[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 631-638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-107]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 20


Global Package Link (Formerly International Package Consignment 
Service)

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service, after considering the comments submitted 
in response to its requests in 59 FR 65961 (December 22, 1994) for 
comments on interim regulations implementing International Package 
Consignment (IPCS) service, and in 60 FR 61660 (December 1, 1995) on an 
amendment of the interim regulations implementing International Package 
Consignment Service, hereby gives notice that it is adopting the 
interim regulations as amended on a permanent basis, without 
modification. The Postal Service also announces that the name of the 
service has been changed to Global Package Link (GPL) service.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 12:01, a.m., January 6, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert E. Michelson, (202) 268-5731.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 22, 1994, the Postal Service 
published in the Federal Register interim regulations implementing 
Global Package Link (GPL) to Japan and

[[Page 632]]

requested comments. 59 FR 65,961 (December 22, 1994). GPL is an 
international mail service designed for mail order companies sending 
merchandise packages to other countries. The service was initially 
available to Japan, with Canada to be added as a destination country in 
the future. Other destination countries would be added as customer 
needs dictated. To use GPL, a customer would be required to mail at 
least 25,000 packages in one year to each country to which it wants to 
use the service, and to agree to link its information systems with the 
Postal Service's so that the Postal Service could extract certain 
information about the contents of the customer's packages for customs 
clearance and other purposes. The notice stated that implementation of 
GPL would benefit (1) U.S. mail order companies and other customers 
that export goods by making it easier and less costly to do so; and (2) 
all other users of the Postal Service by increasing the total 
contribution to fixed costs realized by the Postal Service from its 
international operations. Comments were due on or before January 31, 
1995.
    On December 1, 1995, the Postal Service published an amendment of 
the interim regulations. 60 FR 61660 (December 1, 1995). Under the 
original proposal, the Postal Service would pick up parcels from GPL 
users within 500 miles of the GPL processing facility at John F. 
Kennedy Airport in New York. Customers farther away from JFK would be 
responsible for bringing their parcels to the JFK facility. Under the 
amended interim regulations, the Postal Service would provide work 
stations to customers farther away than 500 miles that would prepare 
packages as required by the Postal Service. Packages would then be 
verified and picked up from these customers' plants and would be taken 
to the nearest appropriate international exchange office for dispatch 
to Japan. Comments were due on or before January 2, 1996.

I. Original Regulations

    The Postal Service received comments on the original interim 
regulations from four organizations: a mail order company which sends 
merchandise to Japan and other countries, Lands' End; two companies 
engaged in the international transportation of merchandise, United 
Parcel Service (UPS) and Federal Express Corporation; and an 
association of companies engaged in the international transportation of 
merchandise, the Air Courier Conference of America (ACCA).
    Lands' End expressed support for GPL service because GPL would help 
it to export goods to Japan more efficiently and cheaply. It also 
stated that it would eagerly evaluate similar programs to additional 
destination countries. It did not object to taking its packages to New 
York's JFK airport for posting but would like to have additional 
acceptance points in the Midwest and the West Coast. In particular, it 
suggested Chicago O'Hare airport as an additional acceptance point. 
These comments confirm the Postal Service's belief that GPL service 
will benefit U.S. exporters. Additional destinations will be considered 
depending on customer need. Additional acceptance points will also be 
considered, again depending on customer need. See 61 FR 39,592 (July 
30, 1996). In addition, under the amendment of the original interim 
regulations, the Postal Service permits mailers to do some of the work 
associated with preparing packages for dispatch in exchange for the 
Postal Service picking up the packages at the customer's facility more 
than 500 miles from the JFK facility. This new option should make the 
service more convenient for mailers who are more than 500 miles from 
JFK.
    UPS, Federal, and ACCA oppose GPL service on various grounds and 
urge that it be terminated immediately. UPS asserts that the 
regulations implementing GPL service are arbitrary and capricious 
because the Postal Service did not publish any cost or other data to 
support GPL rates. It asserts that such support is necessary because 
GPL rates appear to be below cost. Federal Express also asserts that 
GPL rates may not cover costs and likewise criticizes the Postal 
Service for not releasing cost data underlying the rates. Both 
companies assert that GPL rates will adversely affect mailers which do 
not qualify for GPL service. UPS states that the current international 
package mix includes both relatively higher-cost and lower-cost mail. 
As unit revenue decreases as presumably lower-cost mail migrates to 
GPL, other package rates will have to increase to cover the relatively 
higher-cost mail that remains in the other rate schedules to avoid 
cross-subsidization of package mail by other mail. Other mailers would 
also be injured if GPL rates were below cost, because they would be 
subsidizing GPL rates. Federal Express states that in the event that 
GPL rates are below cost or fail to make an adequate contribution to 
overhead, domestic mailers will be worse off. ACCA also criticizes GPL 
rates and asserts that they are unreasonable because the Postal Service 
did not state that the rates would produce a reasonable contribution to 
overhead.
    The Postal Service does not agree with these assertions. First, no 
statute requires the Postal Service to publish cost or other data to 
support international postage rates. Such data are recognized by all in 
the international package business as commercially sensitive. Second, 
GPL rates produce revenues greater than costs. They are not subsidized 
by other mail. As at least one of these commenters appears to have 
recognized, higher volume customers mail packages that are lower cost 
than single piece packages. Insofar as these packages cause the Postal 
Service to incur lower costs, lower rates are also justified. In 
addition, higher volume customers have more options in selecting 
service providers, and will use other companies if they provide a 
better combination of service and price. If the Postal Service does not 
offer competitive rates and services, these customers will use 
competitive service providers, with the result that lower-cost packages 
will leave the other mailstreams anyway, and rates for those services 
will rise. Likewise, to the extent that higher-volume customers turn to 
other carriers because Postal Service international package rates are 
not competitive, the burden of overhead that they would have covered 
will fall in some part on other mailers. In sum, the high-volume 
packages carried by the Postal Service today are likely to migrate from 
the other mailstreams in any event, so that if users of other services 
are going to receive any benefit it is better that those packages 
migrate to another Postal Service mailstream where contribution can be 
maintained rather than to another service provider where the Postal 
Service will receive no contribution at all.
    The Postal Service's experience to date also undermines the 
assertions of adverse impact on non-GPL mailers. A large part of the 
volume that GPL has attracted is new to the Postal Service, and, 
indeed, appears to be new volume to Japan. In this respect, this new 
volume is doing what the Postal Service intended it to do: adding new 
contribution to offset the need for obtaining contribution from other 
mailers.
    UPS, Federal Express, and ACCA also assert that GPL rates are 
unduly discriminatory or preferential in violation of 39 U.S.C. 
Sec. 403(c). ACCA asserts that the rates are discriminatory because 
they are significantly lower than single-piece rates. ACCA and UPS 
assert that the rates are discriminatory because in certain rate steps 
the rates for express parcels are lower than the rates

[[Page 633]]

for standard air parcels, and because the rates for some standard air 
parcels are lower than for economy air parcels. UPS asserts that GPL 
rates are unduly discriminatory because the discounts are tied to the 
annual volume tendered by the mailer rather than to per-mailing 
volumes. UPS and Federal Express further assert that the rates are 
discriminatory because customers within 500 miles of JFK are provided 
ground transportation to JFK while those more than 500 miles from JFK 
must transport their packages at their own expense. Federal Express 
asserts that the rates are discriminatory because the interconnection 
of the customers' and the Postal Service's computer systems must be 
negotiated and agreed.
    The Postal Service again does not agree. Section 403(c) does not 
prohibit all discriminations or preferences, only those that are undue 
or unreasonable. UPS Worldwide Forwarding v. U.S. Postal Service, 66 
F.3d 621 (3d Cir. 1995). Single-piece mailers and higher-volume mailers 
are not similarly situated. They require different kinds of services 
and different types of service features. For example, mailers which use 
GPL service forgo service features such as mailing at a local post 
office in favor of bulk entry of mail at the New York gateway or 
performing some of the dispatch preparation work in exchange for pick 
up at their facility. In addition, it is not possible to be all things 
to all customers. Judgments must be made as to which services, and how 
much of them, can be provided at specified rates, and the 500 mile 
limit on providing ground transportation to JFK reflects such a 
judgment. It is also important to note that the Postal Service received 
no comment from any potential user of GPL service objecting to the 500 
mile limit. In the Postal Service's view, this disparate treatment is 
reasonable. In addition, as pointed out above, under the amended 
regulation the Postal Service will pickup packages for customers 
outside the 500 mile limit if the customer is willing to do some of the 
package preparation. That should alleviate some of the burden on such 
customers.
    Likewise, in any task as complex as linking different computer 
systems, it is impossible to treat any two customers exactly alike. 
Even though each customer's computer system is different from 
another's, it cannot be reasonably said that the two customers are not 
similarly situated. Accordingly, any differences in the computer links 
does not create any undue discrimination or preference.
    The differences in rates for the different levels of service 
reflect differences in the cost structures for those services. Economy 
service is available only for items which qualify as small packets for 
which the Postal Service pays the Japanese postal administration AO 
terminal dues rates. Standard Air service items are postal parcels for 
which the Japanese postal administration charges a per-kilogram inward 
land rate it establishes that is different from the per-kilogram rate 
for small packets. Express items are EMS items for which the Japanese 
postal administration charges a per-item charge it establishes. The 
differences in the manner in which the Japanese postal administration 
is compensated for the services it provides are reflected in the rates 
the Postal Service charges its GPL customers.
    Finally, it is not unduly discriminatory to tie discounts to a 
customer's annual volume. First, at the higher annual volumes customers 
do in fact tender more parcels per mailing than do customers with lower 
annual volumes, which results in some cost savings. In addition, 
because higher-volume customers have more options than lower-volume 
customers, their price sensitivity is greater than lower-volume 
customers, which makes them not similarly situated. It is not unduly 
discriminatory to offer different rates to mailers who are not 
similarly situated.
    It should also be noted that these arguments of charging the same 
rate to mailers who allegedly receive different services were a 
necessary consequence of the District Court's decision in UPS Worldwide 
Forwarding, Inc. v. Postal Service, 853 F. Supp. 800 (D. Del. 1994), 
which held that the Postal Service was not authorized to negotiate 
customized services and rates with large-volume customers. Rather, the 
court said that the Postal Service was required to offer only 
categories of mail services to different types of mail and mail users. 
That required the Postal Service to group mailers together for the 
purpose of providing services and establishing rates even though those 
mailers might have unique needs and might not actually use all the 
service features that might be available. This ``averaging'' of 
services rendered and rates charged is a common feature of postal 
services in which significantly different services can be rendered at 
the same price, e.g., mailing a letter across the street versus mailing 
a letter across the country. The District Court's decision has now been 
reversed, but the Postal Service has decided to continue GPL as 
originally conceived.
    Federal Express asserts that GPL to Japan is cream skimming because 
it is offered only to Japan. The reasoning behind this assertion is 
unclear, especially since Japan is not a low-cost destination. In any 
event, that GPL was initially offered only to Japan is not an 
indication that it will only be offered to Japan. Every service has to 
start somewhere, and since there was an expressed need for such a 
service to Japan, that made Japan the logical place to start. Since 
then, service has been implemented to Canada and the U.K. and other 
destination countries will be added as demand justifies them.
    Federal Express and ACCA assert that the Japanese postal 
administration's charges for delivery in Japan might not include all 
the costs incurred by that administration for delivery and that, 
therefore, the total economic cost for GPL service might not be 
included in the GPL cost base. ACCA urges that the cost base for GPL 
rates be revised to include any costs that the Japanese postal 
administration might have omitted. Neither cites any data source that 
might support their assertions, nor is the Postal Service aware of any 
data that might relate to them. While Federal Express is correct in 
saying that Japan charges UPU terminal dues rates for those packages 
that are small packets, the Japanese postal administration sets its own 
inward land rate for parcels and imbalance charges for EMS items. It 
would appear unlikely that Japan would set those charges at levels that 
would not cover their costs. Further, the UPU Convention authorizes 
postal administrations to negotiate terminal dues rates different from 
those in the Convention. The Japanese postal administration could 
negotiate different rates for small packets if it believed that those 
rates were inadequate. It has not raised that issue with the Postal 
Service. Accordingly, there is no basis for believing that the Japanese 
postal administration's charges do not cover the costs of delivery in 
Japan, and no basis to make any adjustment even if there were some 
rational economic reason to include any cost other than what the 
Japanese postal administration in fact charges for its services.
    Similarly, ACCA urges that the costs of GPL service be adjusted 
upward to account for the economic value of the customs clearance 
services provided by the Japanese postal administration which ACCA 
asserts might not be correctly priced because such customs clearance 
services are not available to other international transportation 
service providers. The Postal Service disagrees. First, there is no 
basis for believing that the cost of customs clearance is not included 
in the charges established by the Japanese postal administration, since 
such services are

[[Page 634]]

provided to all mail of the kind sent by GPL regardless of the rate 
charged by the Postal Service. Moreover, there are no data which could 
be used to make such an adjustment even if it were appropriate.
    In a similar argument, Federal Express asserts that GPL is unfair 
competition because it receives postal customs clearance that it 
asserts is simpler than commercial customs clearance. The Postal 
Service disagrees. Just because postal customs clearance is different 
does not make it either better or worse than commercial customs 
clearance. In some respects the two are alike in that commercial 
invoices are required for both commercial and postal express shipments. 
In some respects, postal customs clearance is more burdensome because a 
customs declaration must be affixed to each item, a requirement that 
commercial customs clearance does not have. This is additionally 
burdensome for express items because the customs declaration is in 
addition to an invoice. It is also true that postal customs clearance 
requires individual inspection of each item, whereas commercial customs 
clearance relies on a manifest and typically only limited inspection of 
individual items, which also makes postal customs clearance more 
burdensome.
    UPS asserts that the Postal Service did not comply with the 
Administrative Procedures Act (APA) in implementing GPL rates. In 
short, the APA does not apply to the establishment of international 
rates. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, the APA does 
not apply to the Postal Service. 39 U.S.C. Sec. 410(a). No provision of 
the Postal Reorganization Act or other statute makes the APA applicable 
to international ratemaking, even though there are provisions making 
the APA applicable in specific instances. See 39 U.S.C. Sec. 3001(j).
    UPS further asserts that even if the APA did not apply to the 
Postal Service, the Postal Service violated its own regulations by not 
publishing GPL rates until after their effective date. Part 20 of 39 
C.F.R., to which UPS refers, does not specify when regulations must be 
published, and in fact contemplates that regulations will be published 
periodically regardless of their effective date. Moreover, Part 20 does 
not govern whether regulations can be made effective retroactively, 
which was the case in this instance.
    UPS also asserts that there was no indication in the Federal 
Register notice announcing GPL service that the Postal Service had 
obtained the consent of the President to establish GPL rates. By a 
December 15, 1994, memorandum published in the Federal Register on 
December 19, 1994, 59 FR 65,471, the President delegated to the 
Governors of the Postal Service whatever authority he had under 39 
U.S.C. Sec. 407 to consent to the establishment of international 
postage rates. In accordance with that delegation, the Postal Service 
obtained the consent of the Governors of the Postal Service to 
establish GPL rates before implementing them, which consent was 
confirmed in Governors Resolution No. 95-4 adopted on March 6, 1995. In 
addition, the formality of obtaining the Governors' approval as the 
delegatee of the President has been rendered immaterial insofar as the 
Court of Appeals in the UPS Worldwide Forwarding case held that the 
prior practice of the Postal Service implementing international postage 
rates without the objection of the President was an acceptable 
interpretation of 39 U.S.C. Sec. 407 based on over 120 years of 
practice.
    ACCA not only asserts that GPL rates are illegal because they were 
not approved by the President, but also asserts that the President's 
delegation of authority to the Governors is unconstitutional because it 
violates the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment. ACCA cites 
several cases it believes support its position: Carter v. Carter Coal 
Company, 298 U.S. 238 (1936); Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564 (1973); 
In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133 (1955); Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 
409 U.S. 57 (1972); and Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927). The Postal 
Service disagrees.
    Tumey, Ward, and Murchison each involved judicial officers or city 
officials acting in a judicial capacity and stand for the principle 
that a person cannot act as a judge in a case in which he or she has a 
personal interest. The establishment of international rates is not a 
judicial act, nor are the Governors of the Postal Service, who are 
appointed to represent the public interest generally, 39 U.S.C. 
Sec. 202(a), acting in a judicial capacity when they give consent to 
the establishment of international rates. Moreover, the Governors of 
the Postal Service do not have any personal stake in the revenues from 
the international postage rates charged by the Postal Service because 
they receive a fixed salary of $10,000 per year and $300 per meeting up 
to a total of $30,000 per year regardless of what action they take with 
respect to international postage rates.
    Gibson involved a state optometry board proceeding in which the 
board, composed entirely of independent optometrists and acting in a 
quasi-judicial capacity, sought to revoke the licenses of all 
optometrists who worked for optical companies, approximately half of 
the optometrists in the state. The Court held that the board was biased 
and incompetent to proceed in view of the pecuniary benefit the board 
members would receive if they eliminated half of their competition. 
Gibson does not apply because the Governors of the Postal Service have 
no pecuniary interest in approving international postage rates.
    Carter involved a New Deal program that was intended to stabilize 
the coal industry by regulating prices, wages, and working conditions. 
The Court struck down most of the legislation on the theory that coal 
production and sale did not involve interstate commerce. It also struck 
down a feature of the legislation that gave regional boards made up of 
coal executives and union representatives power to regulate the wages 
and working conditions of employees of all coal companies in the 
region. The Court concluded that this gave the large companies and 
unions the power to regulate their smaller competitors and therefore 
delegated a governmental function, regulation of the production of 
coal, to private persons. Carter does not apply in this case because 
the establishment of international rates does not involve the 
regulation of anyone's business other than the Postal Service, and the 
Governors are government officials appointed by the President with the 
advice of the Senate, not private persons acting in a private capacity.
    ACCA also asserts that GPL is a new classification of international 
mail and must be submitted to the Postal Rate Commission for 
consideration and a recommended decision. ACCA asserts that Air Courier 
Conference of America v. Postal Service, 959 F.2d 1213 (3d Cir. 1992), 
held that 39 U.S.C. 407 excepted only international rates from 
submission to the Postal Rate Commission, not international 
classifications. ACCA is mistaken.
    Section 407 has been consistently interpreted as applying to both 
international rates and classifications since the two things are 
largely inseparable from a practical point of view: one cannot 
establish rates without reference to the items to which the rates 
apply. Moreover, international mail classifications and services are 
established in postal treaties and conventions.
    The basic classifications of LC, AO including both printed matter 
and small packets, and parcels are established in the Universal Postal 
Convention and Postal Parcels agreement, which are postal treaties 
ratified by the President

[[Page 635]]

of the United States. The levels of service, surface, surface air lift 
(SAL), airmail, and EMS are also established in the Convention. GPL 
matches these classes and services with volume-discount rates that are 
attractive to large volume mailers. It does not create any new classes 
of mail or service. It should also be noted that the Postal Rate 
Commission has never asserted jurisdiction over either international 
rates or classifications.

II. Amendment

    The Postal Service received one comment on the amendment of the 
original interim regulations. This commenter, United Parcel Service, 
reiterated the comments it made with respect to the original interim 
regulations. It also alleged that the amendment was unduly 
discriminatory because only some mailers would receive workstations 
with which to perform package preparation. In addition, it alleged that 
the Postal Service would incur additional surface transportation costs 
in transporting mail to the nearest airmail facility, and would incur 
additional air transportation costs in transporting mail from airmail 
facilities other than JFK, but would not charge rates different from 
those it established originally. Finally, UPS alleges that the reasons 
given in support of the amended interim regulations are contrary to the 
reasons given in the original interim regulations for the lower costs 
of GPL service.
    Insofar as the comments with respect to the amendment are the same 
as the comments on the original interim regulations, the same responses 
apply, and will not be repeated.
    UPS alleges that the amendment is defective because the Postal 
Service would provide workstations only to ``selected'' mailers. 
According to UPS, this would lead to discriminatory treatment of 
mailers. The Postal Service disagrees. The option of receiving work 
stations and performing the package preparation is selected by the 
mailer, not the Postal Service. Insofar as the option is available to 
all similarly situated mailers, there is no undue discrimination or 
preference.
    UPS also alleges that the Postal Service would incur additional 
surface and air transportation expenses compared to the original 
proposal. The Postal Service might incur some additional transportation 
costs, but it will also save mail processing costs based on the package 
preparation performed by the mailer. These savings should largely off-
set the additional expenses incurred, if any. In addition, the new 
option should attract new customers which would not have used GPL 
service as originally conceived. This additional revenue and 
contribution more than compensate for any additional expense that might 
be incurred.
    UPS also asserts that the amendment is inconsistent with the 
original interim rule. According to UPS, the original rule was based on 
the rationale that the Postal Service would incur lower costs in 
processing GPL parcels because of greater availability of direct air 
transportation from JFK airport, efficiencies from processing all GPL 
parcels at a single facility designed for that purpose, efficiencies 
from dispatching all GPL shipments from a single facility, and that 
general operational and managerial considerations supported handling 
all GPL shipments at a single facility.
    UPS's assertions in this regard are incorrect. The original interim 
rule was not based on the rationale that the Postal Service would incur 
lower costs because of the four factors cited. The original interim 
rule was based on a rationale stated in section II. A. of the Federal 
Register notice, which said that the Postal Service was implementing 
this new international service ``In order more closely to meet the 
needs of mail order companies and other customers that send merchandise 
packages from the United States to multiple international addressees.'' 
The four factors cited by UPS were, indeed, factors that led to the 
decision to process and dispatching GPL parcels from the JFK Processing 
Plant. That decision provided economies of scale and allowed the 
implementation of this new service in an efficient manner. As clearly 
stated in the amendment to the interim rule, however, the Postal 
Service subsequently determined, as volumes grew, that it could further 
reduce costs and improve service by allowing mailers to share the 
package processing workload if they met certain conditions. GPL is 
growing, both in numbers of mailers using the service and in volume, 
and the Postal Service will continue to develop procedures that will 
facilitate the use of this service by its customers.
    Accordingly, the Postal Service adopts the following amendments to 
the International Mail Manual, which is incorporated by reference in 
the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 20.1. All other changes in 
the original interim rule for Global Package Link which were published 
in the Federal Register as amendments of the interim rule remain in 
effect as interim rules.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 20

    International postal service, Foreign relations.

PART 20--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 20 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 401, 404, 407, 408.

    2. Chapter 6 of the International Mail Manual is amended by adding 
new subchapter 620 to read as follows:

CHAPTER 6--SPECIAL PROGRAMS

* * * * *

SUBCHAPTER 620--GLOBAL PACKAGE LINK

621  Description
621.1  General
    Global Package Link (GPL) is a bulk mailing system that provides 
fast, economical international delivery of packages containing 
merchandise. GPL is designed to make it easier and less costly for mail 
order companies to export goods. The Postal Service provides GPL on a 
destination county-specific basic pursuant to the terms and conditions 
stipulated in 620.
621.2  Admissible Items
621.21  Prohibited Enclosures
    GPL packages may not contain:
    a. Typewritten and handwritten communications having the character 
of current correspondence.
    b. Any item that is prohibited in international mail. Refer to the 
Country Conditions of Mailing in the Individual Country Listings for 
individual destination country prohibitions.
621.22  Exceptions
    GPL packages may contain an invoice as long as the invoice is 
limited to the particulars that constitute an invoice.
621.3  Availability
    GPL is available only to destination countries identified in 620.
622  Qualifying Mailers
    To qualify, a mailer must enter into a service agreement containing 
the commitments stipulated in 625.2 and must be able to meet the 
general and destination country-specific preparation requirements 
stipulated in 620.
623  General
623.1  Special Services
    The special services provided for in Chapter 3 are not available 
for packages sent by GPL unless specifically provided for in 620.

[[Page 636]]

623.2  Customs Documentation
    The requirements for customs forms vary by destination country as 
stipulated in 620.
623.3  Size and Weight Limits
    Size and weight limits for packages sent by GPL vary by destination 
country as stipulated in 620.
623.4  Postage
623.41  Rates
    Rates vary by destination country as stipulated in 620.
623.42  Postage Payment Method
    Postage must be paid by permit imprint.
623.43  Documentation
    Each mailing of GPL packages must be accompanied by a manifest and 
other documentation in the form specified by the Postal Service.
624  Preparation Requirements
624.1  General Requirements
624.11  Barcode
    Every GPL package must bear a barcode, in a format acceptable to 
the Postal Service, that identifies the package by a unique number. The 
mailer must place the barcode on the address side of the package.
624.12  Addressing
    See 122. The name and address of the mailer and of the addressee 
also should be recorded on a separate slip enclosed in the package.
624.13  Sealing
    Every GPL package must be sealed by the mailer. Wax, gummed-paper 
tape, nails, screws, wire, metal bands, or other materials may be used 
as suitable. The seal must be sufficient to allow detection of 
tampering.
624.14  Packaging
    Every GPL package must be securely and substantially packed. In 
packing, the mailer should consider the nature of the contents, the 
climate, and the delivery method. The Postal Service will determine 
whether the contemplated packaging is suitable prior to the mailer's 
use of GPL.
624.15  Nonpostal Documentation
    Forms required by nonpostal export regulations are described in 
Chapter 5.
624.2  Destination Country-Specific Requirements
    Certain preparation requirements vary by destination country as 
stipulated in 620.
625  GPL Service Agreements
625.1  General
    The mailer must enter into a separate service agreement for each 
destination country to which it wants to use GPL.
625.2  Required Provisions
    Each service agreement must contain the following:
    a. The mailer's commitment to send at least 25,000 packages by GPL 
during the next 12 months to the specified destination country.
    b. The mailer's commitment to designate the Postal Service as its 
carrier of choice to the specified destination country.
    c. The mailer's commitment to link its information systems with the 
Postal Service's so that (1) the Postal Service and the mailer can 
exchange data transmissions concerning the mailer's packages, and (2) 
by scanning the mailer-provided barcode on each package, the Postal 
Service can extract, on an as-needed basis, certain information about 
the package. The package-specific information that the mailer is 
required to make available varies by destination country as stipulated 
in 620.
    d. For a mailer processing packages at the mailer's plant, the 
mailer's commitment to use Postal Service provided workstations to 
process all GPL packages and to sort and prepare those packages for 
dispatch as specified by the Postal Service.
625.3  Optional Provisions
    Each service agreement may set forth any GPL-related arrangements 
between the Postal Service and the mailer that are technical in nature.
626  GPL to Japan
626.1  Description
626.11  General
    GPL to Japan provides the mailer with three delivery options, and 
with preparation by the Postal Service (or on Postal Service-provided 
equipment) of the customs forms required by Japan Post.
626.12  JFK Processing Facility
    All GPL packages processed by the Postal Service are processed at, 
and dispatched to Japan from, a dedicated facility located at JFK 
International Airport (the JFK Processing Facility).
626.13  Delivery Options
626.131  Express Service
    Packages sent through Express Service are transported by air to 
Japan, where they receive special handling by Japan Post and expedited 
delivery. The mailer can track Express Service packages through 
delivery. Reports of delivery performance are furnished to the mailer 
in the formats and at the frequencies agreed upon by the Postal Service 
and the mailer.
626.132  Standard Air Service
    Packages sent through Standard Air Service are transported by air 
to Japan, where they enter Japan Post's domestic airmail system for 
delivery. The mailer can track Standard Air Service packages through 
dispatch from the JFK Processing Facility or the appropriate airmail 
facility.
626.133  Economy Air Service
    Packages sent through Economy Air Service are transported by air to 
Japan, where they enter Japan Post's domestic surface mail system for 
delivery. The mailer can track Economy Air Service packages through 
dispatch from the JFK Processing Facility or the appropriate airmail 
facility.
626.2  Acceptance
626.21  Within 500 Miles of JFK
    If the plant at which the mailer's GPL packages originate is 
located within 500 miles of the JFK Processing Facility, the Postal 
Service accepts the packages at the plant and transports them by truck 
to the JFK Processing Facility according to a schedule agreed upon by 
the Postal Service and the mailer.
626.22  More Than 500 Miles From JFK
626.221  Drop Shipment to JFK
    If the plant at which the mailer's GPL packages originate is more 
than 500 miles from the JFK Processing Facility, the mailer may present 
the packages for verification at the plant and transport them as a drop 
shipment to the JFK Processing Facility according to a schedule agreed 
upon by the Postal Service and the mailer.
626.222  Transport to Airmail Facility
    Alternatively, the mailer may process the packages, using Postal 
Service-provided workstations, and prepare dispatches as specified by 
the Postal Service. The Postal Service verifies and accepts the 
dispatches at the mailer's plant according to a schedule agreed upon by 
the mailer, and the Postal Service transports the packages to an 
appropriate airmail facility for dispatch to Japan.
626.3  Required Package-Specific Information
    The mailer must make available to the Postal Service, by means of 
data

[[Page 637]]

transmissions in the formats and at the frequencies agreed upon by the 
Postal Service and the mailer, the following information about each GPL 
package:
    a. Order number.
    b. Package identification number.
    c. Delivery option used for package.
    d. Buyer's name and address.
    e. Recipient's name and address.
    f. Total weight.
    g. Total value.
    h. Total number of items in package.
    i. Number of each individual item in package.
    j. SKU and/or key-word description of each item.
    k. Value of each item.
    l. Country of origin (if available) of each item.
626.4  Insurance and Indemnity
626.41  Express Service
    Packages sent through Express Service are insured against loss, 
damage, or rifling at no additional cost. Indemnity will be paid by the 
Postal Service as provided in DMM S500. However, Express Service 
packages are not insured against delay in delivery. Neither indemnity 
payments nor postage refunds will be made in the event of delay.
626.42  Standard Air Service
    Packages sent through Standard Air Service weighing more than 1 
pound may be insured at an additional cost. See 320.
626.43  Economy Air Service
    Packages sent through Economy Air Service may not be insured.
626.5  Postage
626.51  Base Rates
    See Exhibit 626.51. Postage is paid on a per-package basis.

         Global Package Link to Japan Base Rates Exhibit 626.51         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Standard   Economy
           Weight not over lbs.              Express     air       air  
                                             service   service   Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1........................................    $14.35     $6.64     $5.43
 2........................................     15.69      9.23      9.35
 3........................................     17.80     13.63     13.27
 4........................................     19.91     15.74     17.20
 5........................................     22.02     20.14          
 6........................................     27.03     24.93          
 7........................................     29.39     29.86          
 8........................................     31.76     32.22          
 9........................................     34.12     37.15          
10........................................     36.49     39.52          
11........................................     38.85     41.88          
12........................................     41.21     46.81          
13........................................     43.58     49.17          
14........................................     45.94     54.10          
15........................................     48.31     56.47          
16........................................     54.29     65.78          
17........................................     56.82     68.32          
18........................................     59.36     73.60          
19........................................     61.89     76.13          
20........................................     64.42     81.42          
21........................................     71.42     89.55          
22........................................     74.12     92.25          
23........................................     76.83     97.88          
24........................................     79.53    100.58          
25........................................     82.23    106.22          
26........................................     84.93    108.92          
27........................................     87.63    114.56          
28........................................     90.34    117.26          
29........................................     93.04    122.89          
30........................................     95.74    125.59          
31........................................    104.59    139.43          
32........................................    107.47    142.30          
33........................................    110.34    145.17          
34........................................    113.21    151.16          
35........................................    116.08    154.03          
36........................................    118.95    160.02          
37........................................    121.82    162.89          
38........................................    124.69    168.88          
39........................................    127.56    171.75          
40........................................    130.43    177.73          
41........................................    141.15    191.23          
42........................................    144.19    197.57          
43........................................    147.23    200.61          
44........................................    150.27    203.65          
------------------------------------------------------------------------

626.52  Discounts
    Postage is reduced by the following additive discounts once the 
applicable volume thresholds are reached during a 12-month period:
    a. 25,000 to 100,000 packages: 0.00%.
    b. 100,001 to 250,000 packages: 4.75%.
    c. 250,001 to 500,000 packages: additional 5.75%.
    d. 500,001 to 1,000,000 packages: additional 6.00%.
    e. More than 1,000,000 packages: additional 6.25%.
626.6  Size and Weight Limits
626.61  Size Limits
626.611  Express Service
    Express Service packages must meet these size limits:
    a. Minimum length and width: large enough to accommodate the 
necessary labels and customs forms on the address side.
    b. Maximum length: 42 inches (36 inches until January 9, 1995).
    c. Maximum length and girth combined: 90 inches (79 inches until 
January 9, 1995).
626.612  Standard Air Service
    Standard Air Service packages must meet these size limits:
    a. Minimum length and width: large enough to accommodate the 
necessary labels and customs forms on the address side.
    b. Maximum length: 42 inches (24 inches for packages weighing 1 
pound or less).
    c. Maximum length and girth combined: 90 inches (79 inches until 
January 9, 1995). Maximum length, height, depth (thickness) combined 
for packages weighing 1 pound or less is 36 inches.
626.613  Economy Air Service
    Economy Air Service packages must meet these size limits:
    a. Minimum length and width: large enough to accommodate the 
necessary labels and customs forms on the address side.
    b. Maximum length: 24 inches.
    c. Maximum length, height, depth (thickness) combined: 36 inches.
626.62  Weight Limits
626.621  Express Service
    Maximum weight: 44 pounds.
626.612  Standard Air Service
    Maximum weight: 44 pounds.
626.613  Economy Air Service
    Maximum weight: 4 pounds.
627  Customs Forms Required
    The mailer is not normally required to affix customs forms to GPL 
packages sent to Japan if the packages are processed at the JFK 
Processing Facility. In such cases, the Postal Service prints the 
necessary customs forms based on the package-specific information 
transmitted by the mailer, and affixes them to the packages. If the 
packages are processed at the mailer's plant on Postal Service-provided 
workstations, those workstations print the necessary forms that the 
mailer normally affixes to the packages. During the interim period in 
which the Postal Service and the mailer are establishing the 
information systems linkages to enable the Postal Service to accomplish 
this, the mailer is required to affix the appropriate customs forms to 
the packages, as follows:
    a. Express Service: Form 2966-A, Parcel Post Customs Declaration--
United States of America.
    b. Standard Air Service: Form 2966-A, Parcel Post Customs 
Declaration--United States of America (packages weighing 1 pound or 
less must bear Form 2976, Customs--Douane C1).
    c. Economy Air Service: Form 2976, Customs--Douane C1.

[[Page 638]]

628  Preparation Requirements
628.1  Express Service
628.11  Processing at JFK
    Every package sent through Express Service must bear a label 
identifying it as an Express Service package. The mailer is not 
normally required to affix this label when such packages are processed 
at the JFK Processing Facility. In this case, the Postal Service prints 
the necessary label and affixes it to the Express Service package. 
During the interim period in which the Postal Service and the mailer 
are establishing the information systems linkages to enable the Postal 
Service to accomplish this, the mailer is required to affix Label 11-B, 
Express Mail Service Post Office to Addressee, or an alternative label 
as instructed by the Postal Service, to every Express Service package.
628.12  Processing at Mailer's Plant
    When packages are processed at the mailer's plant on Postal 
Service-provided workstations, the workstations print the necessary 
label, and the mailer affixes it to the Express Service package.
628.2  Standard Air Service
    There are no Japan-specific preparation requirements for packages 
sent through Standard Air Service (packages weighing 1 pound or less 
must bear the SMALL PACKET marking). See 264.21.
628.3  Economy Air Service
    Packages sent through Economy Air Service must bear the SMALL 
PACKET marking. See 264.21.
* * * * *
    A transmittal letter making the changes in the pages of the 
International Mail Manual will be published and transmitted 
automatically to subscribers. Notice of issuance of the transmittal 
letter will be published in the Federal Register as provided by 39 CFR 
20.3.
Stanley F. Mires,
Chief Counsel, Legislative.
[FR Doc. 97-107 Filed 1-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P