-moving
vessels may be ordered to depart to
ensure safe avoidance of the incoming
storm. Vessels that are unable to depart
the port must contact the COTP to
receive permission to remain in port.
Vessels with COTP’s permission to
remain in port must implement their
pre-approved mooring arrangement. The
COTP may require additional
precautions to ensure the safety of the
ports and waterways. The COTP may
modify the geographic boundaries of the
regulated area and actions to be taken
under Port Condition X–RAY based on
the trajectory and forecasted storm
conditions.
(3) Port Condition YANKEE. Affected
ports are closed to all inbound vessel
traffic. All oceangoing tank barges and
their supporting tugs and all selfpropelled oceangoing vessels over 500
GT must depart the regulated area. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:47 May 24, 2024
Jkt 262001
COTP may require additional
precautions to ensure the safety of the
ports and waterways. The COTP may
modify the geographic boundaries of the
regulated area within the Delaware Bay
COTP Zone and actions to be taken
under Port Condition YANKEE based on
the trajectory and forecasted storm
conditions.
(4) Port Condition ZULU. When Port
Condition ZULU is declared, cargo
operations are suspended, except final
preparations that are expressly
permitted by the COTP as necessary to
ensure the safety of the ports and
facilities. Other than vessels designated
by the COTP, no vessels may enter,
transit, move, or anchor within the
regulated area. The COTP may modify
the geographic boundaries of the
regulated area and actions to be taken
under Port Condition ZULU based on
the trajectory and forecasted storm
conditions.
(5) Port Condition RECOVERY. The
COTP Zone, or portions of it designated
as regulated areas, as are closed to all
vessels. Based on assessments of
channel conditions, navigability
concerns, and hazards to navigation, the
COTP may permit vessel movements
with restrictions. Restrictions may
include, but are not limited to,
preventing, or delaying vessel
movements, imposing draft, speed, size,
horsepower or daylight restrictions, or
directing the use of specific routes.
Vessels permitted to transit the
regulated area shall comply with the
lawful orders or directions given by the
COTP or representative.
(6) Regulated Area Notice. The Coast
Guard will provide notice, via Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Marine Safety
Information Bulletins, or by on-scene
representatives, of where, within the
COTP Zone, a declared Port Condition
is to be in effect.
(7) Exception. This regulation does
not apply to authorized law
enforcement agencies operating within
the regulated area.
Dated: May 21, 2024.
Kate F. Higgins-Bloom,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Sector Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2024–11669 Filed 5–24–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3050
[Docket No. RM2024–8; Order No. 7120]
Periodic Reporting
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Commission is
acknowledging a recent Postal Service
filing requesting the Commission
initiate a rulemaking proceeding to
consider changes to analytical
principles relating to periodic reports
(Proposal Three). This document
informs the public of the filing, invites
public comment, and takes other
administrative steps.
DATES:
Comments are due: July 8, 2024.
Reply Comments are due: July 22,
2024.
SUMMARY:
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.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Proposal Three
III. Notice and Comment
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On May 13, 2024, the Postal Service
filed a petition pursuant to 39 CFR
3050.11 requesting that the Commission
initiate a rulemaking proceeding to
consider changes to analytical
principles relating to periodic reports.1
The Petition identifies the proposed
analytical changes filed in this docket as
Proposal Three.
II. Proposal Three
Background. On November 22, 2023,
the Postal Service filed a notice to
establish a new Zone 10 for Priority
Mail Express (PME), Priority Mail (PM),
and USPS Ground Advantage (GA) and
proposed associated Zone 10 rates.2 The
Commission approved the proposed
price and classification changes and
directed the Postal Service to file a
rulemaking proceeding proposing and
1 Petition of the United States Postal Service for
the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed
Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Three),
May 13, 2024 (Petition). The Postal Service also
filed a notice of filing of non-public materials
relating to Proposal Three. Notice of Filing of
USPS–RM2024–8–NP1 and Application for
Nonpublic Treatment, May 13, 2024.
2 Docket No. CP2024–72, USPS Notice of Changes
in Rates and Classifications of General Applicability
for Competitive Products, November 22, 2023.
E:\FR\FM\28MYP1.SGM
28MYP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules
supporting the methodological changes
necessary to derive separate Zone 10
transportation costs for Priority Mail
and USPS Ground Advantage.3
In accordance with Order No. 7016,
the Postal Service filed notice with the
Commission to develop procedures to
derive separate Zone 10 transportation
cost estimates for PM and GA.4
The Postal Service states that the mail
transportation cost model for PM is
updated annually and filed with the
Annual Compliance Review (ACR),
most recently in Docket No. ACR2023,
Library Reference USPS–FY23–NP27,
December 29, 2023. Petition, Proposal
Three at 2. The current GA
transportation cost model was first
introduced as an interim model during
the FY 2023 ACR and is under
concurrent review before the
Commission in Docket No. RM2024–7.5
The Postal Service states that ‘‘the
current Priority Mail transportation
models (USPS–FY23–NP27,
‘FY2023ParcelsCostModel.xls’ and
‘FY2023FlatsCostModel.xls’) group the
costs from Cost Segment 14 into cubeand weight-related, air- and surfacerelated, distance- and non-distancerelated components to calculate an
overall cost per pound and a cost per
cube by zone.’’ Petition, Proposal Three
at 2. The Postal Service explains that
‘‘[t]he distributions to each zone are
based on the cube and weight of parcels
and flats by zone, parameters derived
from USPS–LR–L–39, and USPS–LR–L–
37 Table 107 air weight and average
haul mileage by zone summaries for
aggregated air lanes.’’ Id.
The Postal Service states ‘‘[t]he
current USPS Ground Advantage
transportation model (USPS–FY23–
NP27, ‘GATransportationByZone_
FY23.xls’) groups the costs from Cost
Segment 14 in to Local/Intermediate
costs, Long Distance Surface costs, and
Air costs to derive a cost per cubic
foot.’’ Id. at 3. The Postal Service notes
that ‘‘[t]he distributions of these
components by zone are based on
mileage factors and proportions of
weight by zone for Surface and Air
volume from the Product Tracking and
Reporting System (PTR).’’ Id.
The Postal Service states that it
applies the resulting costs by zone to
appropriately reflect the costs associated
with a specific customer’s weight and
zone profile when calculating the
financial projections of negotiated
service agreements (NSA) that include
PM or GA. Id. The Postal Service also
states that the ‘‘forward-looking
financial projections are filed to
demonstrate expected compliance with
the requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633(a),
pursuant to 39 CFR 3035.105(c)’’ and
that ‘‘these costs are applied in the ACR
proceedings each year to demonstrate
compliance with the same requirements,
pursuant to 39 [CFR] 3050.21(g)(2).’’ Id.
Proposal Three. The Postal Service
proposes updating the methodology for
distributing the transportation costs for
PM and GA by using more granular data
to produce distribution keys by zone for
both the new Zone 10 assignment and
the existing zones. Id. at 4. The Postal
Service avers that the changes to the
transportation cost models described in
Proposal Three involve several phases.
Id.
First, Proposal Three entails a
mechanical update to PM transportation
models, where the Postal Service plans
to consolidate and eliminate
redundancy in workbooks detailing the
models. Id. The Postal Service states
that the result of this update is not a
new methodology nor introduction of
new information. Id. at 6.
Second, the Postal Service would add
Zone 10 to the model structures for PM
and GA. Id. at 5–6. The Postal Service
states, ‘‘inputs such as volumes,
weights, and cubes would be remapped
according to the new zone definitions.’’
Id. at 5.
Third, Proposal Three utilizes
additional detailed information the
Postal Service developed to account for
the distance taper effect.6
The Postal Service states that ‘‘[t]he
proposed methodology takes advantage
of detailed information that is available
for Highway Contract Route (HCR)
trips:’’
• The total mileage in a quarter for
each trip can be determined from its
origin and destination together with the
3 Docket No. CP2024–72, Order Approving Price
Adjustments and Classification Changes for
Domestic Competitive Products, March 22, 2024, at
36 (Order No. 7016). The Commission directed the
Postal Service to file a rulemaking proceeding
within 90 days from the issuance of the order. Id.
4 See Petition, Proposal Three at 1 n.1, 2. The
Postal Service indicates that PME models are
unaffected by the addition of Zone 10, as the
current PME transportation costs are not
disaggregated by zone.
5 Docket No. RM2024–7, Petition of the United
States Postal Service for the Initiation of a
Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in
Analytical Principles (Proposal Two), May 10, 2024.
6 See Docket No. RM2023–9, Order Approving
Analytical Principles Used in Periodic Reporting
(Proposal Four), November 2, 2023, at 8 (Order No.
6771). Order No. 6771 approved methodology
changes for PM transportation costs and encouraged
the Postal service to conduct future analysis on the
phenomenon whereby trips of shorter distances are
more expensive per mile compared to trips of
longer distances, i.e., the distance taper effect. The
Postal Service indicates that it has ‘‘conducted the
additional analysis and proposes the following
data-driven approach to developing cost adjustment
factors that reflect the economies achieved as the
number of zones traversed by surface trips
increases.’’ Petition, Proposal Three at 5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:47 May 24, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46047
number of trips per quarter. The same
information is currently used by
Transportation Cost System (TRACS) to
identify HCR trips and trip lengths.
• The predicted cost per mile is
determined from contract information
for each route within a contract type
and cost segment. This cost per mile can
be applied to all trips assigned to that
route.
• For each trip, the zone from origin
to destination can be determined from
the three-digit ZIP Codes of the origin
and destination facilities.
Petition, Proposal Three at 6.
The Postal Service states that ‘‘[f]or
each zone, the average cost per mile can
be calculated by aggregating the
quarterly miles and predicted quarterly
costs for all trips whose origin and
destination map to that zone.’’ Id. The
Postal Service asserts that ‘‘[b]ecause
there are relatively few trips that
directly extend to high zones, even
within the Inter-[sectional center
facility]SCF contract type, there is some
variability in the calculated cost per
mile.’’ Id. The Postal Service proposes
to aggregate Zones 5 through 8 into a
single group in order to mitigate this
variability. Id.
The Postal service summarizes the
distance taper adjustment factors for
Inter-SCF regular trips for FY 2023 Q4
as follows:
Zone group
1 ....................................................
2 ....................................................
3 ....................................................
4 ....................................................
5–8 ................................................
Distance
taper
1.54
1.14
1.04
0.94
0.93
Id. at 7.
The Postal Service states that it
‘‘intends to repeat this analysis each
fiscal year and provide updated distance
taper factors in USPS–FYxx-NP27 along
with other updated parameters that are
provided for the transportation cost
models utilized for NSAs.’’ Id.
Fourth, the Postal Service proposes a
methodological change for the treatment
of transportation cost pools for both PM
and GA in order to refine the existing
methodologies by using more granular
data to develop new distribution keys
by zone to distribute the costs more
accurately in each Cost Segment 14 cost
pool by the applicable cost driver. Id.
Proposal Three—Priority Mail. In
Proposal Three, the Postal Service also
proposes several changes to
methodology used to calculate the cost
per pound and per cube for PM parcels
E:\FR\FM\28MYP1.SGM
28MYP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
46048
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and flats.7 The summary of each aspect
of these proposed changes follows.
First, calculations for PM air weight
and average haul by zone have been
updated to incorporate Zone 10. Id. at
14. In addition, ‘‘instead of mapping
each lane to a zone according to great
circle mileage distance between origin
and destination airports, the zone is
now determined using the official
mapping of the 3-digit ZIP pairs of the
origin and destination airports (i.e.,
according to the distance between the
centroids of the 3-digit ZIPs in which
the origin and destination airports are
located.).’’ Id. The Postal Service claims
this is ‘‘an improvement over the
current methodology because it would
remove anomalies such as assigning
some Intra-Alaska air lanes to Zone 2
when there is no such Zone 2 ZIP pair
within Alaska.’’ Id. The Postal Service
states that ‘‘[t]he air weights by origin
and destination airport for the relevant
offshore lanes would be remapped from
the current zone to Zone 10’’ and ‘‘the
ODIS–RPW data would be remapped
according to the new zone definitions.’’
Id. 14–15. The Postal Service asserts
that ‘‘ODIS–RPW information is
collected at the 3-digit ZIP level, but
Zone 9 only applies to certain 5-digit
ZIPS,’’ therefore Zone 9 ODIS–RPW data
is unavailable and would be combined
with Zone 10. Id. at 15. The Postal
Service indicates that because both
Zone 9 and Zone 10 pieces would be on
flights from the Continental U.S., and it
is not possible to separate Zone 9 air
weight from Zone 10 air weight, and
Zones 9 and 10 must be reported
together. Id.
Additionally, air weights for
Commercial Air, UPS, and Air Taxi
distributions by zone would be kept
separate rather than aggregated and Air
Taxi air weights would be further split
into Intra-Caribbean versus all other
lanes. Id.
The Postal Service proposes to
remove calculating the average haul
mileage per zone for the FedEx,
Commercial Air, UPS, Hawaii, and Air
Taxi cost pools because these cost pools
do not have distance-related cost
components. Id. at 16. However, the
Postal Service indicates that the average
haul calculation for the Alaska air
modes would remain unchanged from
the current methodology. Id.
The Postal Service proposes
maintaining the separation of the
existing distributions by zone for
Alaska, Hawaii, and the Caribbean
7 The Postal Service describes the existing
methodology at length, and that description is not
repeated here. See Petition, Proposal Three at 7–13.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:47 May 24, 2024
Jkt 262001
instead of combining these distributions
in the final step. Id.
Second, the Postal Service proposes
replacing several parameters in the cost
model for costs pertaining to mail in
Alaska, reflecting distance and nondistance related costs for that mail. Id.
The Postal Service also removes the
parameters identifying local volume that
avoids contract transportation, as it
found that local pieces are comingled
with higher zone packages and incur the
same transportation costs. Id. at 17. The
Postal Service indicates that new
distribution keys ‘‘would be developed
for each individual cost pool in Cost
Segment 14 based on the new air
weights by cost pool, average haul
mileages, total weights, and total cubic
feet by zone for parcels and flats.’’ Id.
Third, The Postal Services proposes
that air weight and average haul miles
by zone be calculated for individual
providers, rather than aggregated. Id.
The Postal Service states:
The Priority Mail air weight by zone would
be distributed between parcels and flats, as
in the current methodology, and the air cube
for FedEx Day Turn parcels and flats would
be calculated using the density factors and
the air weight for FedEx. Next, the Air
distribution keys for each air cost pool for
parcels and flats would be calculated using
the weight and cube by zone from the same
cost pool. This refinement would represent
an improvement over the current
methodology because now, for example, UPS
costs would be distributed to each zone
according to the UPS weight by zone rather
than being distributed based on the total air
weight across all modes. Likewise, the FedEx
Day costs would be distributed to each zone
according to the FedEx cube by zone, rather
than being distributed based on the total air
cube across all modes.
Id.
The Postal Service indicates that:
Two distribution keys would be calculated
for the Alaska cost pools: the pound
distribution based solely on the Alaska air
weight by zone; and the pound-miles
distribution, which would be calculated by
multiplying the Alaska air weight by zone by
the average haul mileage by zone for Alaska.
The Alaska Non-Preferential cost pool would
employ a weighted average of the pound and
pound-mile distributions using the percent
distance-related Alaska Non-Preferential
parameter.
Id. at 18.
Fourth, the Postal Service would
calculate two distribution keys for
surface transportation cost pools. One
for distance-related surface
transportation, and one for nondistance-related surface transportation.
Id. The Postal Service further describes
the breakout of these distribution keys
into surface and air and details the
calculation. Id. at 18–20. In sum, these
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
distribution keys would be applied at
the cost pool level for the cost pools
within CS14:
• Commercial air costs would be
distributed by the commercial air
weight proportions by zone.
• FedEx Day Turn costs would be
distributed by the FedEx cubic feet
proportions by zone.
• UPS costs would be distributed by
the UPS air weight proportions by zone.
• Peak air costs would be distributed
by the total air weight proportions by
zone.
• Alaska Non-Preferential costs
would be distributed by a weighted
average of the Alaska air weight and
Alaska pound-miles proportions by
zone.
• Alaska Preferential costs would be
distributed by the Alaska air weight
proportions by zone.
• Hawaii costs would be distributed
by the Hawaii air weight proportions by
zone.
• Air Taxi costs would be distributed
by the air taxi air weight proportions by
zone.
• CDS Intra-SCF Highway costs
would be excluded from the model.
• Inter-SCF, Intra-NDC, Inter-NDC,
Highway Plant Load, Alaskan Highway,
Highway Empty Equipment, Freight
Rail, Rail Plant Load, Rail Empty
Equipment, Inland Water, and Offshore
Water costs would be distributed by the
distance-related surface cube
proportions by zone.
• Intra-SCF Highway costs would be
distributed by the non-distance related
surface cube proportions by zone.
• Peak Highway and Terminal/Van
Damage costs would each be distributed
by a weighted average of the distanceand non-distance-related surface cube
proportions by zone.
Id. at 20–21.
Proposal Three—USPS Ground
Advantage. In Proposal Three, the
Postal Service also proposes to update
the USPS Ground Advantage
transportation cost model.8 The
summary of each aspect of these
proposed changes follows.
First, the Postal Service proposes the
same distance taper factors as proposed
in the PM model for GA. Id. at 24. The
Postal Service avers the addition is an
improvement because it would allow
the model to reflect that shorter distance
trips have a higher cost per mile on
average compared to longer haul trips.
Id.
Second, the Postal Service proposes a
methodological change to address the
8 The Postal Service describes the existing
methodology, and that description is not repeated
here. See Petition, Proposal Three at 22–23.
E:\FR\FM\28MYP1.SGM
28MYP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules
treatment of Domestic Water cost pools.
Id. Specifically, Inland and Offshore
Water costs would be disaggregated, and
Offshore Water costs would be
distributed independently. Id. at 24–25.
Third, the Postal Service proposes a
methodology for Zone 10 long-distance
surface transportation, because GA
pieces over one pound may travel by
ocean to offshore locations rather than
flying, but they would also travel by
truck to the ocean port. Id. at 25. The
Postal Service proposes accounting for
this transport by calculating the average
haul mileage for Zone 10 by analyzing
PTR and geographic data. Id. at 25–26.
This analysis would calculate the
average miles per piece for Zone 10
pieces destinating in the Caribbean,
Pacific, and Alaska. Id. at 26. The Postal
Service notes the pairs of most common
departure ports and arrival ports for
these pieces (Jacksonville, FL with
Catano, PR; Richmond, CA with
Honolulu, HI; and Seattle, WA with
Anchorage, AK). Id. The Postal Service
intends to use these pairs to calculate
water miles (and by subtracting water
miles from average miles per piece,
estimating truck miles per piece) for
these pieces. Id. The Postal Service uses
the volume proportions by offshore
destination to produce a weighted
average truck mileage for all Zone 10
pieces. Id.
Fourth, the Postal Service proposes to
analyze PTR data to identify Offshore
Water Ground Advantage weight
percentages by zone. Id. The weight
distribution would be calculated by
identifying the zone of the GA over-onepound pieces that travel by ocean to or
from the offshore location. Id. The
weight distribution would be used to
distribute the GA costs or offshore water
transportation by zone and avoids
assigning GA costs to zones that do not
incur them as is done with the current
methodology. Id. at 26–27. The costs per
cube for each component category
would be summarized to produce the
total unit cost per cube by zone. Id. at
27.
Fifth, the Postal Service proposes to
update customer-specific adjustments
for Vehicle Service Driver (VSD) costs
for local non-distance-related surface
transportation for GA. Id. This proposed
adjustment allows the Postal Service to
account for deviations in VSD costs
driven by the average size of the
customers cube. Id.
Impact. The Postal Service provides
the impact for each component of
Proposal Three, as well as the combined
impact, under seal in Library Reference
USPS–RM2024–8–NP1. Id. Because the
impact of Proposal Three is limited to
PM and GA transportation costs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:47 May 24, 2024
Jkt 262001
separated by zone, there is no impact on
product-level costs. Id. at 28. The Postal
Service avers that the materials filed
under seal ‘‘substantiate and quantify
the Postal Service’s prior statements that
the cost of transport to offshore
locations is higher on average than it is
to transport to non-offshore
destinations.’’ Id.
III. Notice and Comment
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. RM2024–8 for consideration of the
matters raised by the Petition of the
United States Postal Service for the
Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider
Proposed Changes in Analytical
Principles (Proposal Three), filed May
13, 2024.
2. Comments by interested persons in
this proceeding are due no later than
July 8, 2024. Reply comments on the
Petition and Proposal Three are due no
later than July 22, 2024.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the
Commission appoints Madison
Lichtenstein to serve as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this docket.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this Order in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–11566 Filed 5–24–24; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0454; EPA–R04–
OAR–2019–0638; EPA–R04–OAR–2020–
0186; FRL–11971–01–R4]
Air Plan Approval; North Carolina;
Permitting Provisions Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Commission establishes Docket
No. RM2024–8 for consideration of
matters raised by the Petition. More
information on the Petition may be
accessed via the Commission’s website
at https://www.prc.gov. Interested
persons may submit comments on the
Petition and Proposal Three no later
than July 8, 2024. Reply comments on
the Petition and Proposal Three are due
no later than July 22, 2024. Pursuant to
39 U.S.C. 505, Madison Lichtenstein is
designated as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to
represent the interests of the general
public in this proceeding.
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
46049
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to correct the
erroneous incorporation of crossreferences into the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP) using the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) error
correction provision. EPA has
determined that portions of its May 23,
2019, July 17, 2020, and March 1, 2021,
final SIP rulemaking actions were in
error and that it is appropriate to correct
those actions by removing specific
cross-references in the permitting rules
from the SIP.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 27, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2017–0454 at
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
There are three dockets supporting
this action, EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0454,
EPA–R04–OAR–2019–0638, and EPA–
R04–OAR–2020–0186. Docket No. EPA–
R04–OAR–2017–0454 includes a March
24, 2006, SIP submittal from North
Carolina and EPA’s original approval of
the cross-references to North Carolina
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28MYP1.SGM
28MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 28, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46046-46049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-11566]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3050
[Docket No. RM2024-8; Order No. 7120]
Periodic Reporting
AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is acknowledging a recent Postal Service filing
requesting the Commission initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider
changes to analytical principles relating to periodic reports (Proposal
Three). This document informs the public of the filing, invites public
comment, and takes other administrative steps.
DATES:
Comments are due: July 8, 2024.
Reply Comments are due: July 22, 2024.
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. Proposal Three
III. Notice and Comment
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On May 13, 2024, the Postal Service filed a petition pursuant to 39
CFR 3050.11 requesting that the Commission initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to consider changes to analytical principles relating to
periodic reports.\1\ The Petition identifies the proposed analytical
changes filed in this docket as Proposal Three.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Petition of the United States Postal Service for the
Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in
Analytical Principles (Proposal Three), May 13, 2024 (Petition). The
Postal Service also filed a notice of filing of non-public materials
relating to Proposal Three. Notice of Filing of USPS-RM2024-8-NP1
and Application for Nonpublic Treatment, May 13, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposal Three
Background. On November 22, 2023, the Postal Service filed a notice
to establish a new Zone 10 for Priority Mail Express (PME), Priority
Mail (PM), and USPS Ground Advantage (GA) and proposed associated Zone
10 rates.\2\ The Commission approved the proposed price and
classification changes and directed the Postal Service to file a
rulemaking proceeding proposing and
[[Page 46047]]
supporting the methodological changes necessary to derive separate Zone
10 transportation costs for Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Docket No. CP2024-72, USPS Notice of Changes in Rates and
Classifications of General Applicability for Competitive Products,
November 22, 2023.
\3\ Docket No. CP2024-72, Order Approving Price Adjustments and
Classification Changes for Domestic Competitive Products, March 22,
2024, at 36 (Order No. 7016). The Commission directed the Postal
Service to file a rulemaking proceeding within 90 days from the
issuance of the order. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with Order No. 7016, the Postal Service filed notice
with the Commission to develop procedures to derive separate Zone 10
transportation cost estimates for PM and GA.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Petition, Proposal Three at 1 n.1, 2. The Postal Service
indicates that PME models are unaffected by the addition of Zone 10,
as the current PME transportation costs are not disaggregated by
zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service states that the mail transportation cost model
for PM is updated annually and filed with the Annual Compliance Review
(ACR), most recently in Docket No. ACR2023, Library Reference USPS-
FY23-NP27, December 29, 2023. Petition, Proposal Three at 2. The
current GA transportation cost model was first introduced as an interim
model during the FY 2023 ACR and is under concurrent review before the
Commission in Docket No. RM2024-7.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Docket No. RM2024-7, Petition of the United States Postal
Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed
Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Two), May 10, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service states that ``the current Priority Mail
transportation models (USPS-FY23-NP27, `FY2023ParcelsCostModel.xls' and
`FY2023FlatsCostModel.xls') group the costs from Cost Segment 14 into
cube- and weight-related, air- and surface-related, distance- and non-
distance-related components to calculate an overall cost per pound and
a cost per cube by zone.'' Petition, Proposal Three at 2. The Postal
Service explains that ``[t]he distributions to each zone are based on
the cube and weight of parcels and flats by zone, parameters derived
from USPS-LR-L-39, and USPS-LR-L-37 Table 107 air weight and average
haul mileage by zone summaries for aggregated air lanes.'' Id.
The Postal Service states ``[t]he current USPS Ground Advantage
transportation model (USPS-FY23-NP27,
`GATransportationByZone_FY23.xls') groups the costs from Cost Segment
14 in to Local/Intermediate costs, Long Distance Surface costs, and Air
costs to derive a cost per cubic foot.'' Id. at 3. The Postal Service
notes that ``[t]he distributions of these components by zone are based
on mileage factors and proportions of weight by zone for Surface and
Air volume from the Product Tracking and Reporting System (PTR).'' Id.
The Postal Service states that it applies the resulting costs by
zone to appropriately reflect the costs associated with a specific
customer's weight and zone profile when calculating the financial
projections of negotiated service agreements (NSA) that include PM or
GA. Id. The Postal Service also states that the ``forward-looking
financial projections are filed to demonstrate expected compliance with
the requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), pursuant to 39 CFR 3035.105(c)''
and that ``these costs are applied in the ACR proceedings each year to
demonstrate compliance with the same requirements, pursuant to 39 [CFR]
3050.21(g)(2).'' Id.
Proposal Three. The Postal Service proposes updating the
methodology for distributing the transportation costs for PM and GA by
using more granular data to produce distribution keys by zone for both
the new Zone 10 assignment and the existing zones. Id. at 4. The Postal
Service avers that the changes to the transportation cost models
described in Proposal Three involve several phases. Id.
First, Proposal Three entails a mechanical update to PM
transportation models, where the Postal Service plans to consolidate
and eliminate redundancy in workbooks detailing the models. Id. The
Postal Service states that the result of this update is not a new
methodology nor introduction of new information. Id. at 6.
Second, the Postal Service would add Zone 10 to the model
structures for PM and GA. Id. at 5-6. The Postal Service states,
``inputs such as volumes, weights, and cubes would be remapped
according to the new zone definitions.'' Id. at 5.
Third, Proposal Three utilizes additional detailed information the
Postal Service developed to account for the distance taper effect.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Docket No. RM2023-9, Order Approving Analytical
Principles Used in Periodic Reporting (Proposal Four), November 2,
2023, at 8 (Order No. 6771). Order No. 6771 approved methodology
changes for PM transportation costs and encouraged the Postal
service to conduct future analysis on the phenomenon whereby trips
of shorter distances are more expensive per mile compared to trips
of longer distances, i.e., the distance taper effect. The Postal
Service indicates that it has ``conducted the additional analysis
and proposes the following data-driven approach to developing cost
adjustment factors that reflect the economies achieved as the number
of zones traversed by surface trips increases.'' Petition, Proposal
Three at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Postal Service states that ``[t]he proposed methodology takes
advantage of detailed information that is available for Highway
Contract Route (HCR) trips:''
The total mileage in a quarter for each trip can be
determined from its origin and destination together with the number of
trips per quarter. The same information is currently used by
Transportation Cost System (TRACS) to identify HCR trips and trip
lengths.
The predicted cost per mile is determined from contract
information for each route within a contract type and cost segment.
This cost per mile can be applied to all trips assigned to that route.
For each trip, the zone from origin to destination can be
determined from the three-digit ZIP Codes of the origin and destination
facilities.
Petition, Proposal Three at 6.
The Postal Service states that ``[f]or each zone, the average cost
per mile can be calculated by aggregating the quarterly miles and
predicted quarterly costs for all trips whose origin and destination
map to that zone.'' Id. The Postal Service asserts that ``[b]ecause
there are relatively few trips that directly extend to high zones, even
within the Inter-[sectional center facility]SCF contract type, there is
some variability in the calculated cost per mile.'' Id. The Postal
Service proposes to aggregate Zones 5 through 8 into a single group in
order to mitigate this variability. Id.
The Postal service summarizes the distance taper adjustment factors
for Inter-SCF regular trips for FY 2023 Q4 as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance
Zone group taper
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................ 1.54
2............................................................ 1.14
3............................................................ 1.04
4............................................................ 0.94
5-8.......................................................... 0.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Id. at 7.
The Postal Service states that it ``intends to repeat this analysis
each fiscal year and provide updated distance taper factors in USPS-
FYxx-NP27 along with other updated parameters that are provided for the
transportation cost models utilized for NSAs.'' Id.
Fourth, the Postal Service proposes a methodological change for the
treatment of transportation cost pools for both PM and GA in order to
refine the existing methodologies by using more granular data to
develop new distribution keys by zone to distribute the costs more
accurately in each Cost Segment 14 cost pool by the applicable cost
driver. Id.
Proposal Three--Priority Mail. In Proposal Three, the Postal
Service also proposes several changes to methodology used to calculate
the cost per pound and per cube for PM parcels
[[Page 46048]]
and flats.\7\ The summary of each aspect of these proposed changes
follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Postal Service describes the existing methodology at
length, and that description is not repeated here. See Petition,
Proposal Three at 7-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, calculations for PM air weight and average haul by zone have
been updated to incorporate Zone 10. Id. at 14. In addition, ``instead
of mapping each lane to a zone according to great circle mileage
distance between origin and destination airports, the zone is now
determined using the official mapping of the 3-digit ZIP pairs of the
origin and destination airports (i.e., according to the distance
between the centroids of the 3-digit ZIPs in which the origin and
destination airports are located.).'' Id. The Postal Service claims
this is ``an improvement over the current methodology because it would
remove anomalies such as assigning some Intra-Alaska air lanes to Zone
2 when there is no such Zone 2 ZIP pair within Alaska.'' Id. The Postal
Service states that ``[t]he air weights by origin and destination
airport for the relevant offshore lanes would be remapped from the
current zone to Zone 10'' and ``the ODIS-RPW data would be remapped
according to the new zone definitions.'' Id. 14-15. The Postal Service
asserts that ``ODIS-RPW information is collected at the 3-digit ZIP
level, but Zone 9 only applies to certain 5-digit ZIPS,'' therefore
Zone 9 ODIS-RPW data is unavailable and would be combined with Zone 10.
Id. at 15. The Postal Service indicates that because both Zone 9 and
Zone 10 pieces would be on flights from the Continental U.S., and it is
not possible to separate Zone 9 air weight from Zone 10 air weight, and
Zones 9 and 10 must be reported together. Id.
Additionally, air weights for Commercial Air, UPS, and Air Taxi
distributions by zone would be kept separate rather than aggregated and
Air Taxi air weights would be further split into Intra-Caribbean versus
all other lanes. Id.
The Postal Service proposes to remove calculating the average haul
mileage per zone for the FedEx, Commercial Air, UPS, Hawaii, and Air
Taxi cost pools because these cost pools do not have distance-related
cost components. Id. at 16. However, the Postal Service indicates that
the average haul calculation for the Alaska air modes would remain
unchanged from the current methodology. Id.
The Postal Service proposes maintaining the separation of the
existing distributions by zone for Alaska, Hawaii, and the Caribbean
instead of combining these distributions in the final step. Id.
Second, the Postal Service proposes replacing several parameters in
the cost model for costs pertaining to mail in Alaska, reflecting
distance and non-distance related costs for that mail. Id. The Postal
Service also removes the parameters identifying local volume that
avoids contract transportation, as it found that local pieces are
comingled with higher zone packages and incur the same transportation
costs. Id. at 17. The Postal Service indicates that new distribution
keys ``would be developed for each individual cost pool in Cost Segment
14 based on the new air weights by cost pool, average haul mileages,
total weights, and total cubic feet by zone for parcels and flats.''
Id.
Third, The Postal Services proposes that air weight and average
haul miles by zone be calculated for individual providers, rather than
aggregated. Id. The Postal Service states:
The Priority Mail air weight by zone would be distributed
between parcels and flats, as in the current methodology, and the
air cube for FedEx Day Turn parcels and flats would be calculated
using the density factors and the air weight for FedEx. Next, the
Air distribution keys for each air cost pool for parcels and flats
would be calculated using the weight and cube by zone from the same
cost pool. This refinement would represent an improvement over the
current methodology because now, for example, UPS costs would be
distributed to each zone according to the UPS weight by zone rather
than being distributed based on the total air weight across all
modes. Likewise, the FedEx Day costs would be distributed to each
zone according to the FedEx cube by zone, rather than being
distributed based on the total air cube across all modes.
Id.
The Postal Service indicates that:
Two distribution keys would be calculated for the Alaska cost
pools: the pound distribution based solely on the Alaska air weight
by zone; and the pound-miles distribution, which would be calculated
by multiplying the Alaska air weight by zone by the average haul
mileage by zone for Alaska. The Alaska Non-Preferential cost pool
would employ a weighted average of the pound and pound-mile
distributions using the percent distance-related Alaska Non-
Preferential parameter.
Id. at 18.
Fourth, the Postal Service would calculate two distribution keys
for surface transportation cost pools. One for distance-related surface
transportation, and one for non-distance-related surface
transportation. Id. The Postal Service further describes the breakout
of these distribution keys into surface and air and details the
calculation. Id. at 18-20. In sum, these distribution keys would be
applied at the cost pool level for the cost pools within CS14:
Commercial air costs would be distributed by the
commercial air weight proportions by zone.
FedEx Day Turn costs would be distributed by the FedEx
cubic feet proportions by zone.
UPS costs would be distributed by the UPS air weight
proportions by zone.
Peak air costs would be distributed by the total air
weight proportions by zone.
Alaska Non-Preferential costs would be distributed by a
weighted average of the Alaska air weight and Alaska pound-miles
proportions by zone.
Alaska Preferential costs would be distributed by the
Alaska air weight proportions by zone.
Hawaii costs would be distributed by the Hawaii air weight
proportions by zone.
Air Taxi costs would be distributed by the air taxi air
weight proportions by zone.
CDS Intra-SCF Highway costs would be excluded from the
model.
Inter-SCF, Intra-NDC, Inter-NDC, Highway Plant Load,
Alaskan Highway, Highway Empty Equipment, Freight Rail, Rail Plant
Load, Rail Empty Equipment, Inland Water, and Offshore Water costs
would be distributed by the distance-related surface cube proportions
by zone.
Intra-SCF Highway costs would be distributed by the non-
distance related surface cube proportions by zone.
Peak Highway and Terminal/Van Damage costs would each be
distributed by a weighted average of the distance- and non-distance-
related surface cube proportions by zone.
Id. at 20-21.
Proposal Three--USPS Ground Advantage. In Proposal Three, the
Postal Service also proposes to update the USPS Ground Advantage
transportation cost model.\8\ The summary of each aspect of these
proposed changes follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Postal Service describes the existing methodology, and
that description is not repeated here. See Petition, Proposal Three
at 22-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, the Postal Service proposes the same distance taper factors
as proposed in the PM model for GA. Id. at 24. The Postal Service avers
the addition is an improvement because it would allow the model to
reflect that shorter distance trips have a higher cost per mile on
average compared to longer haul trips. Id.
Second, the Postal Service proposes a methodological change to
address the
[[Page 46049]]
treatment of Domestic Water cost pools. Id. Specifically, Inland and
Offshore Water costs would be disaggregated, and Offshore Water costs
would be distributed independently. Id. at 24-25.
Third, the Postal Service proposes a methodology for Zone 10 long-
distance surface transportation, because GA pieces over one pound may
travel by ocean to offshore locations rather than flying, but they
would also travel by truck to the ocean port. Id. at 25. The Postal
Service proposes accounting for this transport by calculating the
average haul mileage for Zone 10 by analyzing PTR and geographic data.
Id. at 25-26. This analysis would calculate the average miles per piece
for Zone 10 pieces destinating in the Caribbean, Pacific, and Alaska.
Id. at 26. The Postal Service notes the pairs of most common departure
ports and arrival ports for these pieces (Jacksonville, FL with Catano,
PR; Richmond, CA with Honolulu, HI; and Seattle, WA with Anchorage,
AK). Id. The Postal Service intends to use these pairs to calculate
water miles (and by subtracting water miles from average miles per
piece, estimating truck miles per piece) for these pieces. Id. The
Postal Service uses the volume proportions by offshore destination to
produce a weighted average truck mileage for all Zone 10 pieces. Id.
Fourth, the Postal Service proposes to analyze PTR data to identify
Offshore Water Ground Advantage weight percentages by zone. Id. The
weight distribution would be calculated by identifying the zone of the
GA over-one-pound pieces that travel by ocean to or from the offshore
location. Id. The weight distribution would be used to distribute the
GA costs or offshore water transportation by zone and avoids assigning
GA costs to zones that do not incur them as is done with the current
methodology. Id. at 26-27. The costs per cube for each component
category would be summarized to produce the total unit cost per cube by
zone. Id. at 27.
Fifth, the Postal Service proposes to update customer-specific
adjustments for Vehicle Service Driver (VSD) costs for local non-
distance-related surface transportation for GA. Id. This proposed
adjustment allows the Postal Service to account for deviations in VSD
costs driven by the average size of the customers cube. Id.
Impact. The Postal Service provides the impact for each component
of Proposal Three, as well as the combined impact, under seal in
Library Reference USPS-RM2024-8-NP1. Id. Because the impact of Proposal
Three is limited to PM and GA transportation costs separated by zone,
there is no impact on product-level costs. Id. at 28. The Postal
Service avers that the materials filed under seal ``substantiate and
quantify the Postal Service's prior statements that the cost of
transport to offshore locations is higher on average than it is to
transport to non-offshore destinations.'' Id.
III. Notice and Comment
The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2024-8 for consideration of
matters raised by the Petition. More information on the Petition may be
accessed via the Commission's website at https://www.prc.gov.
Interested persons may submit comments on the Petition and Proposal
Three no later than July 8, 2024. Reply comments on the Petition and
Proposal Three are due no later than July 22, 2024. Pursuant to 39
U.S.C. 505, Madison Lichtenstein is designated as an officer of the
Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the
general public in this proceeding.
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2024-8 for consideration
of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal
Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes
in Analytical Principles (Proposal Three), filed May 13, 2024.
2. Comments by interested persons in this proceeding are due no
later than July 8, 2024. Reply comments on the Petition and Proposal
Three are due no later than July 22, 2024.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Madison
Lichtenstein to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public
Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in
this docket.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Order in the
Federal Register.
By the Commission.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-11566 Filed 5-24-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
