Periodic Reporting

• Published date: 01 April 2021
• Citation: 86 FR 17100
• Record Number: 2021-06633
• Section: Proposed rules
• Court: Postal Regulatory Commission

17100

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 61 / Thursday, April 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules

1

Petition of the United States Postal Service for

the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed

Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Two),

March 24, 2021 (Petition).

quantifying both costs and benefits,

reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and

promoting flexibility. The Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs has

determined that this rule is not a

significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866.

VA’s impact analysis can be found as

a supporting document at http://

www.regulations.gov, usually within 48

hours after the rulemaking document is

published. Additionally, a copy of the

rulemaking and its Regulatory Impact

Analysis (RIA) are available on VA’s

website at http://www.va.gov/orpm/, by

following the link for ‘‘VA Regulations

Published From FY 2004 Through Fiscal

Year to Date.’’

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule contains no

provisions constituting a collection of

information under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–

3521).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Secretary certifies that this

proposed rule would not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities as

they are defined in the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. There

are no small entities involved with the

process and/or benefits associated with

this rulemaking. Therefore, pursuant to

5 U.S.C. 605(b), the initial and final

regulatory flexibility analysis

requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do

not apply.

Unfunded Mandates

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that

agencies prepare an assessment of

anticipated costs and benefits before

issuing any rule that may result in the

expenditure by State, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector, of $100 million or more

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any

one year. This proposed rule would

have no such effect on State, local, and

tribal governments, or on the private

sector.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance numbers and titles for the

programs affected by this document are

64.100, Automobiles and Adaptive

Equipment for Certain Disabled

Veterans and Members of the Armed

Forces; 64.101, Burial Expenses

Allowance for Veterans; 64.104, Pension

for Non-Service-Connected Disability

for Veterans; 64.105, Pension to

Veterans Surviving Spouses, and

Children; 64.106, Specially Adapted

Housing for Disabled Veterans; 64.109,

Veterans Compensation for Service-

Connected Disability; and 64.110,

Veterans Dependency and Indemnity

Compensation for Service-Connected

Death.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and

procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,

Health care, Pensions, Veterans.

Signing Authority: Denis McDonough,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs, approved

this document on March 12, 2021, and

authorized the undersigned to sign and

submit the document to the Office of the

Federal Register for publication

electronically as an official document of

the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Jeffrey M. Martin,

Assistant Director, Office of Regulation Policy

& Management, Office of the Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, VA proposes to amend 38

CFR part 3 as follows:

PART 3—ADJUDICATION

■1. The authority citation for part 3,

subpart A, continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless

otherwise noted.

■2. Revise 38 CFR 3.203(a)(1) to read as

follows:

§ 3.203 Service records as evidence of

service and character of discharge.

(a) * * *

(1) The evidence is a document issued

by the service department. A copy of an

original document is acceptable if:

(i) The copy was issued by the service

department; or

(ii) The copy was issued by a public

custodian of records who certifies that

it is a true and exact copy of the

document in the custodian’s custody; or

(iii) The copy was submitted by an

accredited agent, attorney or service

organization representative who has

successfully completed VA-prescribed

training on military records, and who

certifies that it is a true and exact copy

of either an original document or of a

copy issued by the service department

or a public custodian of records; or

(iv) The Department of Veterans

Affairs is satisfied that an otherwise

uncertified copy submitted by the

claimant or by the claimant’s

representative is free from alteration;

and

* * * * *

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a))

[FR Doc. 2021–06535 Filed 3–31–21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

39 CFR Part 3050

[Docket No. RM2021–4; Order No. 5852]

Periodic Reporting

AGENCY

: Postal Regulatory Commission.

ACTION

: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY

: The Commission is

acknowledging a recent filing requesting

the Commission initiate a rulemaking

proceeding to consider changes to

analytical principles relating to periodic

reports (Proposal Two). This document

informs the public of the filing, invites

public comment, and takes other

administrative steps.

DATES

: Comments are due: May 14,

2021.

ADDRESSES

: Submit comments

electronically via the Commission’s

Filing Online system at http://

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 Two

III. Notice and Comment

IV. Ordering Paragraphs

I. Introduction

On March 24, 2021, 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 Two.

II. Proposal Two

Background. To estimate costs

avoided by mailer presort activities for

First-Class Mail letters, a workshare

model is developed and filed each year

as part of the Postal Service’s Annual

Compliance Report (ACR). Petition,

Proposal Two at 1. Mail processing flow

is ‘‘modeled by rate category, and the

activities involved are assigned costs

based on the appropriate wage rate,

productivity, and related indirect (i.e.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Mar 31, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM 01APP1

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

17101

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 61 / Thursday, April 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules

2

Id. The Postal Service notes that CRA costs are

not only subject to sampling variation, but the data

used to calculate costs for the CRA Report capture

additionally incurred costs from activities that

cannot be directly modeled. Id.

3

See id. at 1–2. The CRA Adjustment Factor was

initially developed in Docket No. R2006–1. Id. at

2–3; see generally Docket No. R2006–1, Opinion

and Recommended Decision, Volume 1, February

26, 2007.

‘‘piggyback’’) costs of each operation.’’

Id. The resulting costs are called

‘‘directly modeled’’ costs. Id. Mail

processing costs are separately

calculated as part of the Cost and

Revenue Analysis (CRA) Report using

In-Office Cost System (IOCS) data for

the same activities at the product level,

or within the same cost pools. Id.

However, the ‘‘directly modeled’’ costs

can differ from those calculated as part

of the CRA Report for several reasons.

2

As a result, the ‘‘CRA Adjustment

Factor’’ was developed in order to

‘‘calibrate the model and ‘true-up’ the

modeled costs to the costs reported in

the CRA Report,’’ using the following

equation:

3

MailProcUnitCost

i

= ModelUnitCost

i

*

CRAAdjustmentFactor +

FixedUnitCost

The Postal Service notes that, under

the current methodology, ‘‘cost pools

that are directly modeled are treated as

proportional, cost pools that are

operationally determined to be

unrelated to workshare are treated as

fixed, and the remaining cost pools are

treated as partly proportional.’’ Petition,

Proposal Two at 3. It further notes that,

for the last group of cost pools, ‘‘unit

costs are divided into proportional and

fixed components based on costs in the

directly assigned cost pools.’’ Id.

The Postal Service indicates that, in

the years since the methodology

described above was first established,

‘‘the structure of cost pools has been

configured to better align with

operational practice, enhancing the

ability to conduct operational analysis

of cost pools.’’ Id. The Postal Service

further indicates that, ‘‘[w]ith these

developments in data availability, the

current methodology for calibrating the

[cost avoidance] models to CRA costs is

in need of refinement.’’ Id.

Proposal. With Proposal Two, the

Postal Service seeks to ‘‘revise cost pool

classifications for the determination of

the proportional and fixed adjustment to

modeled costs’’ and ‘‘update the cost

pool classification vocabulary to better

reflect how the cost pools are treated in

the calibration methodology.’’ Id. at 4.

The Postal Service proposes three new

cost pool classifications: ‘‘Modeled/

Proportional Pools,’’ ‘‘Unrelated to

Presort’’ and ‘‘Correlated with Presort.’’

Id.

‘‘Modeled/Proportional Pools’’

include ‘‘cost pools where the mailflow

model directly characterizes the flow of

mail through the pools and measures

the cost of the component activities.’’ Id.

at 5. ‘‘Unrelated to Presort’’ include cost

pools where the ‘‘activities performed

are incurred because of piece

characteristics unrelated to presort and

thus the costs are invariant to presort,

and pools where the costs have spurious

correlation with presort.’’ Id. at 6.

‘‘Correlated with Presort’’ include cost

pools that are generally associated with

non-piece sorting allied labor and

support operations. Id. at 8. The Postal

Service notes that ‘‘Correlated with

Presort’’ cost pools may include costs

that are ‘‘partly avoidable with a greater

degree of presorting, but not directly

proportional to modeled piece costs.’’

Id.

Finally, the Postal Service notes that

the model would be modified in one

additional way. The Postal Service

indicates that costs associated with the

distribution of mailpieces to P.O. Boxes

will no longer be included as part of the

model. Id. at 10. It describes subsequent

‘‘costing enhancements’’ that have

eliminated the need to model these

costs, which it states are ‘‘explicitly

measured’’ as part of the ACR. Id. at 10–

11.

Impact. Under the Postal Service’s

proposed methodology, avoided costs

and passthroughs associated with First-

Class Mail letters would be affected.

Those effects are presented in Table 3 of

the proposal. See id. at 14.

III. Notice and Comment

The Commission establishes Docket

No. RM2021–4 for consideration of

matters raised by the Petition. More

information on the Petition may be

accessed via the Commission’s website

at http://www.prc.gov. Interested

persons may submit comments on the

Petition and Proposal Two no later than

May 14, 2021. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C.

505, Katalin K. Clendenin 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. RM2021–4 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 Two), filed March

24, 2021.

2. Comments by interested persons in

this proceeding are due no later than

May 14, 2021.

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the

Commission appoints Katalin K.

Clendenin 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. 2021–06633 Filed 3–31–21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA–R08–OAR–2021–0002; FRL–10021–

88–Region 8]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; North Dakota;

Revisions to Air Pollution Control

Rules; Regional Haze

AGENCY

: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION

: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY

: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a

revision to the North Dakota State

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by

the State of North Dakota on November

11, 2016 and supplemented on March

15, 2021, that addresses amendments to

the regional haze provisions of the

North Dakota Administrative Code

(NDAC). These revisions were

submitted to remove certain regional

haze requirements related to Best

Available Retrofit Technology (BART)

in the first planning period. EPA is also

proposing to approve a revision to the

North Dakota SIP submitted on August

3, 2020, that addresses additional

amendments to the regional haze

provisions of the NDAC. The 2020 SIP

revision was submitted to update the

incorporation by reference date for

regional haze definitions, add emission

reduction requirements to make

reasonable progress during the second

and subsequent regional haze planning

periods, and revise the regional haze

monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements to be applicable

under the second and subsequent

planning period. EPA is taking this

action pursuant to section 110 and Part

C of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Mar 31, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM 01APP1

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS