[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67552-67563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-27784]


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

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

39 CFR Part 3001

[Docket No. RM2002-1; Order No. 1349]


Electronic Filing

AGENCY: Postal Rate Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes electronic filing as the standard 
method for filing most formal documents in Commission proceedings. It 
resembles the proposal in most respects. However, it severs, for a 
separate docket, changes in filing requirements for library references 
and computer analyses. Some other differences between the proposal and 
the final rule include the establishment of two types of account 
holders, elimination of a hardcopy filing requirement for certain 
lengthy documents, and the Commission's assumption of responsibility 
for facilitating service when a blanket waiver is granted. This rule is 
expected to contribute to more efficient administration of the 
Commission's workload.

DATES: Effective date: January 7, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send correspondence to Steven W. Williams, Secretary of the 
Commission, 1333 H Street NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20268-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 
202-789-6818.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Issuance of notice and order: October 21, 
2003;

Regulatory History

    See 66 FR 33034, June 20, 2001 (request for comments and technical 
conference).
    See 67 FR 35766, May 21,2002 (notice of proposed rulemaking).

Introduction

    The Commission has concluded that it is feasible and desirable to 
make electronic filing of documents over the Internet the standard 
procedure for filing official documents with the Commission.
    The Commission began laying the groundwork for the conversion from 
hardcopy to online filing in its notice and order concerning electronic 
filing (order no. 1317), issued June 13, 2001. That notice established 
docket no. T2002-1 as a vehicle for conducting a live test of its 
proposed online filing procedures. Drawing on its experience with that 
live test, the Commission issued its notice of proposed rulemaking in 
this docket on May 8, 2002. See order no. 1341, issued May 8, 2002, (67 
FR 35766, Tuesday, May 21, 2002). That notice proposed amending the 
Commission's rules of practice to require that documents submitted to 
the Commission in official dockets be submitted online, unless a waiver 
is obtained. The notice included a User Guide describing proposed 
Filing Online operating procedures. Following publication of its 
proposed rules and operating procedures, the Commission conducted a 
Filing Online workshop on June 12, 2002 to provide those intending to 
participate in future dockets with instruction and hands-on training in 
those procedures.
    Several times over the next several months, the Commission asked 
those who had participated in recent Commission proceedings to join it 
in testing Filing Online functions and system capacity. These tests 
were generally successful. The success of these training and testing 
procedures has led the Commission to conclude that the Filing Online 
system is sufficiently developed to warrant its immediate 
implementation as the standard system for receiving and disseminating 
documents in formal dockets.
    The Commission has concluded that one part of its proposed rules 
requires further examination before it is implemented. That is the 
proposal that material filed as library references or computer analyses 
be filed in a form that can be read and executed on PC hardware. This 
proposal will be severed from this docket so that it can undergo an 
additional round of comment before it is implemented.
    The rules implementing the Filing Online system that are adopted in 
this order will apply to subpart H of the Commission's rules of 
practice, which govern small post office closings. The Commission, 
however, contemplates making some refinements to subpart H procedures 
in the near future in order to take better advantage of the Filing 
Online system.

Summary

    The amended rules of practice set out in attachment 1 to this order 
are final rules implementing the Filing Online system. They generally 
require that documents in formal proceedings before the Commission be 
filed through the Filing Online system. These final rules will take 
effect on January 7, 2003. They differ from the rules described in the 
notice of proposed rulemaking issued earlier in this docket (order No. 
1341, issued May 8, 2002) in several minor respects.
    The proposed rules provided for only one kind of account holder. 
The final

[[Page 67553]]

rules distinguish between two types of account holders. Primary Account 
Holders are those who represent themselves or clients before the 
Commission. They take responsibility for ensuring that filings 
submitted through their accounts are authentic, accurate, and 
authorized by the participant for whom they have been filed. Agent 
Account Holders are those to whom Primary Account Holders have 
delegated their authority to file documents with the Commission.
    Current account holders who meet the definition of Primary Account 
Holders will automatically be designated Primary Account Holders by the 
Secretary. Current account holders who do not meet the definition of 
Primary Account Holders must reapply to become Agent Account Holders. 
Primary Account Holders may delegate their authority to file documents 
with the Commission to other Primary or Agent Account Holders by 
designating them on their Filing Online Profile Page.
    The proposed rules required that certain kinds of lengthy documents 
be filed both online and in hardcopy form. Under the final rules, the 
only documents that will be accepted in hardcopy form are those for 
which a waiver of the online filing requirement has been obtained, 
designations of written-cross examination, and formal Postal Service 
requests to change rates or classifications.
    The proposed rules required that word processing files be submitted 
in text-based portable document format (pdf) format, and that all other 
files that could be converted to text-based pdf files also be submitted 
in that form. Non-word-processing files could be submitted in their 
native format, but this was not required.
    The final rules require that word processing files be submitted in 
text-based pdf format, but do not require other files to be submitted 
in that format. They strongly encourage, but do not require, that word-
processing files be submitted in their native format as well. The final 
rules require that non-word-processing files that are submitted as 
attachments to host documents be submitted in their native format. Such 
files may be submitted in text-based pdf on a voluntary basis.
    The final rules require that notice be given to the Secretary if a 
scanned pdf file is being submitted.
    The Secretary has expanded the capability of the Filing Online 
system. As before, a file can be converted to text-based pdf format on 
line. Now it is also possible to integrate multiple text-based pdf 
files into a single text-based pdf file on line. This should make it 
easier for account holders to produce a host document entirely in text-
based pdf format.
    The proposed rules required that participants serve documents in 
hardcopy form on other participants who had obtained a waiver of the 
online filing requirement. Under the final rules, the Commission has 
assumed the duty of serving hardcopy documents on participants who 
cannot receive service on line.
    The proposed rules required that participants who had obtained a 
waiver of the online filing requirements serve their documents on 
others in hardcopy form. Under the final rules, those participants may 
submit hardcopy documents to the Secretary. The Secretary will serve 
them by posting them on the Commission's Web site or, if necessary, 
mailing them in hardcopy form.
    The final rules allow complex cross-examination exhibits to be 
served two calendar days before the appearance of the witness by filing 
them on line, or by providing them in hardcopy form to the witness's 
counsel, at the option of the cross examiner.

Public Comments

    Five sets of written comments were received in response to the 
notice of proposed rulemaking in this docket.\1\ Of the five 
commenters, four supported the proposal to require documents in formal 
dockets to be filed online, essentially as proposed. Based on their 
experience with the test phase, they regarded the Filing Online system 
as technically well designed, reliable, and user friendly. They praised 
its potential to speed the availability of needed documents, to 
simplify the management of their documents, and to reduce costs. They 
noted that to realize this potential, online filing must become the 
standard procedure for filing documents. Carlson Comments at 1, Major 
Mailer Association (MMA) Comments at 1-2, Office of the Consumer 
Advocate (OCA) Comments at 1-2, Postal Service Comments at 1, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Douglas F. Carlson Comments in Response to Order No. 1341 
(Carlson Comments), were submitted on June 12, 2002. Comments of 
Major Mailers Association in Support of Proposed Filing Online 
Requirements (MMA Comments), Office of the Consumer Advocate 
Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Require Filing of 
Documents in Electronic Form (OCA Comments), Comments of United 
States Postal Service on Postal Rate Commission Order No. 1341 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Require Filing of Documents in 
Electronic Form (Postal Service Comments), and Val-Pak Direct 
Marketing Systems, Inc. and Val-Pak Dealers' Association, Inc. 
Comments in Response to Commission Order No. 1341 (Val-Pak Comments) 
were submitted on June 21, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Val-Pak Direct Marketing Systems, Inc. (Val-Pak). Val-Pak suggests 
that the Commission's proposal to convert to an online filing system is 
premature. It proposes that the Commission expand the categories of 
documents that would have to be dual filed (filed in hard copy as well 
as electronic form) to include all interrogatory responses, written 
testimony, briefs, and ``anything that potentially can be included in 
the formal record.'' It argues that these documents need to be filed in 
hard copy form to ensure that the docket record is reliably preserved. 
It asserts that there are other benefits of requiring material to be 
filed in hard copy form. It contends that hard copy is easier to read, 
annotate, organize, and recall. It argues that it is more efficient for 
the originator of a document to produce a batch of hard copies on a 
high-speed copy machine than for each recipient of that document to 
produce its own hard copy. Val-Pak Comments at 2.
    Val-Pak also criticizes the Commission's proposal not to require 
testimony and briefs to be filed in hard copy if they are 20 pages or 
less in length. It argues that it would be cumbersome for participants 
to ascertain which briefs fall under this threshold, and therefore 
should be printed out by the participant. Id. at 3.
    There is little reason for Val-Pak to fear that the record will not 
be reliably preserved unless the documents that comprise it are filed 
with the Commission in hardcopy form. The Commission will print a hard 
copy of every document filed on line in a formal docket and archive it, 
at least for the duration of that docket. Val-Pak's concern that 
hardcopy documents are easier to work with should not interfere with 
the transition to the filing online. While hardcopy documents might be 
easier to work with, this is not a reason to require documents to be in 
hardcopy form when they are initially filed with the Commission. 
Participants who prefer to work with hardcopy documents may print them 
at any time after the Commission has posted them on its Web site.
    A more legitimate concern is Val-Pak's argument that having 
different filing requirements for testimony and briefs depending on 
their length will make it difficult for participants to determine 
whether they have assembled a complete set of such documents. Val-Pak 
Comments at 3. The Commission agrees that this is likely to complicate 
the tracking and archiving of such documents. This is one reason that 
the Commission has decided to drop this

[[Page 67554]]

proposal, and to apply the same filing requirements to all testimony 
and briefs, regardless of length.
    Major Mailers Association (MMA). MMA generally supports the 
Commission's proposed Filing Online rules. It joins Val-Pak in 
criticizing the Commission's proposal to apply different filing 
requirements to testimony and briefs according to their length. It 
explains that in a typical rate proceeding it focuses on a few 
important issues, and regards remaining issues as ``second tier'' 
issues. It is only interested in receiving testimony and briefs in 
hardcopy form if they address issues it considers important. It 
believes that it is faster and more efficient to review testimony and 
briefs that address ``second tier'' issues if they are received only in 
electronic form. It argues that this belief is shared by most 
participants. Rather than requiring testimony and briefs over 20 pages 
to be filed in hardcopy form, it urges the Commission to adopt a ``rule 
of reason'' that would permit a participant to designate which 
testimony and briefs it would prefer to receive in hardcopy form. MMA 
Comments at 3-4. MMA's concern that it not be burdened with hard copies 
of testimony and briefs that it is unlikely to read in that form is 
resolved by the Commission's decision to drop its proposal to require 
that lengthy testimony and briefs must be filed in hardcopy form. Under 
the final rules adopted in this order, lengthy briefs and testimony 
will not be treated differently than other documents. Participants will 
be able to print lengthy testimony and briefs if they prefer to read 
them in hardcopy form.
    MMA seeks clarification of one aspect of the Commission's proposed 
Filing Online procedures. It assumes that when an account holder 
uploads a file to the Commission's Web site in its native format, such 
as Microsoft Word, converts it to the required pdf format on the 
Commission's Web site, and submits it for filing, that the Commission 
posts both the native format file and the pdf file so that others can 
download them. When an account holder uses Adobe software to convert a 
file from native format to pdf on his own computer before submitting 
the document for filing, MMA asks whether the account holder is 
obligated to submit the file in native format as well. MMA argues that 
there should be such an obligation, since the native format file is 
likely to be more amenable to cutting, pasting, and searching than the 
pdf file. MMA also asks whether computer analyses, such as spreadsheets 
created in Microsoft Excel, are required to be filed and posted in 
their native format, and not just posted as a scanned pdf file. MMA 
Comments at 4-5. The Postal Service also emphasizes the benefits of 
filing text documents in their native format. Rather than asking that 
filing in both pdf and native formats be required, however, it asks 
that it be encouraged as a courtesy to other participants. Postal 
Service Comments at 7.
    It is advantageous for participants to file word processing files 
in both pdf and native formats for all of the reasons that MMA and the 
Postal Service cite. The Commission, however, believes that it is 
premature to make it mandatory to file word processing files in native 
format. Filing such files in native format raises minor security 
concerns. For example, account holders could occasionally have hidden 
annotations or legislative formatting in their native-format text 
documents which others could retrieve. If the account holder is not 
aware that these annotations are present, and regards them as 
confidential, the account holder might regret having submitted the 
document in native format. One solution, of course, is to check the 
document for hidden annotations before submitting it for filing. The 
Commission is searching for technical tools that might facilitate this 
process. For now, however, the Commission strongly encourages account 
holders to submit word processing files in native format, but it will 
not make it mandatory. If the account holder converts a native format 
file to a pdf file on the Commissions Web site, the option of deleting 
the native file before submitting the filing record to the Commission 
is still available. If a filing record submitted to the Commission 
contains both the native file and the pdf file, the Commission will 
post both files on its Web site.
    MMA also observes that filing computer analyses in native format 
should be considered mandatory under rule 31(k)(3)(i). It notes that 
common spreadsheet software allows the analyst to embed formulae and 
assumptions in spreadsheets that are lost if they are converted to pdf. 
It further notes that spreadsheets in pdf format must be converted back 
to their native format before they can be modified or manipulated. For 
these reasons, MMA urges the Commission to make it clear that account 
holders must file a native-format version of their computer analyses. 
MMA Comments at 5. The Postal Service expresses related concerns. It 
questions whether the Commission's admonition in its notice of proposed 
rulemaking that ``[a]ny collateral files that can be produced in text-
based pdf must also be submitted in that form'' is well considered. It 
argues that some Excel files can be converted to a text-based pdf 
format, but that doing so eliminates most of their embedded utility.
    In its notice of proposed rulemaking, the Commission proposed 
filing rules that did not make filing computer analyses or spreadsheet 
analyses in their native formats mandatory. The rules as proposed 
required computer analyses to be filed in text-based pdf form if they 
were part of a host document. If they were filed as attachments to a 
host document, the proposal required that they be filed in text-based 
pdf form where possible. Otherwise they allowed them to be filed in 
their native format. See order no. 1341, issued May 8, 2002, at 4.
    The parties' comments have persuaded the Commission to reconsider 
how its format requirements should apply to computer and spreadsheet 
analyses. The Commission agrees that it is highly desirable to have 
computer and spreadsheet analyses filed in their native format for the 
reasons that MMA and the Postal Service cite. Filing such analyses in 
native format is already required in most circumstances to satisfy the 
Commission's documentation rules [such as rules 31(k)(2) and (3) and 
rule 54(o)]. This is because in most circumstances detailed 
assumptions, formulae, and sources for numbers are not fully disclosed 
in testimony or other text documents.
    Computer and spreadsheet analyses are typically filed as 
attachments to host documents. The Filing Online rules authorized by 
this order require that computer and spreadsheet analyses filed as 
attachments to a host document be filed in their native format. Filing 
them in native format, such as Excel, Lotus, or Quattropro, will 
preserve the ability to read embedded formulae and the ability to 
manipulate the files. As the Postal Service points out, Excel and 
similar files are not very useful in pdf format because their embedded 
formulae cannot be read, and the numbers cannot be manipulated. 
Accordingly, the Filing Online rules authorized by this order do not 
require that computer and spreadsheet analyses filed as attachments to 
host documents be provided in pdf format. Text-based documents filed as 
attachments to host documents, however, are required to be submitted in 
text-based pdf format, whenever possible. This will maximize the amount 
of filed material that can be included in Filing Online's searchable 
database.
    Another way to maximize the amount of material that will be 
included in Filing Online's searchable database is

[[Page 67555]]

for the Commission to be notified if an account holder has submitted a 
scanned pdf as an attachment to a host document. If the Commission is 
notified that an attached pdf was scanned, it can OCR it in an attempt 
to convert it to a searchable text-based pdf format. The Commission, 
however, cannot tell whether an attachment with a ``.pdf'' extension is 
text-based or scanned at the time that it is submitted without opening 
and testing it. To make sure that scanned pdfs are flagged and OCRed, 
the Filing Online User Guide will instruct the account holder to note 
in the ``Comment'' box provided on the ``Create Filing Record'' or the 
``Edit Filing Record'' page if the pdf attached to a host document is a 
scanned pdf.
    Rather than provide tables or graphs generated in Excel or similar 
formats in a separate file attached to a host document, an account 
holder may choose to integrate them into a host document and to explain 
and annotate them in the host document thoroughly enough to satisfy the 
Commission's documentation rules. The filing rules authorized by this 
order require that host documents and all their components be submitted 
in text-based pdf format. If such material is thoroughly documented in 
the host document, account holders will not be required to provide it 
as native format attachments as well. Supplemental files containing 
such material in native format are useful, however, for reasons already 
described, and account holders are encouraged to provide them.
    Participants should be aware that the host document in text-based 
pdf format that they are required to provide under Filing Online must 
be a single file that reads continuously from beginning to end. If 
Excel-based tables or figures are inserted into the host document, or 
intended to be a part of the host document as appendices, they should 
not be submitted as separate files that other participants would have 
to download separately and reassemble in order to obtain a coherent 
host document. In order to make it easier for account holders to 
include material generated in Excel or similar formats in a host 
document that is a single text-based pdf file, an ``Assemble PDF'' 
function has been added to the Filing Online system.
    The ``Assemble PDF'' function will allow an Account Holder to 
upload an Excel, Lotus, or Quattropro file, convert it to pdf format, 
print it, and then decide if it needs to be manipulated in one of 
several ways. One way would be to simply add it to the end of an 
existing text-based pdf file. The ``Assemble PDF'' function, however, 
also provides an account holder with a way to excerpt designated pages 
from one or more Excel files, reorder them, and append them to an 
existing pdf file. If an account holder wants to insert Excel-based 
material at various points in an existing pdf file, this is most easily 
done by ``embedding'' the material at the desired points, but it could 
also be done in a multi-step process using the ``Assemble PDF'' 
function that the Commission has provided.
    Embedding, or the various features of the ``Assemble PDF'' 
function, will help the account holder produce a host document that 
consists of a single text-based pdf file in order to satisfy the 
requirements of the Filing Online system. These techniques will be 
effective if the analyst who has generated the Excel or similar 
material has set print areas appropriately, and provided any needed 
headers and footers, prior to converting the Excel material to pdf 
format.
    Revised format requirements. Because the file format requirements 
for the Filing Online system that appear in the current User Guide 
differ in minor ways from those described in the notice of proposed 
Rulemaking, it will be helpful to summarize them.
    [sbull] Host Documents and other word processing-based files must 
be submitted as text-based pdf files. The Commission urges that they be 
submitted as native files as well, but does not require it.
    [sbull] Files that are not word-processing based (spreadsheet, 
computer language, scanned files, etc.) must be submitted as native 
files if they are attached to a host document. They may be submitted as 
text-based pdf files as well.
    [sbull] Scanned pdf files must be designated as such at the time 
they are submitted.
    Douglas F. Carlson. Douglas Carlson joins Val-Pak and MMA in 
criticizing the Commission's proposal to apply different filing 
requirements to testimony and briefs according to their length. He 
argues that few briefs or testimonies would avoid the hardcopy filing 
requirement since few would be less than the 20-page threshold. He 
complains that the expense of filing and serving such documents in 
hardcopy form discourages participation in Commission proceedings. He 
argues that raising the threshold to 30 pages would mitigate this 
burden, as well as the burden of downloading and printing large numbers 
of such documents filed by others on deadline days. The OCA supports 
this proposal. OCA Comments at 3.
    Mr. Carlson assumes that the rationale for the Commission's 
proposed rule that lengthy briefs and testimonies be filed and served 
in hardcopy form as well as on line is a need to avoid the crush of 
downloading and printing numerous large documents on the same day and 
the need to avoid congestion in the Commission's docket section. As an 
alternative to raising the 20-page threshold, he proposes that briefs 
and testimonies filed in advance of the filing deadline be excused from 
the hardcopy requirement. Carlson Comments at 2. The OCA opposes this 
alternative. It argues that it would give opponents a procedural 
advantage if they were to receive advance notice of arguments in 
testimony or briefs, particularly for reply briefs. OCA Comments at 3.
    The Commission has decided to drop its proposed rule that would 
have required lengthy testimony and briefs to be filed and served in 
hardcopy form. This will eliminate the source of the objections voiced 
by Mr. Carlson. The recent expansion of capacity of the Commission's 
Filing Online system, and the tests of that capacity, indicate that 
congestion of that system is unlikely, even on days of anticipated peak 
demand. Accordingly, account holders should be able both to upload 
documents, and to download and print documents on peak filing days, 
without unreasonable delay. Account holders will be able to print any 
briefs or testimony that they prefer to review in hardcopy form without 
having to first determine whether the documents fall on one side or the 
other of a page-based threshold.
    Postal Service. The Postal Service generally supports the proposal 
to make online filing the standard filing procedure in formal dockets, 
although it cautions that some additional testing of the Postal 
Service's ability to download filed documents in live dockets would be 
desirable before a major case is filed. It suggests that further 
refining of the proposed Filing Online rules is needed in the following 
respects.
    The Postal Service assumes that the portions of proposed rules 9, 
10, and 11 that allow a waiver of the requirement that documents be 
filed online apply ``only to a participant who is wholly excluded from 
Filing Online.'' Postal Service Comments at 4. It says that responses 
to discovery sometimes require that material other than electronic 
documents be provided, such as videotapes or Priority Mail envelopes, 
or documents that were generated by non-standard software. It reasons 
that paragraph (b)(2)(vii) of the current library reference rule (39 
CFR 31(b)(2)(vii)) could still accommodate such material if it were 
made a library reference and an appropriate notice of

[[Page 67556]]

filing the library reference were submitted online. It observes that 
this would increase the number of library references, but would avoid 
the need to process motions for waivers of the online-filing 
requirement. Id.
    The Postal Service wrongly assumes that proposed rules 9 through 11 
would not authorize waivers for individual filings. The language of 
those rules is explicit that both the online-filing requirement and 
waivers of that requirement apply on a document-by-document basis. 
Proposed rule 9(a) provides that ``[t]he filing of each written 
document * * * shall be made using the Internet (Filing Online) * * * 
unless a waiver is obtained.'' Proposed rule 10(a) states that the 
online-filing requirement (as well as the account holder requirement) 
applies on a document-by-document basis. It provides that ``(e)ach 
document filed with the Commission must be submitted through Filing 
Online by an account holder unless a waiver is obtained.'' Proposed 
rule 12(a)(2) states that the online service requirement and the 
exceptions to that requirement apply on a document-by-document basis. 
Proposed rule 12(a) provides that ``[e]ach document filed in a 
proceeding via the Internet by an account holder shall be deemed served 
* * *. Proposed rule 12(a)(2) states that there is an exception to the 
online service requirement for ``[a] document that must be served on a 
participant that the Commission or presiding officer has determined is 
unable to receive service through the Commission's Web site.'' 
(Emphasis in the above quotations has been supplied.) In contrast to 
the above quoted provisions, proposed rule 12(b) makes an exception to 
the online service requirement available to participants who are unable 
to file documents online.
    Close reading of proposed rules 9 through 12 (which are made final 
rules by this order) makes it clear that waivers of the online filing 
requirement are available on both a document-by-document basis, and on 
a participant basis. If it is feasible to provide material to be filed 
in electronic form, participants are obligated under these rules to do 
so, and to file them online. Even if a participant did not originally 
obtain a document in electronic form, such as a newspaper clipping, but 
he can readily scan it to produce a legible pdf, he is obligated to do 
so, and to attach it to a host document, such as an interrogatory 
answer. A document is eligible to be treated as a library reference 
only if it is not feasible to generate a legible document in electronic 
form that can be attached to a host document and filed online. This is 
consistent with the Commission's policy to minimize the number of 
library references.
    The Postal Service believes that a problem may be created by the 
gap that would occur between the time that the Filing Online system 
generates a receipt for a document that has been submitted for filing, 
and the time that it is accepted and posted on the Commission's Web 
site.
    In its notice of proposed rulemaking, the Commission indicates that 
when the Filing Online system receives an electronic document that an 
account holder has submitted for filing, it will issue an electronic 
receipt to the account holder indicating the time that is was received. 
It explains that the Commission's docket section would then review the 
document for compliance with its rules before accepting it as filed. 
Acceptance would be indicated by posting the document on the Daily 
Listing page of the Commission's Web site. See order no. 1341, issued 
May 8, 2002, at 6-7.
    The Postal Service speculates that under the current hardcopy 
system, when a document is submitted at the docket window the docket 
staff reviews it for compliance with the Commission's filing rules, and 
then applies a date stamp indicating that it has been accepted for 
filing. It contrasts this with the Commission's proposed Filing Online 
procedures, where the docket section would first issue an electronic 
receipt for a document, then review it for compliance with filing 
rules. The Postal Service suggests that the scope of the review that 
the docket section would perform prior to acceptance of a document 
submitted online would be broader than under the current hardcopy 
system (for example, determining whether a document is a single-or a 
multiple-purpose document) and that the authority for such review needs 
to be clarified. Postal Service Comments at 4-5.
    Contrary to the Postal Service's assumption, under the current 
hardcopy filing system, the docket section date stamps a document when 
it is received. It then reviews it for compliance with the Commission's 
filing rules. The date stamp indicates only the time that the document 
was received. It does not indicate that the document was accepted for 
filing.
    Proposed Filing Online procedures would parallel the current 
hardcopy procedure. The Commission would issue an electronic receipt to 
indicate the time that the document was received, and then review it 
for compliance with filing rules. The difference would be that under 
Filing Online, the Commission would affirmatively indicate that a 
document had been accepted for filing by posting it on its Web site. 
Under current hardcopy filing procedures, if a date-stamped document is 
determined to be in compliance with the Commission's filing rules, the 
Commission takes no further action.
    The Postal Service is correct, however, that Filing Online would 
impose filing requirements beyond those that currently apply to 
hardcopy documents. While the general filing requirements will continue 
to be set forth in the Commission's rules of practice, some of the more 
detailed requirements, such as the role of the host document, and the 
formats that are acceptable, will be published only on the Commission's 
Web site in the Filing Online User Guide. Reserving such detailed 
filing requirements for the Filing Online User Guide is necessary 
because the technical features of the Filing Online system can be 
expected to continually evolve, and Filing Online procedures will need 
to evolve with them. It would not be practical to have to continually 
amend the Commission's rules of practice through notice and comment 
rulemaking procedures as the Filing Online system evolves.
    The Postal Service points out that under rule 9 as it was proposed 
in the notice of proposed rulemaking, the Secretary is authorized to 
reject filings if they do not comply with an applicable ``statute, 
rule, regulation, or order.'' It suggests that if Filing Online 
requirements do not take the form of a ``statute, rule, regulation, or 
order'' the Secretary may not use them as grounds for rejection. Postal 
Service Comments at 4-5.
    To clarify the Secretary's rejection authority, final rule 9(d) 
includes non-compliance with ``filing instructions published by the 
Secretary'' among the grounds for which the Secretary may reject a 
filing. For purposes of rule 9(d), it will be sufficient if the 
Secretary's filing instructions have been published on the Commission's 
Web site.
    The Postal Service was prompted to raise the issue of the 
Secretary's rejection authority by a comment made by the Secretary's 
staff during the Filing Online workshop held on June 12, 2002. The 
Postal Service understood the staff to have asserted that a pleading 
that serves two separate purposes would be rejected. Postal Service 
Comments at 5.
    The Secretary's staff meant to articulate a more limited 
requirement. The staff meant to assert that pleadings that would 
normally be submitted as separate documents if they were filed in

[[Page 67557]]

hardcopy form should be submitted in separate Filing Records if they 
are submitted online. As an example of documents that would be filed 
separately if they were in hardcopy form, the staff mentioned a motion 
to accept interrogatory answers as late filed, and the interrogatory 
answers themselves. The staff was emphasizing the importance of 
submitting only one host document per Filing Record. Associating each 
host document with a unique Filing Record makes it easier to identify 
and archive documents. The staff did not mean to assert that a host 
document could serve only one purpose.
    The Postal Service's comments, however, have drawn the Commission's 
attention to the desirability of requiring that each host document have 
a separate procedural purpose. Compound pleadings and composite motions 
are difficult to track and archive. If each pleading has a distinct 
procedural purpose it will be easier to associate it with a unique 
Filing Record and unique set of record identifiers. This should make it 
easier to track and archive pleadings. In particular, it should make it 
easier to track motions. Because each motion will be submitted with its 
own Filing Record, and would have a unique file identifier, it will 
make it less likely that a motion would ``fall through the cracks'' and 
fail to be addressed. Accordingly, the requirement that each host 
document serve a separate procedural purpose will be included in the 
Filing Online User Guide.
    Under this requirement, as noted, a motion for acceptance of late-
filed interrogatory answers and the interrogatory answers themselves 
would be filed as separate host documents in separate Filing Records. 
Of course, a motion that is conditioned on the disposition of another 
motion should prominently refer to the motion upon which it is 
conditioned, even though it is filed separately.
    Requiring participants to plead for distinct kinds of relief and 
file separate host documents submitted in separate Filing Records 
should not add significantly to the time or expense of filing those 
documents if they are filed electronically. It should, however, make 
tracking and archiving more efficient for both the Commission and the 
participants.
    The Postal Service observes that under the proposed rules, a 
participant may obtain a blanket waiver of the requirement that 
documents be filed online. It notes that it will be difficult to reap 
the benefits that an online filing system can provide if blanket 
waivers are commonly granted. It argues that almost all participants in 
past Commission proceedings have demonstrated their ability to 
participate electronically. It observes that even if there are future 
participants who do not have their own Internet connections, they 
should be able to access the Commission's Web site from a public 
library. Under these circumstances, it argues, the bar should be set 
quite high for anyone desiring to be excused from participating online. 
Postal Service Comments at 5-6.
    The Postal Service discusses the burden of serving hardcopy 
documents on a participant who has obtained a waiver, and the burden 
that such a participant has of serving hardcopy documents on others. It 
argues that the Commission should assume responsibility for serving 
documents on such participants. It asserts that the Commission could 
consolidate all documents that need to be served on such a participant 
each day, and send them in a single package. This, it contends, would 
avoid much duplication of effort by other participants. It argues that 
service of hardcopy documents by a participant with a waiver also 
should be facilitated by the Commission. It argues that such a 
participant could mail or fax documents to the Commission, which could 
then digitize them and post them on its Web site, again avoiding 
duplication of effort. It argues that to be consistent with the 
expedited service that would characterize the Filing Online system, a 
participant with a waiver should be required to mail its documents to 
the Commission by Express Mail or facsimile transmission. It goes on to 
argue that service of a hardcopy document by the Commission on behalf 
of a participant with a waiver should be considered to be effective on 
the date that it is received by the Commission, presumably because the 
Commission will have posted the document on the day that it was 
received. The Postal Service suggests that this would make service 
computation dates consistent for all participants, whether or not they 
were required to file online. Postal Service Comments at 5-6.
    The Commission agrees with the Postal Service that almost all 
participants in recent Commission proceedings have shown that they can 
interact with the Commission's Web site and are likely to be able to 
participate in the Filing Online system. The Commission expects to be 
able to provide participants with sufficient technical assistance to 
ensure that they can effectively use the Filing Online system. Under 
these circumstances, a participant will have a heavy burden of 
persuasion to overcome if it wishes to obtain a blanket waiver of the 
online filing requirements adopted in this order.
    If a participant were to obtain a blanket waiver, the Commission 
will assume responsibility for serving that participant with the 
documents filed by other participants. As the Postal Service validly 
observes, the Commission could avoid duplication of effort on the part 
of other participants by consolidating into a single mailing each day 
the documents that must be served on a participant with a blanket 
waiver. The assumption of this responsibility by the Commission is 
reflected in revised rule 12(a)(2). Similarly, if a participant were to 
obtain a blanket waiver, the Commission would facilitate service of 
documents by that participant on others. Under rule 12(b), a 
participant with a blanket waiver would deliver hardcopy documents that 
it wished to serve on others to the Secretary by hand or First-Class 
Mail. Such documents would be deemed served when they are posted on the 
Commission's Web site. If for some reason such documents cannot be 
converted to electronic form by the Commission and posted on its Web 
site, they will be deemed served when the Secretary posts them as 
First-Class Mail.
    Under a system where filing documents online is the norm, the need 
for filing hard copies of documents with the Commission will remain, 
although these instances are expected to be rare. In the notice of 
proposed rulemaking, proposed rule 10(b) specified that when 
participants are required to file documents with the Commission in 
hardcopy form, that they must provide the Commission with an original 
and 24 conforming copies. Proposed rule 10(c) specified that when 
participants who have obtained a waiver of the online filing 
requirements choose to file documents on computer media, that they must 
provide the Commission with an original and three conforming copies. 
Upon further reflection, the Commission has determined that the number 
of conforming copies that must be provided to the Commission under 
either rule 10(b) or rule 10(c) should be reduced to two.
    In the rare instance when a participant has a document that it 
cannot digitize and file online, yet it still can feasibly serve on 
participants in hardcopy form (perhaps a newspaper article that it is 
unable to scan), the Commission is likely to be able to digitize it and 
to distribute it internally by posting it on its Web site. Accordingly, 
the Commission generally will not need to be provided with

[[Page 67558]]

enough hard copies of such documents to circulate them internally. 
Exceptions may be formal rate or classification requests. The Postal 
Service has been cooperative in providing as many copies of formal 
requests as the Commission needs.
    Among the Filing Online rules contained in the notice of proposed 
rulemaking was rule 10(a)(2), which stated that ``[d]ocuments filed 
online must satisfy computer system compatibility requirements 
specified by the Secretary.'' The notice indicated that the Secretary 
would publish these requirements on the Commission's Web site in the 
form of instructions in the Filing Online User Guide. See order no. 
1341 at 11-12. To date, the Secretary has identified and published only 
a few technical requirements for interfacing with the Filing Online 
system.
    For the basic document filing function, the only technical 
restrictions are the formats in which documents must be submitted. 
Enhanced functions, such as batch downloading and batch printing, 
require that specified utilities be downloaded from the Commission's 
server.
    The Commission's Web site contains a list of word processing, 
browser, and PC/MAC combinations that have been tested and found to be 
compatible with the Filing Online system. In its comments, the Postal 
Service infers that this (rather than the Filing Online User Guide) is 
the list of system compatibility requirements that the Secretary is 
authorized to prescribe under proposed rule 10(a)(2). It observes that 
there are some word processing applications that are absent from that 
list even though they can produce rich text format (RTF) files. It 
argues that it would not be prudent to bar participants from using 
various applications or platforms simply because they have not yet been 
tested. Because this list of tested platforms does not actually 
prescribe software or hardware that must be used in order to 
participate in Filing Online, the Postal Service asks what effect 
proposed rule 10(a)(2) is intended to have. Postal Service Comments at 
7.
    In arriving at its conclusion that the list of tested platforms 
published on the Commission's Web site was meant to implement proposed 
rule 10(a)(2), the Postal Service apparently overlooked the portion of 
the discussion of rule 10(a)(2) in the notice of proposed rulemaking 
that explains that the Secretary will prescribe system compatibility 
requirements in the Filing Online User Guide. See order no. 1341 at 11-
12. The Secretary has not attempted to restrict the applications, 
browsers, or hardware that an account holder may use to access the 
Filing Online system. The Commission agrees with the Postal Service 
that it would not be prudent to limit the software or hardware that 
account holders may use simply because they have yet not been tested by 
the Commission. The Secretary will continue to post on the Commission's 
Web site, separate from the list of technical requirements, a list of 
software/hardware combinations that have been tested and found to be 
compatible with the system. It should prove useful to participants that 
might be deciding how to configure systems that they expect to use to 
access Filing Online.
    Proposed rule 10 has been revised to reflect the refinements 
described above to Filing Online's format requirements. As a result of 
these revisions, proposed rule 10(a)(2) now appears as final rule 
10(a)(5).
    Password security is the final issue that the Postal Service's 
comments address. The Postal Service notes the Commission's admonition 
that regular password changes augment security. It asks the Commission 
to consider adding software that would force account holders to make 
regular password changes. Postal Service Comments at 8. In the 
Commission's view, the benefits of this change could be outweighed by 
the inconvenience it would cause to account holders who properly manage 
their passwords.
    Change in the definition of account holders. Additional experience 
with the Filing Online system since the notice of proposed rulemaking 
was issued has prompted the Commission to refine the definition and 
role of account holders. Currently, some account holders represent 
themselves in proceedings before the Commission, some are attorneys who 
represent clients in proceedings before the Commission, and some are 
paralegals or secretaries who file documents on behalf of attorney 
representatives.
    Currently, account holders must undertake the duties and 
obligations associated with the subscription requirement that is found 
in rule 11(e). These include warranting that the material submitted for 
filing is authorized by the participant that the account holder 
represents, and is authentic and accurate. Authority to provide these 
assurances resides with the person appearing in a proceeding on his or 
her own behalf or on behalf of a participant, rather than with a 
secretary or paralegal. Accordingly, the Commission has decided that 
there is a need to distinguish between types of account holders to 
better reflect the duties that they assume. Principal account holders 
are those that are able to undertake the obligations of rule 11(e) 
because they are appearing on their own behalf or that of a client. An 
agent account holder is one to whom a principal account holder has 
delegated authority to submit material for filing on the principal's or 
a client's behalf. When an agent account holder files material, the 
subscription obligations of rule 11(e) remain with the principal 
account holder who authorized the filing.
    The Commission's decision to distinguish between types of account 
holders will not require most current account holders to take further 
steps to retain their Filing Online account. If a current account 
holder represents himself, herself, or a client, before the Commission, 
the Filing Online system will automatically treat such an account 
holder as a principal account holder.
    A current account holder who does not qualify as a principal 
account holder, however, will have to reapply for a Filing Online 
account to be recognized as an agent account holder. A revised account 
holder application that distinguishes between principal account holders 
and agent account holders is provided with this order as attachment 2. 
After receiving a new user name and password, the agent account 
holder's ability to file through Filing Online will depend on the 
delegations of authority that appear on the Profile Pages of principal 
account holders. Principals will have to update their Profile Pages by 
furnishing, in the space provided, the user name of each agent account 
holder to whom they wish to delegate authority to file documents 
online. Agent account holders may have multiple principals. Similarly, 
principals may delegate their authority to file documents to other 
principals, as well as to agents, by furnishing the appropriate user 
Names on their Profile Pages. Principals who delegate their authority 
to file to others must take responsibility for updating their Profile 
Pages to reflect any changes in the identity of their delegates or 
agents.
    User Activity Pages will be modified to reflect the distinction 
between principal account holders and agent account holders. An agent 
account holder's User Activity Page will show each document that the 
agent is working on, or has submitted for filing in the previous two 
days, and which principal has authorized it. A principal account 
holder's User Activity Page will show each document that the principal 
is working on, or has submitted for filing in the previous two days, 
and any agent that is assisting with the document.
    Designations. Under current rule 30(e)(2), designations of written 
cross-

[[Page 67559]]

examination must be served in hardcopy form at least three working days 
before the witness is scheduled to appear for oral cross-examination. 
Under Filing Online, notice of these designations must be served by 
filing them online with the Commission. To make this clear, final rule 
30(e)(2) will add the phrase ``in accordance with rules 9 through 12'' 
to the language imposing the requirement that designations be served. 
Current rule 30(e)(2), however, also requires that two hard copies of 
the designations served shall simultaneously be submitted to the 
Secretary of the Commission. The Commission then incorporates these 
hard copies in the set of designations for that witness that is 
received into the record during oral cross-examination. This Commission 
function will be performed more efficiently if the designations 
furnished to the Commission remain in hardcopy form. To clarify that 
designations of written cross-examination that are furnished to the 
Commission are to remain in hardcopy form, final rule 30(e)(2) will 
employ the phrase ``two hard copies of the documents'' to the language 
imposing this requirement.
    Cross-examination exhibits. As initially proposed, rule 30(e)(3) 
would have required a participant who wished to employ complex exhibits 
in oral cross-examination of an opposing witness to file those exhibits 
online two calendar days before the scheduled appearance of the 
witness. As adopted in this order, rule 30(e)(3) gives the participant 
the option of filing such cross-examination exhibits online or 
providing them to counsel for the witness in hardcopy form. This 
flexibility will accommodate exhibits that cannot be digitized and 
submitted online.
    The specific procedures that are proposed for filing documents 
online with the Secretary of the Commission are set forth in the Filing 
Online User Guide, which may be accessed from the Filing Online Login 
Page on the Commission's Web site (URL: http://www.prc.gov). A hardcopy 
of the Filing Online User Guide that has been revised to reflect the 
final Filing Online rules adopted in this order will also be mailed to 
each person who was on a service list of any Commission docket that was 
active within the past two years. It will also be mailed to anyone else 
that requests it.
    Under the Filing Online procedures adopted in this order, each 
individual who wishes to represent a participant in a Commission 
proceeding must be a principal account holder. If a principal account 
holder wishes to delegate his authority to file documents in a 
proceeding, the individual to whom this authority is delegated must 
first become an agent account holder. An individual may become a 
principal account holder or an agent account holder by filling out the 
account holder application available by contacting the Secretary (See 
ADDRESSES) and mailing it to the Secretary. Order no. 1341, issued May 
8, 2002, describes the contractual duties that an account holder 
undertakes, and the procedures to be followed in obtaining a permanent 
password.

Text of Amended Revisions

    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission hereby amends 
subpart A of its rules of practice and procedure as set forth below to 
this order.
    It is ordered:
    1. The Commission adopts the provisions below as the final rules 
amending 39 CFR 3001.6, 9-13, 20, 20a, 26-28, 30, 31 and 42.
    2. These rules will take effect on January 7, 2003.
    3. Changes to 39 CFR 3001.31(b)(2)(vii) and 3001.31(k)(3) that were 
proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking (order no. 1341, issued 
May 8, 2002), will be addressed in a subsequent docket.
    4. The Secretary shall cause this notice and order adopting final 
rule to be published in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Steven W. Williams,
Secretary.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 3001

    Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service


    For the reasons stated in the Preamble, the Commission adopts the 
following amendments to 39 CFR part 3001.

PART 3001--RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

    1. The authority citation for part 3001 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 39 U.S.C. 404(b); 3603, 3622-24, 3661, 3662, 3663.

Subpart A--Rules of General Applicability

    2. Amend Sec.  3001.6 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3001.6  Appearances.

* * * * *
    (b) Authority to act. When an officer of any participant or an 
attorney acting in a representative capacity appears in person, submits 
a document to the Commission online as a Principal Account Holder, or 
signs a paper filed with the Commission, his/her personal appearance, 
online submission, or signature, shall constitute a representation to 
the Commission that he/she is authorized to represent the particular 
participant in whose behalf he/she acts. Any person appearing before or 
transacting business with the Commission in a representative capacity 
may be required by the Commission or the presiding officer to file 
evidence of his/her authority to act in such capacity.
    (c) Notice of appearance and withdrawal of appearance. An 
individual intending to appear before the Commission or its presiding 
officer in a representative capacity for a participant in a proceeding 
shall file with the Commission a notice of appearance in the form 
prescribed by the Secretary unless that individual is named in an 
initial filing of the participant whom he/she represents as a person to 
whom communications from the Commission in regard to the filing are to 
be addressed. A person whose authority to represent a participant in a 
specific Commission proceeding has been terminated shall file a timely 
notice of withdrawal of appearance with the Commission.
* * * * *

    3. Revise Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.13 to read as follows:


Sec.  3001.9  Filing of documents.

    (a) Filing with the Commission. The filing of each written document 
required or authorized by these rules or any applicable statute, rule, 
regulation, or order of the Commission, or by direction of the 
presiding officer shall be made using the Internet (Filing Online) 
pursuant to Sec.  3001.10(a) at the Commission's Web site http://www.prc.gov, unless a waiver is obtained. If a waiver is obtained, a 
hardcopy document may be filed either by mailing or by hand delivery to 
the Office of the Secretary, Postal Rate Commission, 1333 H Street, 
NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20268-0001 during regular business hours 
on a date no later than that specified for such filing.
    (b) Account holder. In order for a document to be accepted using 
Filing Online, it must be submitted to the Commission by a principal 
account holder or an agent account holder (Filing Online account 
holder). The authority of the principal account holder to represent the 
participant on whose behalf the document is filed must be valid and 
current, in conformance with Sec.  3001.6. The authority of an agent 
account holder to submit documents for

[[Page 67560]]

a principal account holder must be valid and current. A principal 
account holder must promptly inform the Secretary of any change in his/
her authority to represent participants in a proceeding or any change 
in the authority delegated to an agent account holder to submit 
documents on his/her behalf.
    (c) Acceptance for filing. Only such documents as conform to the 
requirements of this part and any other applicable rule or order 
authorized by the Commission shall be accepted for filing. In order for 
a document to be accepted using Filing Online, it must be submitted to 
the Commission by a Filing Online account holder.
    (1) Subject to Sec.  3001.9(d):
    (i) A document submitted through Filing Online is filed on the date 
indicated on the receipt issued by the Secretary. It is accepted when 
the Secretary, after review, has posted it on the Daily Listing page of 
the Commission's Web site.
    (ii) A hardcopy document is filed on the date stamped by the 
Secretary. It is accepted when the Secretary, after review, has posted 
it on the Daily Listing page of the Commission's Web site.
    (2) Any document received after the close of regular business hours 
or on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, shall be deemed to be filed on 
the next regular business day.
    (d) Rejected filings. Any filing that does not comply with any 
applicable rule or order authorized by the Commission may be rejected. 
Any filing that is rejected is deemed not to have been filed with the 
Commission. If a filing is rejected, the Secretary or the Secretary's 
designee will notify the person submitting the filing, indicating the 
reason(s) for rejection. Acceptance for filing shall not waive any 
failure to comply with this part, and such failure may be cause for 
subsequently striking all or any part of any document.


Sec.  3001.10  Form and number of copies of documents.

    (a) Documents. Each document filed with the Commission must be 
submitted through Filing Online by an account holder, unless a waiver 
is obtained.
    (1) The text of documents filed with the Commission shall be 
formatted in not less than one and one-half spaced lines except that 
footnotes and quotations may be single spaced. Documents must be 
submitted in Arial 12 point font, or such program, format, or font as 
the presiding officer may designate.
    (2) The Secretary may prescribe additional format requirements for 
documents submitted through Filing Online.
    (3) The form of documents filed as library references is governed 
by Sec.  3001.31(b)(2)(iv).
    (4) Requests for changes in rates and classifications, including 
supporting documentation, shall be filed both online and in hardcopy 
form pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section.
    (5) Documents filed online must satisfy Filing Online system 
compatibility requirements specified by the Secretary in the Filing 
Online User Guide, which may be accessed from the Filing Online page on 
the Commission's Web site, http://www.prc.gov.
    (6) Documents requiring privileged or protected treatment shall not 
be filed online.
    (b) Hard copies. Each document filed in paper form must be produced 
on letter-size paper, 8 to 8\1/2\ inches wide by 10\1/2\ to 11 inches 
long, with left- and right-hand margins not less than 1 inch and other 
margins not less than .75 inches, except that tables, charts or special 
documents attached thereto may be larger if required, provided that 
they are folded to the size of the document to which they are attached. 
If the document is bound, it shall be bound on the left side. Copies of 
documents for filing and service must be printed from a text-based pdf 
version of the document, where possible. Otherwise, they may be 
reproduced by any duplicating process that produces clear and legible 
copies. Participants in proceedings conducted under subpart H who are 
unable to comply with these requirements may seek to have them waived. 
Each person filing a hardcopy document with the Commission must provide 
an original and 2 fully conformed copies of the document required or 
permitted to be filed under this part, except for a document filed 
under seal, for which only the original and two (2) copies need be 
filed. The copies need not be signed but shall show the full name of 
the individual signing the original document and the certificate of 
service attached thereto.
    (c) Computer media. A participant that has obtained a waiver of the 
online filing requirement of Sec.  3001.9(a) may submit a document on 
standard PC media, simultaneously with the filing of one printed 
original and two hard copies, provided that the stored document is a 
file generated in either Acrobat (pdf), Word, or WordPerfect, or Rich 
Text Format (rtf).


Sec.  3001.11  General contents of documents.

    (a) Caption and title. The caption of each document filed with the 
Commission in any proceeding shall clearly show the docket designation 
and title of the proceeding before the Commission. The title of such 
document shall identify each participant on whose behalf the filing is 
made and include a brief description of the document or the nature of 
the relief sought therein (e.g., motion for extension, brief on 
exceptions, complaint, notice of intervention, answer to complaint).
    ( b) Designation of individuals to receive service. Each notice of 
intervention filed pursuant to Sec.  3001.20 or Sec.  3001.20a must 
state the name, full mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail 
address of up to two individuals designated to receive service of 
hardcopy documents relating to the proceeding.
    (c) Contents. In the event there is no rule, regulation, or order 
of the Commission which specifically prescribes the contents of any 
document to be filed, such document shall contain a proper 
identification of the parties concerned and a concise but complete 
statement of the relief sought and of the facts and citations of 
authority and precedent relied upon.
    (d) Improper matter. Defamatory, scurrilous, or unethical matter 
shall not be included in any document filed with the Commission.
    (e) Subscription. Each document filed with the Commission shall be 
subscribed. Subscription constitutes a certification that he/she has 
read the document being subscribed and filed; that he/she knows the 
contents thereof; that if executed in any representative capacity, the 
document has been subscribed and executed in the capacity specified in 
the document with full power and authority so to do; that to the best 
of his/her knowledge, information and belief every statement contained 
in the document is true and no such statements are misleading; and that 
such document is not filed for purposes of delay.
    (1) For a document filed via the Internet by an account holder, the 
subscription requirement is met when the document is filed with the 
Commission.
    (2) For a hardcopy document filed under either Sec.  3001.10(b) or 
(c), the original shall be signed in ink by the individual filing the 
same or by an authorized officer, employee, attorney, or other 
representative and all other copies of such document filed with the 
Commission and served on the participants in any proceeding shall be 
fully conformed thereto.
    (f) Table of contents. Each document filed with the Commission 
consisting of 20 or more pages shall include a table

[[Page 67561]]

of contents with page references. For briefs see Sec.  3001.34.
    (g) Certificate of service. A certificate of service signed in ink 
must be attached to the original of each hardcopy document filed with 
the Commission showing service on all participants in a proceeding as 
prescribed by Sec.  3001.12. All copies filed and served shall be fully 
conformed thereto.


Sec.  3001.12  Service of documents.

    (a) Service by account holders. Each document filed in a proceeding 
via the Internet by an Account Holder shall be deemed served on all 
participants when it is accepted by the Secretary and posted on the 
Commission's Web site, except that:
    (1) A document subject to Sec.  3001.10(a)(4) must meet the service 
requirements that apply to hardcopy documents as well as those that 
apply to documents filed online.
    (2) A document that must be served on a participant that the 
Commission or presiding officer has determined is unable to receive 
service through the Commission's Web site shall be served on such 
participant by the Secretary by First-Class Mail.
    (b) Service by others. If the Commission or presiding officer has 
determined that a participant is unable to file documents online, 
documents filed by that participant must be delivered to the Secretary 
by hand or First-Class Mail. Such documents will be deemed served upon 
all participants when they are accepted by the Secretary and posted on 
the Commission's Web site. If such documents cannot be posted on the 
Commission's website, they will be deemed served on all participants 
when the Secretary posts them as First-Class Mail.
    (c) Service by the Commission. Except as provided in this section, 
each document issued by the Commission or presiding officer shall be 
deemed served upon the participants in the proceeding upon its posting 
by the Commission on its website. Service of Commission documents on 
any participant that the Commission or presiding officer has determined 
is unable to receive service through the Commission Web site shall be 
by First-Class Mail.
    (d) Hardcopy documents. Each participant filing a hardcopy document 
in a proceeding shall serve such document upon each person on the 
proceeding's service list, unless that person is subject to paragraph 
(b) of this section, or the Commission or presiding officer otherwise 
directs.
    (e) Limitation on extent of hardcopy service. To avoid the 
imposition of an unreasonable burden upon participants, the Commission 
or the presiding officer may, by appropriate order, limit service of 
hardcopy documents to service upon participants intending to actively 
participate in the hearing, or upon a person or persons designated for 
properly representative groups, or by requiring the making of documents 
available for convenient public inspection, or by any combination of 
such methods.
    (f) Service list. The Secretary shall maintain a current service 
list in each proceeding which shall include the participants in that 
proceeding and up to two individuals designated for service of 
documents by each participant. The service list for each current 
proceeding will be available on the Commission's Web site http://www.prc.gov. Each participant is responsible for ensuring that its 
listing on the Commission's Web site is accurate, and should promptly 
notify the Commission of any errors.
    (g) Method of hardcopy service. Service of hardcopy documents may 
be made by First-Class Mail or personal delivery, to the address shown 
for the individuals designated on the Secretary's service list. Service 
of any hardcopy document upon the Postal Service shall be made by 
delivering or mailing six copies thereof to the address shown for the 
individual designated in the Secretary's service list.
    (h) Date of hardcopy service. Whenever service is made by mail, the 
date of the postmark shall be the date of service. Whenever service is 
made by personal delivery, the date of such delivery shall be the date 
of service.
    (i) Form of hardcopy certificate of service. The certificate of 
service of hardcopy documents shall show the name of the participant or 
his/her counsel making service, the date and place of service, and 
include the statement that ``I hereby certify that I have this day 
served the foregoing document upon all participants of record in this 
proceeding in accordance with section 12 of the rules of practice.


Sec.  3001.13  Docket and hearing calendar.

    The Secretary shall maintain a docket of all proceedings, and each 
proceeding as initiated shall be assigned an appropriate designation. 
The Secretary shall maintain a hearing calendar of all proceedings that 
have been set for hearing. Proceedings shall be heard on the date set 
in the hearing order, except that the Commission may for cause, with or 
without motion, at any time with due notice to the parties advance or 
postpone the date of hearing. All documents filed in a docket, other 
than matter filed under seal, and the hearing calendar may be accessed 
remotely via the Commission's Web site, or viewed at the Commission's 
docket section during regular business hours.

    4. Amend Sec.  3001.20 by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3001.20  Formal intervention.

* * * * *
    (c) Form and time of filing. Notices of intervention shall be filed 
no later than the date fixed for such filing in any notice or order 
with respect to the proceeding issued by the Commission or its 
Secretary, unless in extraordinary circumstances for good cause shown, 
the Commission authorizes a late filing. Notices of intervention shall 
conform to the requirements of Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12.
* * * * *

    5. Amend Sec.  3001.20a by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3001.20a  Limited participation by persons not parties.

* * * * *
    (a) Form of intervention. Notices of intervention as a limited 
participator shall be in writing, shall set forth the nature and extent 
of the intervenor's interest in the proceeding, and shall conform to 
the requirements of Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12.
* * * * *

    6. Amend Sec.  3001.26 by revising paragraphs (a) through (c) and 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  3001.26  Interrogatories for purpose of discovery.

    (a) Service and contents. In the interest of expedition and limited 
to information which appears reasonably calculated to lead to the 
discovery of admissible evidence, any participant may propound to any 
other participant in a proceeding written, sequentially numbered 
interrogatories, by witness, requesting nonprivileged information 
relevant to the subject matter in such proceeding, to be answered by 
the participant served, who shall furnish such information as is 
available to the participant. A participant through interrogatories may 
require any other participant to identify each person whom the other 
participant expects to call as a witness at the hearing and to state 
the subject matter on which the witness is expected to testify. The 
participant propounding the interrogatories shall file them with the 
Commission in conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12. 
Follow-up interrogatories to clarify or elaborate on the answer to an 
earlier discovery

[[Page 67562]]

request may be filed after the initial discovery period ends. They must 
be filed within seven days of receipt of the answer to the previous 
interrogatory unless extraordinary circumstances are shown.
    (b) Answers. Answers to discovery requests shall be prepared so 
that they can be incorporated as written cross-examination. Each answer 
shall begin on a separate page, identify the individual responding and 
the relevant testimony number, if any, the participant who asked the 
question, and the number and text of the question. Each interrogatory 
shall be answered separately and fully in writing, unless it is 
objected to, in which event the reasons for objection shall be stated 
in the manner prescribed by paragraph (c) of this section. The 
participant responding to the interrogatories shall file the answers in 
conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12 within 14 days of 
the filing of the interrogatories or within such other period as may be 
fixed by the Commission or presiding officer, but before the conclusion 
of the hearing.
    (c) Objections. In the interest of expedition, the bases for 
objection shall be clearly and fully stated. If objection is made to 
part of an interrogatory, the part shall be specified. A participant 
claiming privilege shall identify the specific evidentiary privilege 
asserted and state the reasons for its applicability. A participant 
claiming undue burden shall state with particularity the effort that 
would be required to answer the interrogatory, providing estimates of 
cost and work hours required, to the extent possible. An interrogatory 
otherwise proper is not necessarily objectionable because an answer 
would involve an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the 
application of law to fact, but the Commission or presiding officer may 
order that such an interrogatory need not be answered until a 
prehearing conference or other later time. Objections shall be filed 
with the Commission in conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 
3001.12 within 10 days of the filing of the interrogatories.
* * * * *
    (e) Compelled answers. The Commission, or the presiding officer, 
upon motion of any participant to the proceeding, may compel a more 
responsive answer, or an answer to an interrogatory to which an 
objection has been raised if the objection is found not to be valid, or 
may compel an additional answer if the initial answer is found to be 
inadequate. Such compelled answers shall be filed in conformance with 
Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12 within seven days of the date of the 
order compelling an answer or within such other period as may be fixed 
by the Commission or presiding officer, but before the conclusion of 
the hearing.
* * * * *

    7. Amend Sec.  3001.27 by revising paragraphs (a) through (c) and 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  3001.27  Requests for production of documents or things for 
purpose of discovery.

    (a) Service and contents. In the interest of expedition and limited 
to information which appears reasonably calculated to lead to the 
discovery of admissible evidence, any participant may serve on any 
other participant to the proceeding a request to produce and permit the 
participant making the request, or someone acting in his/her behalf, to 
inspect and copy any designated documents or things that constitute or 
contain matters, not privileged, that are relevant to the subject 
matter involved in the proceeding and that are in the custody or 
control of the participant to whom the request is addressed. The 
request shall set forth the items to be inspected either by individual 
item or category, and describe each item and category with reasonable 
particularity, and shall specify a reasonable time, place and manner of 
making inspection. The participant requesting the production of 
documents or things shall file its request with the Commission in 
conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12.
    (b) Answers. The participant responding to the request shall file 
an answer with the Commission in conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 
through 12 within 14 days after the request is filed, or within such 
other period as may be fixed by the Commission or presiding officer. 
The answer shall state, with respect to each item or category, that 
inspection will be permitted as requested unless the request is 
objected to pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) Objections. In the interest of expedition, the bases for 
objection shall be clearly and fully stated. If objection is made to 
part of an item or category, the part shall be specified. A participant 
claiming privilege shall identify the specific evidentiary privilege 
asserted and state with particularity the reasons for its 
applicability. A participant claiming undue burden shall state with 
particularity the effort that would be required to answer the request, 
providing estimates of cost and work hours required, to the extent 
possible. Objections shall be filed with the Commission in conformance 
with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12 within 10 days of the request 
for production.
* * * * *
    (e) Compelled answers. Upon motion of any participant to the 
proceeding to compel a response to discovery, as provided in paragraph 
(d) of this section, the Commission or the presiding officer may compel 
production of documents or things to which an objection is found not to 
be valid. Such compelled documents or things shall be made available to 
the participant making the motion within seven days of the date of the 
order compelling production or within such other period as may be fixed 
by the Commission or presiding officer, but before the conclusion of 
the hearing. When complying with orders to produce documents or things, 
notice shall be filed in conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 
3001.12. The Commission or the presiding officer may, on such terms and 
conditions as are just and reasonable, order that any participant in a 
proceeding shall respond to a request for inspection, and may make any 
protective order of the nature provided in Sec.  3001.26(g) as may be 
appropriate.

    8. Amend Sec.  3001.28 by revising paragraphs (a) through (c) and 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  3001.28  Requests for admissions for purpose of discovery.

    (a) Service and content. In the interest of expedition, any 
participant may serve upon any other participant a written request for 
the admission, for purposes of the pending proceeding only, of any 
relevant, unprivileged facts, including the genuineness of any 
documents or exhibits to be presented in the hearing. The participant 
requesting the admission shall file its request with the Commission in 
conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12.
    (b) Answers. Each matter of which an admission is requested shall 
be separately set forth and is admitted unless within 14 days after the 
request is filed, or within such other period as may be fixed by the 
Commission or presiding officer, the participant to whom the request is 
directed files a written answer or objection pursuant to paragraph (c) 
of this section. A participant who answers a request for admission 
shall file its answer with the Commission in conformance with 
Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12.
    (c) Objections. In the interest of expedition, the bases for 
objection shall be clearly and fully stated. If objection is made to 
part of an item, the part shall be specified. A participant claiming 
privilege shall identify the specific

[[Page 67563]]

evidentiary privilege asserted and state the reasons for its 
applicability. A participant claiming undue burden shall state with 
particularity the effort that would be required to answer the request, 
providing estimates of cost and work hours required to the extent 
possible. Objections shall be filed with the Commission in conformance 
with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12, within 10 days of the request 
for admissions.
* * * * *
    (e) Compelled answers. Upon motion of any participant to the 
proceeding the Commission or the presiding officer may compel answers 
to a request for admissions to which an objection has been raised if 
the objection is found not to be valid. Such compelled answers shall be 
filed with the Commission in conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 
3001.12 within seven days of the date of the order compelling 
production or within such other period as may be fixed by the 
Commission or the presiding officer, but before the conclusion of the 
hearing. If the Commission or presiding officer determines that an 
answer does not comply with the requirements of this rule, it may order 
either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be filed.

    9. Amend Sec.  3001.30 by revising paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  3001.30  Hearings.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Written cross-examination. Written cross-examination will be 
utilized as a substitute for oral cross-examination whenever possible, 
particularly to introduce factual or statistical evidence. Designations 
of written cross-examination should be served in accordance with 
Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12 no later than three working days 
before the scheduled appearance of a witness. Designations shall 
identify every item to be offered as evidence, listing the participant 
who initially posed the discovery request, the witness and/or party to 
whom the question was addressed (if different from the witness 
answering), the number of the request and, if more than one answer is 
provided, the dates of all answers to be included in the record. (For 
example, ``OCA-T1-17 to USPS witness Jones, answered by USPS witness 
Smith (March 1, 1997) as updated (March 21, 1997)).'' When a 
participant designates written cross-examination, two hard copies of 
the documents to be included shall simultaneously be submitted to the 
Secretary of the Commission. The Secretary of the Commission shall 
prepare for the record a packet containing all materials designated for 
written cross-examination in a format that facilitates review by the 
witness and counsel. The witness will verify the answers and materials 
in the packet, and they will be entered into the transcript by the 
presiding officer. Counsel may object to written cross-examination at 
that time, and any designated answers or materials ruled objectionable 
will be stricken from the record.
    (3) Oral cross-examination. Oral cross-examination will be 
permitted for clarifying written cross-examination and for testing 
assumptions, conclusions or other opinion evidence. Notices of intent 
to conduct oral cross-examination should be filed three or more working 
days before the announced appearance of the witness and should include 
specific references to the subject matter to be examined and page 
references to the relevant direct testimony and exhibits. A participant 
intending to use complex numerical hypotheticals, or to question using 
intricate or extensive cross-references, shall provide adequately 
documented cross-examination exhibits for the record. Copies of these 
exhibits should be filed at least two calendar days (including one 
working day) before the scheduled appearance of the witness. They may 
be filed online or delivered in hardcopy form to counsel for the 
witness, at the discretion of the participant. If a participant has 
obtained permission to receive service of documents in hardcopy form, 
hardcopy notices of intent to conduct oral cross-examination of 
witnesses for that participant should be delivered to counsel for that 
participant and served three or more working days before the announced 
appearance of the witness, and cross-examination exhibits should be 
delivered to counsel for the witness at least two calendar days 
(including one working day) before the scheduled appearance of the 
witness.
* * * * *

    10. Amend Sec.  3001.31 by revising the first sentence of paragraph 
(b)(2)(iv) to read as follows:


Sec.  3001.31  Evidence.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) Filing procedure. Participants filing material as a library 
reference shall file contemporaneous written notice of this action in 
conformance with Sec. Sec.  3001.9 through 3001.12. * * *
* * * * *

    11. Amend Sec.  3001.42 by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3001.42  Public information and requests.

* * * * *
    (a) Notice and publication. Service of intermediate and recommended 
decisions, advisory opinions and public reports upon parties to the 
proceedings is provided for in Sec. Sec.  3001.12(c) and 3001.39(d). 
Descriptions of the Commission's organization, its methods of 
operation, statements of policy and interpretations, procedural and 
substantive rules, and amendments thereto will be filed with and 
published in the Federal Register, and are available on the 
Commission's Web site, http://www.prc.gov. Commission recommended 
decisions, advisory opinions and public reports, orders, and 
intermediate decisions will be released to the press and made available 
to the public promptly by posting on the Commission's Web site.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-27784 Filed 11-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P