Postal stakeholders file comments for the PRC’s 701 report to the President and Congress

SteveBlog, Story

Yesterday was the deadline for comments concerning the Postal Regulatory Commission’s 701 Report, which the Commission is required to prepare at least every five years, under the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA).

As the Commission explains  in its notice seeking comments, the 701 Report is directed to  the President and Congress, and it is supposed to address  (1) the operation of the amendments made by PAEA; and (2) recommendations for any legislation or other measures necessary to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the postal laws of the United States.

The notice reviews the numerous recommendations that the Commission made in its previous 701 report, back in 2011.  These included allowing the Postal Service to add new market dominant classes of mail, allowing the Postal Service to introduce new non postal services (with adequate safeguards to reduce the potential for the introduction of unprofitable products), and requiring the Postal Service to consult with the Commission not only in establishing service standards for market dominant products, but also when seeking to change existing service standards.  These recommendations have not been realized, however, because new legislation has stalled for the past five years.

For the 2016 report, the Commission has invited comments on the following topics:

  • Postal Service Financial Situation
  • Market Dominant Rate System
  • Competitive Rate System
  • Negotiated Service Agreements
  • Post Office Closing/Consolidation Procedures
  • Service Standards
  • Nonpostal Services
  • The Postal Service Fund and the Postal Service Competitive Products Fund
  • Advisory Opinion Process
  • Market Tests
  • Universal Service Obligation and the Postal Monopoly
  • Requirement of a Public Representative
  • Requirement of Commission Inspector General

Those who filed comments yesterday represent a cross-section of the stakeholders in the postal industry — big mailers and their associations,  partner-competitors like UPS, citizens groups and think tanks, and the postal worker unions.  Also filing comments were a couple of private individuals (including yours truly).

Here’s a list of those who filed comments.  The links take you to the comments on the PRC website.  

Comments of the National Association of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO
Public Representative Comments
Comments of David Yao on the PAEA Review
Comments of Don Cheney on Post Office Closing/Consolidation Procedures
Comments of Former Utility Regulators
Valpak Direct Marketing Systems, Inc. and the Valpak Franchise Association, Inc. Comments on Commission Report to the President and Congress Pursuant to Section 701 of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
United States Postal Service Comments in Response to Order 3238
Comments of Pitney Bowes Inc.
Comments of Citizens Against Government Waste
Comments of Campaign for Postal Banking
APWU Comments on Report to the President and Congress Pursuant to Section 701 of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
Comments Of United Parcel Service, Inc. On The Section 701 Report
Comments of a Grand Alliance to Save Our Public Postal Service
Comment of National Taxpayers Union
Comments of the Association for Postal Commerce, Major Mailers Association, and Saturation Mailers Coalition
Comment of the National Association of Presort Mailers
Comments of Elaine Mittleman on the Report to the President and Congress Pursuant to Section 701 of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
Comments of MPA-Association of Magazine Media and Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers
Comments of the American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research Submitted to the Postal Regulatory Commission, June 14, 2016
Comments of Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc.
Motion by the National Association of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO for Extension of Time to File Comment
Comment of Linda O’Donnell on the State of USPS
Comments of the Greeting Card Association
Comments of Lexington Institute
Comments of R Street Institute
Comments of the Parcel Shippers Association
Comments by Steven Hutkins Regarding the Commission’s Section 701 Report
Print Friendly, PDF & Email