Associated Mail & Parcel Centers Blog

Associated Mail & Parcel Centers (AMPC) members pay dues to support the organization’s efforts to support their businesses. The money pays for a staff to develop benefits, programs, discounts, research, education, and advocacy for the members. Joining AMPC is easy. To help us support your industry and business, go to www.ampc.org and sign up.

The Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) has approved the USPS request to move some of their P.O. Boxes in upscale areas to the Competitive Product List from the Market Dominant Product List (Docket MC2010-20 and http://shipp.in/g/1c3).  This allows the USPS to raise the price of renting a P.O. Box in these areas to determine the market.

From the PRC Order: “The Request generated significant interest with 42 comments received. The Commission received 37 comments that are substantially the same, the bulk of which are from AIM Mail Center franchisees and other owners of mail and parcel centers. Nearly all of the commenters provide PMB services. The  commission also received comments from the Associated Mail & Parcel Centers, the National Alliance of Retail Ship Centers, David Popkin, the Public Representative, and Douglas Carlson.  Most commenters raised concerns that PMB providers, as small businesses, would be unable to compete with the Postal Service, particularly if it provides similar ancillary services.

“Others express concern that the Postal Service will offer ancillary services to compete more directly with PMBs… Currently, PMB providers distinguish themselves from the Postal Service by offering enhanced services, such as e-mail notification, free faxes, and private carrier acceptance… Citing the Postal Service’s resources and tax benefits, commenters assert that future changes to P.O. Box Service would give the Postal Service an unfair competitive advantage…”

Comment: The problem with these comments was that this request narrowly proposed to more easily raise the prices of P.O. Boxes in some test areas and the request did not address the enhanced services that the Private Mail Box offer being proposed for PO Boxes.

From the PRC Order: “None of the commenters opposes any potential price increase. Some commenters even advocate raising P.O. Box rental rates to be in line with PMBs as long as there are no changes to the P.O. Box product itself.”

Comment: Some comments even addressed the request by the USPS to allow the elimination of Saturday delivery, which was also not addressed in this USPS request.

From the PRC Order: “The concerns raised by these commenters are not insignificant. They are, however, premature.  First, the Postal Service’s proposal is narrowly tailored, involving a limited number of locations and no changes in fees or services.  Potential changes in the nature of P.O. Box Service are not before the Commission in this proceeding.  If, in the future, the Postal Service proposes to offer ancillary P.O. Box Services, these issues can be raised.

“Second, the Postal Service has requested an advisory opinion regarding its plans to change carrier delivery frequency from 6 to 5 days.  That matter remains pending before the Commission.  Persons interested in the Postal Service’s plan, including maintaining the current delivery frequency to P.O. Boxes, are encouraged to participate actively in that proceeding.

“Third, the concerns expressed about potential changes to P.O. Box Service are not contingent on approval of the Request.  The Postal Service is not foreclosed from proposing to add ancillary services to P.O. Box Service whether classified as a market dominant or competitive product. Consequently, concerns about potential changes to P.O. Box Service do not warrant rejecting the instant proposal.”

Summary

1. The commenters did not oppose the raising of P.O. Box prices.  Some approved.
2. The commenters did oppose P.O. Boxes adding ancillary services.
3. One commenter opposed the five-day delivery request as requested in PRC Docket N2010-1.

• Only Number 1 above applied to this request.
• Although related, Number 2, capable of being applied to Market Dominate or Competitive Products, was not applicable to this request.
• Number 3 was not related and irrelevant to this request.

Concerning the commenters’ issues raised about the USPS offering the ancillary services that Commercial Mail Receiving Agents (CMRA) offer Private Mail Box renters, AMPC contents that the comments, although “premature” were appropriate at this point.

Although the USPS can request these ancillary services for PO Boxes no matter which Product List they are on, the issue of unfair competition, with the addition of these services to PO Boxes has been made public and the PRC and the USPS are aware of the concern.  The PRC and the USPS now know that the industry is paying attention and will be active regarding any requests of this type.

Order Approving Request

PRC Docket Search

USPS Competition with Private Mail Boxes – An Analysis