96-32616. Experimental Nonletter-Size Business Reply Mail Categories and Fees, 1996; Notice and Order on Filing of Request for Establishment of Experimental Nonletter-Size Business Reply Mail Categories and Fees  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 24, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 67860-67862]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-32616]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
    
    [Order No. 1148; Docket No. MC97-1]
    
    
    Experimental Nonletter-Size Business Reply Mail Categories and 
    Fees, 1996; Notice and Order on Filing of Request for Establishment of 
    Experimental Nonletter-Size Business Reply Mail Categories and Fees
    
    Issued December 18, 1996.
        Before Commissioners: Edward J. Gleiman, Chairman; H. Edward 
    Quick, Jr., Vice Chairman; George W. Haley; W.H. ``Trey'' LeBlanc 
    III.
    
        Notice is hereby given that on December 13, 1996, the U.S. Postal 
    Service filed a Request with the Postal Rate Commission pursuant to 
    section 3623 of the Postal Reorganization Act, 39 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 
    for a recommended decision on proposed changes in the Domestic Mail 
    Classification Schedule (DMCS). The proposed revisions also include 
    proposed new fees. The Request includes attachments and is supported by 
    the testimony of three witnesses and three library references. It is on 
    file in the Commission Docket Room and is available for inspection 
    during the Commission's regular business hours. 1
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ In a separate notice filed simultaneously with its Request, 
    the Postal Service states that interested persons who intervene in 
    this proceeding may arrange to obtain copies of the request by 
    contacting Postal Service counsel by telephone at (202)268-2998, or 
    Ms. Bonnie D'Alessandro at (202)268-2988, and that intervenors will 
    be provided with two copies of the Request upon showing that they 
    have filed notices of intervention with the Postal Rate Commission.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Experimental Nature of the Proposed Change: The Postal Service 
    indicates that it is requesting new classifications and fees for 
    nonletter-size Business Reply Mail (BRM) on an experimental basis. The 
    Service proposes that these experimental BRM categories be put into 
    effect for two years, in order to assess the costs associated with 
    providing them and their administrative feasibility.
        Description of request: The Postal Service proposes a revised 
    schedule of fees for nonletter-size Business Reply Mail processed under 
    two alternative accounting procedures known as the ``reverse manifest'' 
    method and the ``weight averaging'' method. Generally, the Postal 
    Service expects that the alternative methods of accounting for 
    nonletter-size BRM pieces will reduce postal workhours that would 
    otherwise be attributable to this mail, permit more expeditious rating 
    and billing, allow the recipient earlier access to the mail, and 
    increase customer satisfaction with BRM service. On these grounds, the 
    Postal Service proposes per-piece fees for active business reply mail 
    advance deposit accounts of 2 cents for nonletter-size pieces using 
    reverse manifest procedures, and 3 cents for such pieces using weight 
    averaging procedures.
        However, in addition to the apparently lower per-piece accounting 
    costs of employing the two methods, the Service anticipates that 
    establishing a ``reverse manifest'' or ``weight averaging'' BRM account 
    for a recipient, as well as the required periodic sampling, auditing, 
    and monitoring of such an account, will generate extraordinary postal 
    costs in excess of the current BRM annual permit fee ($85.00) and 
    annual advance deposit accounting fee ($205.00). To recover these 
    extraordinary costs, the Service proposes adoption of application/
    qualification fees for each BRM account seeking to employ an 
    alternative
    
    [[Page 67861]]
    
    accounting method: ($1000) for the reverse manifest method and ($3000) 
    for the weight averaging method. Finally, the Postal Service proposes 
    additional monthly fees of ($1000) for accounts using the reverse 
    manifest method and ($3000) for accounts using the weight averaging 
    method. These new fees would be in addition to the current permit fees.
        The Request also states that the Postal Service intends to select 
    20 or fewer applicants to participate in the proposed experiment: as 
    many as 10 BRM recipients for use of the reverse manifest method, and 
    up to 10 recipients for use of the weight averaging method. The Service 
    proposes a two-year duration for the experiment to allow interested 
    mailers sufficient time to gauge the potential costs and benefits of 
    the alternative methods in light of their mailing practices, and to 
    provide the Postal Service time to select a cross-section of 
    participating users, set up the required administrative procedures, and 
    to collect and analyze operational, cost and market research data.
        Motion for waiver of certain filing requirements The Postal 
    Service's request was also accompanied by a motion for waiver of 
    compliance with certain requirements of section 64(h) of the rules of 
    practice (39 CFR 3001.64(h)), which specify rate-related information to 
    be included in classification requests that would affect rates and 
    fees. Specifically, the Postal Service seeks waiver of compliance with 
    subsections (d) (in part), (f)(2), (f)(3), (h), (j), (l)(1) (in part), 
    and (l)(2) of section 54 of the rules (39 CFR 3001.54(d), (f)(2), 
    (f)(3), (h), (j), (l)(1), and (l)(2)), which would otherwise be 
    required under section 64(h)(2)(i) (39 CFR 3001.64(h)(2)(i)]) The 
    Postal Service states that the requested waiver is justified by the 
    extremely limited scope of the proposed experiment, the irrelevance of 
    some of the rules' requirements to Business Reply Mail, and its 
    anticipation that the consequent effects on costs, revenues, and 
    volumes will be insignificant.
        Motion for application of protective conditions to a workpaper: The 
    Postal Service's Request was also accompanied by a motion requesting 
    that the Commission apply protective conditions which would restrict 
    participants' access to, and prohibit public disclosure of, Workpaper I 
    to the Direct Testimony of Witness Leslie Schenk, which the Postal 
    Service has filed in camera. In support of its motion, the Service 
    states that witness Schenk's cost estimates for nonletter-size Business 
    Reply Mail are based upon data that include the incoming BRM piece 
    volumes received by Nashua Photo, Mystic Color Lab, and Seattle 
    Filmworks, three film processors which compete among themselves and 
    against other firms in the film processing industry. The Service 
    represents that each firm considers its incoming BRM volume to be 
    commercially sensitive, privileged and confidential information, and 
    that access to such data was granted to witness Schenk with the 
    explicit understanding that it would not be publicly disclosed or 
    provided to any competing firm. The Service proposes a list of 
    protective conditions that would limit access to the workpaper, its 
    permissible use, and duration of access by authorized individuals.
        Motion to expedite the proceeding: Section 67d of the rules of 
    practice (39 CFR 3001.67d) states that the Commission will treat cases 
    falling under the experimental rules as subject to the maximum 
    expedition consistent with procedural fairness, and prescribes adoption 
    of a schedule that will allow issuance of a decision not more than 150 
    days from a determination that experimental treatment of the request is 
    appropriate. Notwithstanding this provision, the Postal Service has 
    submitted a motion requesting that the Commission establish procedures 
    allowing for issuance of a recommended decision on its request within 
    120 days of the date of its filing. In support of its motion, the 
    Postal Service states that it has provided sufficient information to 
    allow such expedited consideration, and notes the Commission's ability 
    to consider and issue a recommended decision concerning the experiment 
    proposed in Docket No. MC96-1 in less than 90 days. In connection with 
    its motion, the Postal Service proposes adoption of special rules of 
    procedure, which it provided in draft form. The Service also provides a 
    proposed procedural schedule.
        Anyone wishing to be heard in this matter is directed to file a 
    written notice of intervention with Margaret P. Crenshaw, Secretary of 
    the Commission, 1333 H Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20268-0001, on or 
    before January 17, 1997. Intervenors should indicate whether they want 
    full or limited participation status. See rules 39 CFR 3001.20 and 
    3001.20a.
        Those interested in participating in this docket are given notice 
    that the Commission will evaluate whether it is appropriate to use 
    rules 67-67d for considering the Postal Service Request. In determining 
    whether the procedures for experimental cases are appropriate, the 
    Commission will consider: (1) The novelty of the proposed change; (2) 
    the magnitude of the proposed change; (3) the ease or difficulty of 
    collecting data on the proposed change; and (4) the duration of the 
    proposed change. Participants are invited to comment on whether the 
    Postal Service request should be evaluated under rules 67-67d. Such 
    comments are to be filed on or before January 17, 1997. Prior to a 
    Commission decision on this question, participants should act on the 
    assumption that the Postal Service request that the case be considered 
    pursuant to these rules will be approved.
        Rule 67a provides a procedure for limiting issues in experimental 
    cases. In order to enable participants to evaluate whether genuine 
    issues of fact exist, the Postal Service shall respond to discovery 
    requests within 10 days. Written discovery pursuant to rules 25-28 may 
    be undertaken immediately upon intervention.
        A decision on whether there is a need for evidentiary hearings, and 
    the scope of any such hearings has not been made yet. Participants 
    wishing to comment on this question should file a statement of issues 
    raised by the Postal Service request by January 17, 1997. At the same 
    time, participants should designate those issues involving questions of 
    material fact which they believe require trial type hearings. The 
    Postal Service and any interested participant may file responses to 
    these statements on or before January 24, 1997.
        If it is determined to schedule trial type hearings to consider 
    topics involving issues of material fact, hearings to evaluate the 
    supporting evidence presented by the Postal Service may be scheduled to 
    begin as soon as February 10, 1997. The Presiding Officer will 
    establish subsequent procedural dates.
        Representation of the general public: In conformance with 
    Sec. 3624(a) of title 39, the Commission designates W. Gail Willette, 
    Director of the Commission's Office of the Consumer Advocate (OCA), to 
    represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding. 
    Pursuant to this designation, Ms. Willette will direct the activities 
    of Commission personnel assigned to assist her and, when requested, 
    will supply their names for the record. Neither Ms. Willette nor any of 
    the assigned personnel will participate in or provide advice on any 
    Commission decision in this proceeding. The OCA shall be separately 
    served with three copies of all filings, in addition to and 
    contemporaneous with, service on the Commission of the 24 copies 
    required by section 10(c) of the rules of practice (39 CFR 3001.10(c)).
        It is ordered:
    
    [[Page 67862]]
    
        1. The Commission will sit en banc in this proceeding.
        2. Notice of intervention will be filed no later than January 17, 
    1997.
        3. Participants wishing to comment on whether it is appropriate to 
    consider this request under Commission rules 67-67d shall submit such 
    comments no later than January 17, 1997.
        4. Participants are directed to file statements of issues and 
    designations of issues requiring trial type hearings no later than 
    January 17, 1997; responses may be submitted no later than January 24, 
    1997.
        5. Answers to the Postal Service motions: to Expedite the 
    Proceeding, for Waiver of Certain Filing Requirements, and Requesting 
    Protective Conditions are to be submitted no later than January 22, 
    1997.
        6. W. Gail Willette, Director of the Commission's Office of the 
    Consumer Advocate, is designated to represent the general public.
        7. The Secretary shall cause this Notice and Order to be published 
    in the Federal Register.
    
        By the Commission.
    Margaret P. Crenshaw,
    Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 96-32616 Filed 12-23-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/24/1996
Department:
Postal Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
96-32616
Pages:
67860-67862 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Order No. 1148, Docket No. MC97-1
PDF File:
96-32616.pdf