News on USPS Mailbox Issue
Below is a report from Bryan Buford, Executive Head of AMPC, on the complaint made to the Postal Regulatory Commission. At issue is USPS’s effort to offer mailbox holders a street address, email notice, acceptance of all carrier packages and other services without increasing current prices. This is viewed as a blatant attempt to compete unfairly by subsidizing additional labor and equipment cost with postage revenues. The complaint was joined by several franchisors including Postal Connections and many independent owner-operators across the country.
Detailed below is a rundown of the complaint decisions: but the bottom line is this looks good. The PRC has agreed with our complaint that the USPS did not follow proper procedure. They’re giving the USPS the opportunity to file for those enhancements properly by July 9 or the complaint proceeds. Either way, we get the opportunity to speak up about these enhancements, which is as it always should have been. Bryan Buford, AMPC
Here’s the rundown:
Today the PRC issued a response (Order No. 1366) to the Complaint we filed on March 15 and the subsequent USPS Motion to Dismiss that was filed on April 4. The PRC both granted in part and denied in part the Motion to Dismiss. Furthermore, the PRC put the Complaint in Abeyance pending a submission and disposition of an elective filing by the USPS in regards to its enhancements for PO Box service.
Basically, the PRC agreed with our argument that the Post Office did not seek approval for the enhanced services it is now offering with PO Box Service. The PRC stated in the Order, “The Postal Service did not propose to offer the enhanced services at issue in the Complaint in any prior proceedings before the Commission.” The USPS Motion to dismiss our complaint pursuant to sections 3633 and 3642 is denied.
The Commission did find in favor of dismissal of the Section 3661 Claim.
The argument there was that the enhanced services represented a change in the nature of postal services and required the USPS to seek an advisory opinion. The Commission concluded that the enhanced services do not amount to a change in the nature of postal services.
The PRC has established Docket MC2012-26 as a placeholder for an elective filing by the Postal Service concerning its enhanced services.
The PRC has written that the PAEA regulations mandate the notice and relevant supporting materials be filed with the Commission to inform the public and the Commission of planned or requested changes. As noted above, the USPS did not do this despite their claims otherwise. So, the PRC is creating a docket where the those enhancements will be properly presented before us and the general public. In that scenario, we’ll have our rightful opportunity to discuss and evaluate the service, its true costs and its potential damage. But that filing is elective. If the USPS does not choose to pursue this option, the complaint will proceed. In which case, we will again have our opportunity to dissect the enhancements in a more litigious environment.
This is a win for our complaint. All along we have stressed that our complaint is based on the premise that the USPS did not follow the proper channels in launching the enhancements to the PO Box service. The PRC has agreed with our assessment and one way or the other, we will get our chance to properly evaluate and comment on these enhancements.
Bryan Buford
Executive Director
815-978-2391
www.ampc.org