[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9716-9719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04894]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
New Mailing Standards for Mailpieces Containing Liquids
AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Postal Service is revising Mailing Standards of the United
States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM[supreg]), section
601.3.4 to clarify and supplement the mailing standards for mailpieces
containing liquids.
DATES: Effective March 28, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Collins at (202) 268-5551 or Wm.
Kevin Gunther at (202) 268-7208.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Postal Service published a notice of proposed rulemaking on
July 9, 2018, (83 FR 31712-31713) requesting public feedback on
potential changes to DMM 601.3.4. The original proposed rule provided
for a 30-day comment period. At the request of the mailing industry,
the comment period was subsequently extended to September 30, 2018.
During the comment period, the Postal Service received twenty formal
comments, and engaged in a number of discussions with mailers and with
various members of the mailing and hazardous materials transportation
industries.
The July 9, 2018 proposed rule consisted of two components. The
first component was the clarification of existing language that
specified packaging and markings for mailpieces containing liquids. The
second component was a proposal to extend the requirement to triple-
package breakable primary containers with a volume of four (4) ounces
or less. Current mailing standards require triple packaging only for
breakable primary containers over 4 ounces.
The Postal Service will move forward with the proposed
clarification language and incorporate some additional changes that
were proposed by mailers during the comment period. The Postal Service
has observed that a significant percentage of liquid spills results
from mailers misinterpreting the existing packaging requirements for
liquids, thinking their nonmetal containers are not breakable. However,
nonmetal containers (i.e., plastic, glass, earthenware, etc.) are often
the source of liquid spills in Postal Service networks.
Specifically, the Postal Service will remove the ambiguity
surrounding the meaning of ``breakable container,'' in addition to
clarifying the packaging requirements for those containers. The Postal
Service expects this revision to reduce confusion, improve compliance,
and limit the frequency with which it has to take action with
noncompliant mailers. For convenience and simplicity, the Postal
Service will also consolidate existing requirements for the packaging
of liquids from Publication 52, Hazardous, Restricted and Perishable
Mail, into the revised DMM 601.3.4, adding reference to package
orientation markings as a condition for the mailing of liquids or other
spillable materials. The Postal Service believes this clarification to
be
[[Page 9717]]
necessary prior to considering an escalation of enforcement.
With regard to extending the requirement to triple-package
breakable primary containers with a volume of 4 ounces or less, the
Postal Service will not move forward with this proposal at this time.
The Postal Service will continue to monitor the frequency and impact of
spills originating for these smaller containers, and make a
determination at a future date regarding mailing standards revisions
relating to smaller containers of liquids. The Postal Service
encourages mailers to review and, if justified, make improvements to
their packaging processes for small containers, especially for those
liquids that can be disruptive to Postal Service operations (e.g.,
corrosive, viscous or oily liquids, and those with strong odors).
Summary of Comments and Postal Service Responses
The Postal Service received 20 responses to the July 9, 2018
proposed rule, several of which included multiple comments. Commenters
included trade groups representing shippers of hazardous materials,
individual mailers, mailer organizations, pharmaceutical mailers, and
technical/professional service providers. Comments and Postal Service
responses are summarized as follows:
Comment: Three commenters expressed concern with the impact the
proposed revision could have on liquid product samples placed into
Periodicals, and other flat-size or letter-size mailpieces.
USPS Response: It was not the intent of the Postal Service to
expand the applicability of the revised DMM 601.3.4 to packets of
liquid product samples placed in letter-size and flat-size mailpieces.
Mailing standards relating to samples in Periodical mailpieces are
provided in DMM 207.3.3.9. Additional details are described in Customer
Support Ruling (CSR) PS-273. The mailing of packets of liquid product
samples in other letter-size and flat-size mailpieces is described in a
Postal Service policy, administered primarily through the Pricing and
Classification Service Center (PCSC). The Postal Service does not
intend to make changes to these mailing standards or policy at this
time.
Comment: Several commenters opined that the revised standards would
tend to make the Postal Service less competitive, add cost to mailers,
and could drive liquid mailers to other transportation providers.
USPS Response: The Postal Service is committed to the safety and
security of all items in its networks and strives to create mailing
standards that support these efforts, yet are not overly burdensome to
the mailing industry. The Postal Service will continue to work with
industry to find ways to minimize incidents and the hidden costs
resulting from clean-up expenses, lost work-hours and indemnity claims
associated with spills of liquids in Postal Service networks.
Comment: Several commenters requested that the Postal Service
reconsider its proposal to extend the triple-packaging requirement to
primary containers of 4 ounces or less, with one commenter suggesting
that the 4 ounce threshold be raised. These commenters relate that the
additional expense associated with compliance would increase mailer
costs.
USPS Response: In response to these requests, the Postal Service
will not move forward with this proposal. Instead, the Postal Service
will monitor the frequency and impact of spills originating from these
smaller containers, and make a determination at a future date regarding
mailing standards revisions. The Postal Service plans to consult with
the shipping industry periodically on this topic and prior to proposing
additional restrictions on smaller containers, if such a change appears
necessary. In the meantime, the Postal Service requests that mailers
review and, if warranted, make improvements to their packaging
processes for small containers, especially for those liquids that can
be disruptive to Postal Service operations (e.g., viscous or oily
liquids and those with strong odors).
Comment: One commenter generally agreed with the change, but
suggested restricting its application to commercial mailers only, while
another commenter speculated that most spill incidents are not
attributable to commercial mailers.
USPS Response: There is no evidence to support the claim that e-
Retailers are better or worse at packaging liquids than the general
public. The proposed changes are intended to reflect industry best
practices that can be applied uniformly.
Comment: Several commenters urged the Postal Service to improve its
enforcement regarding mailers found to be using insufficient packaging
for liquids, instead of implementing new requirements. One commenter
specifically suggested that the USPS Mailpiece Incident Reporting Tool
(MIRT) be employed for this purpose. Additional suggestions ranged from
mandating new mailer-provided insurance coverage that would compensate
for damages to equipment and affected mailpieces to the introduction of
fines that would cover the cost of any damages caused by mailpieces
that are not prepared in accordance with mailing standards.
USPS Response: The MIRT currently has the capacity to capture
details of, and generate reports for, nonhazardous liquids incidents.
The Postal Service will continue its efforts to improve MIRT compliance
going forward, and will attempt to provide more consistent and timely
feedback to noncompliant mailers.
In an additional effort to improve compliance, the Postal Service
will move forward with some of its proposed revisions to DMM 601.3.4
and Publication 52, Hazardous, Restricted and Perishable Mail, section
451.3, specifically to remove the ambiguity surrounding the meaning of
the term ``breakable container'' and clarifying the packaging
requirements for those containers. The Postal Service believes a
significant percentage of liquid spill incidents arise from mailers
misinterpreting the existing packaging requirements for liquids,
thinking their nonmetal containers are not breakable. As a result, the
Postal Service expects these revisions to improve compliance, and limit
the frequency with which it has to take action with noncompliant
mailers. It is also expected that these revisions are an appropriate
first step in the Postal Service's improved enforcement process and the
Postal Service will continue to work with the mailing industry to
explore other options.
Comment: One commenter suggested the Postal Service place
additional restrictions on problematic liquids.
USPS Response: The Postal Service currently has separate and
distinct mailing standards for hazardous and nonhazardous liquids. At
this time, the Postal Service prefers not to add another set of
standards for nonhazardous liquids with specific characteristics. The
Postal Service will consider this approach at a later date if
conditions demonstrate the need.
Comment: One commenter related their belief that requiring triple
packaging of nonmetal containers will add considerable packaging costs
by adding additional weight and bulk to shipments, and may push
mailings into higher rate cells, affecting a mailer's ability to
combine liquids and non-liquids in the same shipment.
USPS Response: The Postal Service is sensitive to mailer concerns
about escalating cost. However, it is the position of the Postal
Service that the proposed revisions relating to breakable containers
and the requirement to triple
[[Page 9718]]
package are nothing more than clarification of existing standards. The
Postal Service believes mailers should have always been triple
packaging nonmetal containers, such as plastic bottles of motor oil,
laundry detergent, and similar materials. As discussed previously in
this Federal Register notice, the Postal Service believes it imperative
to address the issue of spills, along with their associated hidden
costs.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Postal Service benchmark
with other carriers to discover their strategies for managing and
mitigating liquids incidents.
USPS Response: The Postal Service recognizes that there are
operational differences between itself and commercial carriers and that
it has legal constraints unique to its role as a governmental entity.
However, the Postal Service plans to discuss liquid spill mitigation
strategies with commercial carriers as opportunities arise.
Comment: One commenter requested that the Postal Service revise the
language in the current DMM 601.3.4(d) to remove the requirement for
mailers to provide their International Safe Transit Association (ISTA)
3A Package-Product Certification Notice at the time of mailing, and to
replace it with language stating that mailers only need to be capable
of meeting the conditions of the ISTA 3A procedure test.
USPS Response: The Postal Service believes it important for
mailers, when choosing to use an alternate process to triple packaging,
to provide certification that their packaging meets all the applicable
test criteria. Therefore, the Postal Service will retain the
requirement that mailers perform the ISTA 3A test on each combination
of internal and external packaging for liquids, and make available the
applicable 3A Package-Product Certification Notice for Postal Service
review upon request. Upon the effective date of this notice, the Postal
Service will no longer require mailers to provide these certifications
at the time of each mailing, unless specifically requested by the
office of acceptance.
Comment: One commenter requested that the Postal Service allow
tests, other than ISTA 3A, as an alternate process to triple packaging.
USPS Response: In discussions with mailing and hazardous materials
transportation industries regarding these proposed revisions, the
Postal Service requested that mailers provide details about industry
best practices used to ensure packaging is sufficiently rigorous to
mitigate the risk of liquid spills in Postal Service networks. The
Postal Service received one response from a pharmaceuticals mailer that
referenced the Food and Drug Administration Current Good Manufacturing
Practices (CGMP) process as an alternate process to triple packaging.
The Postal Service reviewed the procedures and practices specified by
the CGMP, but was unable to find guidelines relating to shipping or
mailing of products and materials. As a result, the Postal Service will
not add CGMP as an alternative to triple packaging for liquids in
primary containers over 4 ounces. This commenter is encouraged to
contact Postal Service Product Classification if they wish to provide
additional input regarding CGMP.
Comment: One commenter requested that the Postal Service reconsider
the requirement to provide enough absorbent material to absorb all the
liquid contained in the primary container(s). The commenter stated that
the requirement is expensive, difficult to quantify, and is more
restrictive than that of commercial carriers.
USPS Response: The requirement to cushion the primary container
with material sufficient to absorb all leakage has been in place for
several years. Because of the elevated frequency with which liquid
spills are now occurring, the Postal Service does not intend to relax
this requirement at this time. Mailers that find it cost prohibitive to
include absorbent materials as the cushioning material inside packages
are encouraged to use the package testing alternatives found in the DMM
section 601.3.4d.
Comment: One commenter requests that the Postal Service provide a
minimum of one year for mandatory compliance.
USPS Response: As stated previously in this Federal Register
notice, the Postal Service does not intend to move forward with its
proposal to require triple packaging for containers of 4 ounces or
less. In addition, the requirement to triple package breakable
containers is not new, and has been in effect for many years. Since the
DMM revisions discussed in this Federal Register notice do not
constitute new requirements, the Postal Service does not believe it
necessary to provide for a transitional period. Although these changes
are effective March 28, 2019, the revisions will be published in the
DMM on June 23, 2019.
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111
Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service.
The Postal Service adopts the following changes to Mailing
Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual
(DMM), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations.
See 39 CFR 111.1.
Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is amended as follows:
PART 111--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 111 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301-307; 18 U.S.C. 1692-
1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001-3011, 3201-3219,
3403-3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, 3633, and 5001.
0
2. Revise the Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service,
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) as follows:
Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail
Manual (DMM)
* * * * *
600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services
601 Mailability
* * * * *
3.0 Packaging
* * * * *
3.4 Liquids
[Revise 3.4 as follows:]
Mailers must mark the outer container of a mailpiece containing
liquid to indicate the nature of the contents (i.e., liquid), and
include orientation arrows in accordance with Publication 52, section
226. Mailers must package and mail liquids under the following
conditions:
a. Use screw-on caps with a minimum of one and one-half turns,
soldering, clips, or similar means to close primary containers
containing liquids. Do not use containers with friction-top closures
(push-down tops) except as provided in 3.4c. The use of locking rings
or similar devices are encouraged when mailing containers with
friction-top closures (push-down tops).
b. Liquids in steel pails and drums with positive closures, such as
locking rings or recessed spouts under screw-cap closures, may be
mailed without additional packaging.
c. Breakable containers including, but not limited to, those made
of glass, plastic, porcelain, and earthenware, and metal containers
with pull-tabs (pop-tops) or friction-top closures, having a capacity
of more than 4 fluid ounces must be triple-packaged according to the
following requirements:
1. Cushion the primary container(s) with absorbent material capable
of
[[Page 9719]]
absorbing all of the liquid in the container(s) in case of breakage;
2. Place the primary container inside another sealed, leakproof
container (secondary container), such as a watertight can or plastic
bag; and
3. Use a strong and securely sealed outer mailing container durable
enough to protect the contents and withstand normal processing in
Postal Service networks.
d. As an alternative to 3.4c above, mailers may use containers
certified under the International Safe Transit Association (ISTA) Test
Procedure 3A. Mailers must, upon request, provide written test results
verifying that sample mailpieces passed each test outlined in the
standard and that no liquids were released.
* * * * *
We will publish an appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to
reflect these changes.
Brittany M. Johnson,
Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-04894 Filed 3-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P