[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 76 (Thursday, April 18, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17190-17204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9595]
[[Page 17189]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Postal Service
_______________________________________________________________________
39 CFR Part 111
Classification Reform; Implementation Standards; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 76 / Thursday, April 18, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 17190]]
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
Classification Reform; Implementation Standards
AGENCY: Postal Service.
ACTION: Supplementary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This supplementary final rule sets forth the remaining
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) standards adopted by the Postal Service to
implement the Decision of the Governors of the Postal Service in Postal
Rate Commission Docket No. MC95-1, Classification Reform I. These
standards address the specific aspects of the final rule published in
the Federal Register on March 12, 1996 (61 FR 10068-10217), on which
the Postal Service had sought additional comments.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leo F. Raymond, (202) 268-5199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 24, 1995, pursuant to its authority
under 39 U.S.C. 3621, et seq., the Postal Service filed with the Postal
Rate Commission (PRC) a request for a recommended decision on a number
of mail classification reform proposals (Classification Reform). The
PRC designated the filing as Docket No. MC95-1. The PRC published a
notice of the filing, with a description of the Postal Service's
proposals, on April 3, 1995, in the Federal Register (60 FR 16888-
16893).
Following two earlier advance notices of proposed rulemaking
seeking comments from the public (60 FR 34056-34069, June 29, 1995, and
60 FR 45298-45323, August 30, 1995), the Postal Service published for
public comment in the Federal Register a proposed rule (60 FR 66582-
66703, December 22, 1995) that included a complete listing of changes
to the standards in the DMM that it proposed to adopt if the
Classification Reform proposals requested by the Postal Service in PRC
Docket No. MC95-1 were recommended by the PRC and approved by the
Governors of the Postal Service.
Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3624, on January 26, 1996, the PRC issued its
Recommended Decision on Docket No. MC95-1 to the Governors of the
Postal Service. The PRC recommendations included revisions to some of
the mail classification structures and rates requested by the Postal
Service. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3625, the Governors acted on the PRC's
recommendations on March 4, 1996. With the exception of the PRC's
separate courtesy envelope mail and bulk parcel post proposals, the
Governors determined to approve the PRC's recommendations, and the
Board of Governors set an implementation date of July 1, 1996, for
those rate and classification changes to take effect. (Decision of the
Governors of the United States Postal Service on the Recommended
Decision of the Postal Rate Commission on Classification Reform I,
Docket No. MC95-1, Board of Governors Resolution No. 96-2.)
To implement the Governors' decision, the Postal Service published
a final rule containing the DMM standards adopted by the Postal Service
in the March 12, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 10068-10217). Except as
specifically noted therein, the revised DMM standards take effect July
1, 1996. As explained in that final rule, because the PRC's Recommended
Decision, as approved by the Governors, made significant changes to the
mail classification structure requested by the Postal Service, it was
necessary to change some elements of the proposed rule when producing
the final rule.
To the extent that the final rule established standards not
previously published for public comment, the Postal Service determined
to seek and consider additional input from customers. That further
opportunity for public comment was limited to matters newly introduced
in the final rule, that were not mandated by the rate and
classification provisions, and that were significant in their impact on
customers compared with the corresponding elements of the proposed rule
recommended by the PRC and approved by the Governors. Comments were
solicited for these specific provisions:
1. New standards applied to Regular Periodicals similar to those
adopted in the final rule for First-Class Mail and Standard Mail:
a. All pieces in an automation rate mailing must be delivery point
barcoded (for letter-size pieces) or ZIP+4 or delivery point barcoded
(for flat-size pieces).
b. Presort and other preparation standards must be met, including a
150-piece minimum for preparing trays of automation rate letter-size
mail.
c. All 5-digit ZIP Codes used in the addresses on nonautomation
rate Regular Periodicals must be verified annually for accuracy.
Mailers must certify this verification at the time of mailing.
d. Letter-size reply envelopes and cards enclosed in automation
rate pieces must meet specific standards for automation compatibility.
Mailers must certify this automation compatibility at the time of
mailing.
2. Standards for documentation produced by Presort Accuracy
Validation and Evaluation (PAVE)-certified software and for
standardized documentation produced otherwise.
Because the list of provisions on which comment was sought was
limited and straightforward, because mailers were expected to have
little difficulty evaluating the impact of those limited provisions on
their operations and preparing comments quickly, and because the Postal
Service wanted to ensure that mailers have sufficient time to make any
necessary changes to their operations before the July 1, 1996,
implementation date, the Postal Service set March 27, 1996, as the
closing date for comments on the specific matters identified in the
final rule.
Part A of this supplementary final rule provides an analysis of
comments received and the Postal Service responses. Part B provides
policy information about plant-verified drop shipments. Significant
changes made to the final rule since its issuance, including the
excerpted text of revised DMM standards that have been amended based on
comments, are at the end of this notice.
A. Summary of Comments
1. General Information
The Postal Service received 77 pieces of correspondence offering
comments on the identified aspects of the final rule. (Of that number,
18 pieces were form letters received from employees of one company;
these letters are treated as a single comment. Another 14 letters,
based on a different form letter, were submitted by 14 different
companies; these letters are treated as individual comments.)
Commenters included mailers, printers, industry consultants, individual
publishers, and major mailer associations.
Of those items on which comment was sought, all but two commenters
wrote on issues relevant to Periodicals. Comments on Periodicals are
discussed in section 2 below. Only two commenters wrote about the
portion of the final rule concerning standardized documentation. One of
those two commenters was a major billing service; the other, a list and
data management service. Their comments are discussed in section 3.
Although comment was sought on only the specific listed issues and
not on other aspects of the final rule, many commenters submitted
comments on other issues. This group of comments is discussed in
section 4.
[[Page 17191]]
2. Periodicals
a. 100% Barcoding
Of the comments on those specific points for which comment was
sought, 38 commenters focused on the Postal Service's proposal that
automation rate Regular Periodicals mailings must be 100% barcoded.
Commenters generally supported the concept of efficient mail and the
Postal Service's desire to optimize the volume of such mail, but they
generally disagreed with the feasibility of the Postal Service's
proposed implementation of a 100% barcoding standard for Regular
Periodicals and an implementation date for this standard. Seven of
those commenters suggested that carrier route presorted pieces count
toward the percentage of barcoded pieces, two urged inclusion of firm
packages, and three recommended counting 5-digit barcoded pieces toward
the required percentage. Twenty-eight commenters offered various
timetables on which the Postal Service could ``ramp up'' to a higher
percentage of barcoded pieces in Regular Periodicals mailings, but few
accepted an eventual 100% environment. One commenter advocated
retaining the current ``85% rule,'' whereas six other commenters stated
that the Postal Service should defer requiring 100% barcoding until it
can provide ZIP+4 codes for all addresses that a mailer submits for
address matching and coding.
The Postal Service has identified efficient mail as a major
expected result of Classification Reform and has publicized that
expectation since the earliest phases of the reform process. Moreover,
the Postal Service has invested heavily in barcode-based automated
systems as a strategy to drive cost from its mail processing
operations, another objective set early in the reform process and
strongly supported by customers. The rates adopted as a result of
Docket No. MC95-1 underwrite mailers' efforts and investments in
producing the efficient 100% barcoded mailstream needed to allow
automated systems to yield their planned cost and service benefits.
Throughout the years that the Postal Service's Classification
Reform proposals were developed, a clear message was maintained, not
only about the need for and benefits of a pure barcoded mailstream, but
also for heightened awareness that quality address information is the
key enabling factor for successful address matching and barcoding. In
view of this clear record, the Postal Service has determined not to
retain standards supporting the current inefficient mailstream (e.g.,
the ``85% rule'') and not to adopt new standards that compromise
achievement of its automation objectives.
For example, allowing inclusion of carrier route presort pieces or
pieces bearing a 5-digit barcode in the percentage of barcoded mail
does not offer a benefit consistent with the Postal Service's
automation goal. Although presorting mail by carrier route enables
movement of that mail directly to the carrier with minimal en route
distribution, such preparation has no effect on the rest of the mailing
(i.e., the remaining copies of an issue of a publication not sorted to
carrier routes) and does not increase the volume of mail compatible
with automation. Moreover, the 100% barcoding standard would apply only
to automation rate pieces (an automation rate is not available for
carrier route sorted pieces), making the coexistence of a separate
carrier route sorted mailstream essentially irrelevant regardless of
its volume. As a result, the final rule will not allow the quantity of
mail prepared for carrier route rates to count toward the required
percentage of a mailing that must be barcoded.
Firm packages and pieces bearing only a 5-digit barcode will not be
included either. Aside from the likely incompatibility of their
wrapping material with automated processing, firm packages often exceed
the physical size restrictions of automated equipment and, if included
in automation rate mailings, would require culling for separate
processing. This scenario is inconsistent with an efficient mailstream
and argues for the exclusion of firm packages from an automated mailing
(both physically and as a contributor toward the 100% barcoding level).
The final rule will continue the exclusion of firm packages.
Five-digit barcoded pieces represent no assurance of quality in the
mailpiece address. Otherwise, a ZIP+4 code could have been determined
and translated into a delivery point barcode (or a ZIP+4 barcode on a
flat-size piece). Therefore, despite the limited processing benefit of
a 5-digit barcode, the Postal Service remains convinced that quality
addressing and the best possible depth of code should remain the sole
objectives of automation rate mailers. The final rule will retain the
specification for a delivery point barcode (or, for a flat, a ZIP+4
barcode).
Concerns are unfounded that nonbarcoded mail will be excluded from
the mailstream. Nonbarcoded mail will still be acceptable but will have
to be mailed separately from barcoded mail. However, in line with the
basic theme of Classification Reform that mail should pay rates more
closely aligned with the cost of the mail, nonbarcoded mail (other than
carrier route sorted mail) will be subject to rates that are higher
than those available for barcoded pieces. Without excluding them from
the mail, nonbarcoded pieces not sorted to carrier routes are clearly
priced in a manner that encourages the mailer to evaluate ways to move
such pieces into the more efficient and economical barcoded mailstream.
Throughout the years that Classification Reform was developed, the
Postal Service conducted a dialogue with the mailing industry regarding
address quality. During that time, customers defined various challenges
that they perceived as limiting their ability to reach the quality
standards proposed by the Postal Service. In response, the Postal
Service worked to find solutions, either within existing address
management strategies or by new methods tailored to the needs of
specific customers.
Throughout this time, there were concerns that the entirety of
customer address lists could not be matched to postal databases. Many
customers argued, as did the commenters mentioned above, that standards
for a 100% barcoded mailstream should be deferred until the Postal
Service can ``guarantee to code and match 100% of all addresses,'' as
stated by one commenter. In response, the Postal Service determined to
work with customers to rectify hindrances, within the customer's
address files or elsewhere, so that 100% coding could be achieved. The
Postal Service has not accepted a less-than-100% barcoded mailstream as
an alternative.
The Postal Service does not accept the general statement of some
commenters that noncodable addresses are caused by deficiencies in the
Postal Service's database or in the matching software used to compare
customer address lists with that database. Rather, the Postal Service
continues to affirm that a ZIP+4 code is available for every known and
recorded delivery address, including addresses at institutions that
have worked with the Postal Service to establish an internal address
system, and that the inability to barcode some mail is based on address
quality problems. Although the reasons vary for which specific
addresses frustrate efforts at ZIP+4 matching (and, in some cases,
resist easy identification), the Postal Service disagrees that most
customers cannot meet the challenge of 100% matching after application
of sufficient diagnostic measures. To that end, the Postal Service
restates its
[[Page 17192]]
commitment to work with customers in identifying and applying the
necessary tools to permit 100% coding of address lists.
The Postal Service believes that such concerted effort is
worthwhile to generate the efficiencies of a pure barcoded mailstream.
Given that benefit, the Postal Service cannot agree that it is prudent
or necessary to defer standards for 100% barcoding until all known
address problems are resolved. Because of the importance of address
quality and its central role in producing a barcoded mailstream, the
Postal Service has determined to apply a 100% barcoding standard to
automation rate Regular Periodicals just as it has to automation rate
First-Class Mail and Standard Mail. The final rule will therefore
retain this basic standard.
However, despite the many months of general discussion about 100%
barcoding, the Postal Service is aware that Regular Periodicals mailers
have experienced a belated introduction to the 100% barcoding standard.
(It was because of this awareness that comments were accepted on the
cited aspects of the final rule.) Although the Postal Service does not
believe that the address management challenges facing Regular
Periodicals are any more daunting than those facing mailers of First-
Class Mail and Standard Mail, it acknowledges that Regular Periodicals
mailers need time to implement internal adjustments to upgrade address
quality and codability, to modify internal production systems, and to
make other changes necessary to produce pure barcoded mailings.
Therefore, while remaining firm that standards for mailstream
efficiency (barcoding) and address quality should apply equally to all
classes of mail, the Postal Service has concluded that mailers of all
classes of mail should be afforded a comparable period during which to
prepare to meet those standards. Therefore, the Postal Service will not
fully implement the 100% barcoding standard for automation rate Regular
Periodicals until January 1, 1997.
From July 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996, up to 10% of the
pieces in an automation rate Regular Periodicals mailing may bear only
a 5-digit barcode (if a flat) or a ZIP+4 barcode or no barcode (if a
letter). However, all pieces will have to meet the applicable standards
for physical automation compatibility and barcode quality. Nonbarcoded
pieces must be claimed at nonautomation rates and presorted with the
barcoded pieces. Carrier route pieces, firm pieces, and pieces not
bearing a delivery point barcode (or, if a flat, a ZIP+4 barcode) may
not be counted toward the temporary 90% barcoded minimum. (In effect,
this continues the existing mixed mailstream, only at a 90/10 level
rather than the 85/15 level in place through June 30, 1996.) Beginning
January 1, 1997, all pieces in an automation rate Regular Periodicals
mailing must meet the same barcoding standard applicable to automation
rate First-Class Mail and other-than-Nonprofit Standard Mail (i.e.,
letter-size mail must bear a delivery point barcode; flat-size mail
must bear a ZIP+4 barcode or delivery point barcode).
b. Unique 3-Digit Cities
One commenter suggested that the Postal Service return to package-
based rates for letter-size Periodicals until a DMCS change can be made
to allow all 3-digit mail to qualify for the 3/5 rates. (Only unique 3-
digit cities are eligible for 3/5 (Level B) rates today. The Postal
Service requested a redefinition of the rate to apply 3/5 rates to all
3-digit sortations, but this was not recommended by the PRC.) Barring
that, the commenter argued, the Postal Service should allow the
inclusion of unique 3-digit cities in scheme groups where applicable.
The Postal Service has reconsidered its original position on this
matter and has amended the final rule (DMM E241.2.1a) to allow pieces
for a unique 3-digit city to qualify for the 3/5 rate, regardless of
volume, when included in a scheme group (where applicable) if those
pieces are separated from the remainder of the scheme group's mail.
c. Enclosed Reply Pieces
Three commenters opposed the standard for enclosed reply pieces,
i.e., that enclosed letter-size reply cards and envelopes bear the
correct FIM and delivery point or ZIP+4 barcode (as applicable). The
commenters were particularly concerned over inserted pieces whose
production was ``beyond [their] control,'' i.e., produced by a third
party for inclusion in their publications. One commenter worried that
mail would be held ``hostage'' if an enclosed piece does not meet the
applicable standards or that the Postal Service will ``punish''
publications for their enclosures.
The Postal Service does not believe fears of punishment are
warranted. The commenters correctly noted the problems with materials
provided by third parties for enclosure in publications, but this
circumstance has parallels in First-Class Mail and many Standard Mail
situations as well. In all cases, responsible persons, including at
least one of the commenters, identified the need for preparatory steps
to preclude problems with provided materials. The Postal Service
deferred implementing the standard for enclosed reply mail until
January 1, 1997, to provide sufficient time to correspond with and
educate suppliers and printers that prepare third-party enclosures.
Accordingly, the final rule will retain the provisions for enclosed
reply pieces, effective January 1, 1997.
d. 150-Piece Minimum
Four commenters opposed the imposition of 150-piece presort
eligibility and preparation standards for automation rate letter-size
Periodicals. These comments are similar to comments received from some
preparers of First-Class Mail and Standard Mail during the comment
period following the December 22 proposed rule and addressed at some
length in the Postal Service's March 12 final rule. From a physical or
mail processing perspective, automation rate letter-size mail is
comparable regardless of class, and the reasons for which the Postal
Service applied a 150-piece minimum for automation rate First-Class
Mail and Standard Mail are equally valid for similar mailpieces mailed
at Periodicals rates. Therefore, because the issues raised by these
commenters have already been answered with respect to mail for other
classes, the final rule will retain the 150-piece standard for
automation rate Periodicals.
e. Six-Piece Minimum Per Sack
Three commenters raised concerns over the six-piece minimum per
sack, arguing that they will be unable to continue preparing smaller
sack volumes to some 5-digit destinations that, they feel, give their
publications a better service opportunity than when prepared in 3-digit
or lesser destination sacks with six or more pieces. (Standards were
announced in the final rule that required preparation of a sack/tray
regardless of volume for each 3-digit served by the origin SCF (mail
processing plant), and permitted such a sack/tray for each entry point
for drop shipment mailers. This provision is also applicable to
Periodicals.) The Postal Service understands customers' desire for good
service and appreciates their efforts to facilitate such service by
going beyond the required level of preparation. However, in this case,
the Postal Service balanced the potential benefits of sacks with fewer
than six pieces against the costs of handling so little mail per sack
and determined that it is preferable to retain the minimum volume
prescribed in the final rule. The Postal Service will strive, on a
case-by-
[[Page 17193]]
case basis, to resolve any service problem that results from this
required minimum volume.
f. Presort Changes
Three commenters stated concerns over changes in sortation
(elimination of SCF packages, elimination of the optional city sort,
and changes to sortation standards generally). The Postal Service has
repeatedly publicized its intention to implement major network changes
at the same time that Classification Reform is implemented.
Accordingly, sortation standards for all reformed classes of mail align
with the simpler mail processing and distribution network. SCF and
optional city sortations are two examples of levels no longer useful
and, like state and mixed states sortations, were eliminated under
Classification Reform. Because of the clear need to align customers'
sortation with the pattern of the postal distribution network, and the
impracticability of phasing in a fundamental network change or
operating two networks concurrently, the implementation of new
sortation standards must proceed as prescribed in the final rule.
g. Barcoded Labels
One commenter asked for a 10% to 15% allowance for nonbarcoded
sack/tray labels. In response to comments on the December 22 proposed
rule, the Postal Service deferred implementation of the barcoded label
standard for automation rate mailings until January 1, 1997. At that
point, the Postal Service expects to improve its ability to handle such
mail more economically by distributing trays and sacks according to the
barcode printed on the sack or tray labels. Allowing a significant
portion of that mailstream to have nonbarcoded labels would not only
dilute the benefit of the remaining labels but also retain needless
costs for the mail inside the sacks and trays. Consequently, the final
rule will retain the standard for barcoded sack and tray labels,
effective January 1, 1997.
h. Other Issues
(1) One commenter asked the Postal Service to permit the continued
use of ``second-class'' on wrappers and polywrap enclosing
publications. Because MC95-1 renamed second-class mail as Periodicals,
the Postal Service will not amend its standards to permit ``second-
class'' on wrappers and other enclosures. However, requests to exhaust
stock of enclosure material already preprinted with ``second-class''
will be adjudicated on a case-by-case basis.
(2) Three commenters questioned the need for a separate Form 3553,
Coding Accuracy Support System (CASS) Report, for mailings made
repeatedly from the same list (e.g., a list used by a daily newspaper).
Although the basic standard for generation and submission of Form 3553
will be retained as stated in the final rule, the Postal Service will
consider how this standard can be most sensibly implemented in cases
where regular mailings are submitted for a relatively stable address
list.
(3) Two commenters questioned the availability of ``working''
pallets for each entry point. The DMM standards for palletization were
revised in a separate rulemaking concluded before the final rule on
Classification Reform was announced, but were shown in their entirety
in the March 12 notice. ``Working'' pallets may be prepared by the
mailer, subject to the general 10% limit on such pallets, and may be
deposited at those post offices that are appropriate for the mail
contained on the pallet. To eliminate any confusion over the definition
of ``working'' pallet, the DMM standards will be amended to remove
``working'' in favor of ``mixed BMC'' or ``mixed ADC,'' as appropriate.
(4) One commenter questioned the correct rate for Standard Mail (A)
enclosed in Periodicals claimed at a carrier route presort rate. The
applicable standards were not significantly altered in the final rule
and continue to allow the enclosure to pay the corresponding rate paid
for the host piece. Therefore, enclosed Standard Mail (A) would be
charged the basic carrier route (nonautomation) rate if enclosed in a
publication claimed at the carrier route Periodicals rates.
(5) One commenter claimed the rate increase for some Periodicals
was greater than stated by the PRC. He also urged elimination of
``unique 3-digit city'' as a factor in presort or rate eligibility. The
Postal Service did not request retention of ``unique 3-digit city'' in
its filing, but the PRC retained this distinction in its Recommended
Decision. A consideration of the reasons for that action is beyond the
scope of this rulemaking.
(6) Two commenters suggested that the rules for address matching
should be interpreted to allow the matched list to be valid for 90 days
beyond the ``last permissible use'' date of the Postal Service file,
rather than 90 days after the date of matching. The Postal Service
discussed this issue extensively in its proposed and final rules and
determined to set the date of matching as the start of the 90-day
clock.
(7) Although the list of issues on which comments were sought did
not include tabloid-size publications' eligibility for automation
rates, both groups of form letters contained a statement on that
subject, and the comments of one association, prepared by an executive
of one of the form letter commenters, also mentioned tabloid-size
publications. The one company whose employees submitted a total of 18
identical letters urged the Postal Service to accelerate deployment of
a next-generation flat sorter (the FSM 1000) to process tabloids. The
remaining group of comments cited the ``injustice'' of excluding
tabloids from barcoded rates. Those commenters' letter stated that it
is unfair for tabloids to pay higher rates ``when we have followed the
requirements for Periodical Class mail.''
Although this is not an issue on which comments were sought, the
Postal Service will respond. The final rule will contain no change
either to redefine the physical characteristics of an automation-
compatible flat or to extend automation rate eligibility to
incompatible flat-size pieces. The Postal Service will not consider
allowing any publication that is incompatible with current automated
flat mail processing equipment (the FSM 881) to have access to
automation rates. Such a suggestion offers no benefit to the Postal
Service and would improperly extend a cost avoidance discount to mail
that does not offer any compensatory opportunity for cost reduction in
postal handling. The Postal Service is deploying the FSM 1000 on a
timetable that meets the operational needs of the Postal Service. Any
enlargement of the current dimensions for automation-compatible flats
will need to await the general availability of the FSM 1000.
As always, the Postal Service will continue to work with mailers to
assist them to qualify for the most favorable rates for which they are
potentially eligible. However, the Postal Service notes that all
Periodicals mailers, including those of tabloid-size publications,
already benefit from favorable rates as a result of their compliance
with the basic standards for Periodicals eligibility. Mailers who
desire to participate in the added price or service benefits of
automation should weigh those benefits against the value of the current
format of their publications and make an appropriate business decision
within their own best interests.
3. Documentation
Only two commenters responded to the Postal Service's standard that
documentation of mailings, where required to support postage statement
data, had to be produced from software certified by Presort Accuracy
Validation
[[Page 17194]]
and Evaluation (PAVE) or in a standardized format. Examples of
standardized documentation were published as part of the final rule.
One commenter, a major billing service claiming to have submitted
its own form of computer-generated mailing documentation for PAVE
certification, states that the final rule has caused ``PAVE
certification [to be] taken away and made the sole property of hardware
and software vendors,'' forcing that company ``to comply with what the
[software] vendors and the Postal Service have agreed.''
The other commenter, a large list and data management service,
stated that the timetable for implementation of standardized
documentation of Periodicals mailings was too short. Noting how much
time in advance of the issue date a publication's address and presort
data are developed, the current absence of completed Postal Service
specifications for standardized documentation for Periodicals, and the
time needed for software vendors to produce and distribute presort
software once postal specifications are released, the commenter argued
that software could not be developed in time to produce issues of
publications that will appear on January 1, 1997. Instead, the
commenter urged delay in implementing standardized documentation for
Periodicals until September 1, 1997.
The Postal Service has required documentation in support of postage
statements for many years. Recently, it required documentation to
describe the volume of pieces at various presort levels within
automation rate mailings and the number of pieces with or without a
barcode. As early as 1976, presort rates necessitated some form of
proof by the mailer that mailings contained the same number of properly
prepared, qualifying pieces as claimed at the reduced rate on the
postage statement. In view of this history, the Postal Service does not
believe that producing accurate documentation, keyed to the mailing
that it accompanies, should be a significant task for most customers,
especially given most contemporary business mailers' heavy dependence
on computer systems for many aspects of mail production.
With the advent of complex mailings, which in recent years include
combinations of rate categories, presort levels, and entry discounts,
the role of documentation has become increasingly significant both as a
source of information for use in completing postage statements and as a
tool for postal verification. As a result, the importance of accuracy
has been matched by the importance of usability and clarity. If
documentation is ambiguous or cumbersome to review, attempts to relate
it to the physical mailing are frustrating if not unsuccessful,
bringing into question how well the information is mirrored on the
postage statement and defeating the purpose for the documentation's
generation and submission for use by the Postal Service to verify the
mailing. Therefore, the Postal Service has increasingly emphasized
clarity and consistency in documentation, both in content and in
format. Mailers have been required to meet specific documentation
standards for many years, especially those mailers who mail at
automation rates. As a result of this experience, the Postal Service
does not believe that the documentation standards in the final rule
present a significant hurdle for those customers already generating
quality mailing documentation.
Moreover, it is only reasonable to expect that the Postal Service's
extensive discussions of documentation standards would be with those
parties whose products will produce the documentation: providers of
software to the mailing industry. These discussions have been neither
exclusive nor private, and they have been designed to set criteria for
documentation that are achievable by computer software generally,
regardless of whose software is used, including software developed
proprietarily by independent mailers. Because of the generality of the
criteria for standardized documentation and the essential level of
quality that those criteria demand, the Postal Service does not agree
that those criteria are burdensome or beyond the ability of its
customers. The Postal Service expects each customer to decide on a
cost-benefit basis whether to produce software in-house or purchase it
from the commercial market. No customer is being forced either to
abandon proprietary software or to purchase software from a vendor.
Standardized documentation, including that generated by PAVE-certified
presort software, is a generic commodity and a reasonable product to
expect from a customer producing automation mailings. As a result, the
Postal Service finds no basis to amend the final rule to recraft its
definition of standardized documentation's content or format.
Regarding the timeframe for implementing standardized documentation
requirements, the Postal Service must conclude that mailers and vendors
attentive to the Classification Reform process are well aware of the
reasons for a July 1 implementation date and what they each must do to
be ready on that date. Although individual circumstances may
necessitate individual consideration, the Postal Service finds no
reason to conclude that, through application of adequate resources,
most if not all customers cannot have the necessary software ready and
in use when Classification Reform is implemented (or, for mailers of
Periodicals, on January 1, 1997). Therefore, the final rule will not be
amended to delay implementation of standards for documentation
generated by PAVE-certified software or produced in a standardized
format.
4. Other Issues
a. AUTO Marking on Automation Mail
Six correspondents submitted statements that they would have
difficulty complying with the standard for the marking of automation
rate First-Class Mail and Standard Mail (i.e., that each piece be
marked ``AUTO'' (or ``AUTOCR'' if carrier route presort) and that no
other piece bear that marking if not paid at that rate). One commenter
complained about the requirement that ``AUTO'' must be shown in all
uppercase letters. This was not an issue open for further comment. The
Postal Service will note, however, that marking of mail is essential
for accurate identification and cost ascertainment when sampling the
mailstream, and the effort to provide such a marking is necessary so
that future automation mail rates will be based on a more accurate
determination of the cost of that mail. Therefore, the Postal Service
believes that measures required of customers to apply the appropriate
markings on mail are consistent with and responsive to customers'
overall desire for cost-based rates.
The Postal Service recognizes that various mailer systems could
produce the required markings if additional alternative methods were
provided beyond those in the final rule. Accordingly, the DMM standards
shown below incorporate new revisions to permit placement of ``AUTO''
or ``AUTOCR'' in a mailer or manifest keyline (where appropriate).
Placement of these markings will be allowed in an MLOCR date
correction, meter drop shipment, or manifest keyline if preceded by two
asterisks. To correct an incorrectly applied ``AUTO'' or ``AUTOCR''
marking, the Postal Service has also amended the final rule to allow
the mailer to add the marking ``Single-Piece'' or ``SNGLP'' below or to
the left of the postage area, in a line above the
[[Page 17195]]
address, or in an ink-jet applied date line.
The Postal Service also recognizes that some customers' systems
might require relatively significant adjustments in order to identify
the correct marking for a mailpiece and/or apply it and/or suppress an
incorrect marking. Because producing the desired mailpiece marking
might need creative solutions in some cases, the Postal Service will
continue to discuss its marking standards with affected customers on a
case-by-case basis. It must be emphasized, however, that such
discussions will be solely to develop solutions about how to meet the
marking standards.
b. Exception for Letter-Size Pieces at Automation Rate for Flats
One commenter objected to the time limit on that portion of the
final rule in which the Postal Service provided an exception for
Standard Mail letter-size pieces prepared to qualify for the automation
rate for flats. In effect, that exception allowed an entire job to be
prepared as flats on pallets if the Regular rate portion was 10% or
less of the combined volume of the Enhanced Carrier Route and
automation rate pieces. (The final rule incorrectly showed this as 15%;
that error is among the corrections noted below.) The Postal Service
allowed this exception through the end of 1996 to give customers
preparing such mail ample opportunity to redesign and modify production
lines to prepare thereafter all letter-size mail in trays regardless of
the rate paid for it.
The consistent preparation of letter-size mail in trays is an
important objective of the Postal Service in implementing
Classification Reform. Such preparation is an element of the
standardization and efficiency that reform is intended to provide.
However, because of the problems cited by mailers of this specific
type of mail, commonly called ``fletters'' or ``slim jim catalogs,''
the Postal Service has determined to explore further with the industry
how to achieve the intended benefit for the Postal Service while
minimizing disruption for mailers. Pending further review of the
preparation of this type of letter-size mail, the exception cited above
will continue in effect without an expiration date.
c. Use of CDS for Sequenced Mail
One commenter pointed out that the Postal Service's requirement
that a mailer document use of CASS-certified software for matching
carrier route codes is irrelevant if the mailer uses the Postal
Service's own Computerized Delivery Sequence (CDS) product when
producing walk-sequenced Enhanced Carrier Route mailings.
A mailer who uses CDS is provided Form 3553 with each product
update so that the mailer can submit the necessary documentation with
mailings. Rather than establish a separate procedure for CDS users, the
Postal Service will continue to interpret DMM E632.1.4 (``another AIS
product'') to include CDS among the appropriate tools for carrier route
coding.
d. Postage Statement
One commenter, a major billing service, objected to the
``requirement for a single postage statement.'' The Postal Service is
unable to identify the genesis of this comment but must emphasize that
the commenter is incorrect. The final rule allows customers to report
many separate groups of mail (commonly called ``mailings'') on a single
statement but does not require that this be done. Customers retain the
right to prepare a separate statement with each group of mail if that
is their practice or preference.
e. Strapping of Trays
One commenter asked for a delay in implementing the standards for
tray strapping. The Postal Service explained in earlier phases of this
rulemaking the reasons for the required strapping of trays. Those
reasons remain and, as a result, the standards will be implemented as
announced in the final rule.
f. Other Issues
Various commenters offered observations or asked questions on other
issues beyond the scope of this phase of the final rulemaking and, as
such, will not be responded to in this supplementary final rule.
However, the Postal Service remains interested in answering the
questions and concerns of its customers. Mailers are asked to direct
their questions to their respective area or district Classification
Reform Implementation Coordinator; Manager, Business Mail Entry; or
Rates and Classification Service Center, as appropriate.
B. Plant-Verified Drop Shipments
The Postal Service also has formulated its policy concerning the
rates and preparation standards that will apply to any plant-verified
drop shipment (PVDS) that is prepared for entry during the period
immediately surrounding the implementation date for Classification
Reform (July 1, 1996) as follows:
1. PVDS verified and paid for before July 1, 1996, will be accepted
into the mailstream through July 5, 1996, if presented with appropriate
documentation of verification and payment.
2. PVDS may be verified and paid for beginning June 1, 1996, under
the rates and preparation standards that take effect July 1, 1996, if
the shipment is not accepted into the mailstream until July 1, 1996, or
later.
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111
Postal Service.
For the reasons discussed above, the Postal Service hereby adopts
the following amendments to the Domestic Mail Manual, which is
incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations (see 39
CFR part 111).
PART 111--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 111 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 3001-
3011, 3201-3219, 3403-3406, 3621, 3626, 5001.
2. The following substantive changes are made to the Domestic Mail
Manual. (This list is to show significant revisions only and is not
intended to detail amendments for typographical correction,
organizational consistency, or editorial clarity.)
A ADDRESSING
* * * * *
A900 Customer Support Services
* * * * *
A950 Coding Accuracy Support System (CASS)
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
* * * * *
1.2 Requirement
[Amend 1.2 by replacing ``CASS certification'' with ``CASS
certification (including Multiple Accuracy Support System (MASS))'' to
read as follows:]
Any mailing claimed at an automation rate must be produced from
address lists properly matched and coded with CASS-certified address
matching methods listed below. Mailers using multiline optical
character readers (MLOCRs) to print delivery point barcodes on
mailpieces (or for flats, ZIP+4 barcodes) must also obtain CASS
certification (including Multiline Accuracy Support System (MASS)) for
the address matching software used on their MLOCRs.
* * * * *
[[Page 17196]]
5.0 DOCUMENTATION
* * * * *
5.5 Using Single Lists
[Amend 5.5 by replacing ``within 1 year'' with ``within 6 months''
in the second sentence to read as follows:] When a mailing is produced
from all or part of a single address list, the mailer must submit one
Form 3553 and other required documentation reflecting the summary
output information for the entire list, as obtained when the list was
coded. When the same address list is used to make other mailings within
6 months of the date it was matched and coded, an original or a copy of
the computer-generated Form 3553 must be submitted with each.
* * * * *
C CHARACTERISTICS AND CONTENT
* * * * *
C800 Automation-Compatible Mail
C810 Letters and Cards
* * * * *
8.0 ENCLOSED REPLY CARDS AND ENVELOPES
8.1 Basic Standard
[Revise 8.1 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, all letter-size reply cards and
envelopes (business reply, courtesy reply, and metered reply mail)
provided as enclosures in automation First-Class Mail, automation
Regular Periodicals, and automation Regular and Enhanced Carrier Route
Standard Mail must meet the applicable standards in 1.0 through 7.0,
bear a facing identification mark meeting the standards in 8.2, and
bear the correct delivery point barcode (or, for business reply mail
(BRM), the correct ZIP+4 barcode) for the delivery address on the reply
piece as defined by the USPS, subject to the barcode standards in C840.
Mailers must certify that these standards have been met when the
corresponding mail is presented to the USPS. BRM pieces must also meet
the applicable standards in S922.
* * * * *
E ELIGIBILITY
* * * * *
E100 First-Class Mail
* * * * *
E130 Nonautomation Rates
* * * * *
3.0 PRESORTED RATES
* * * * *
3.3 Address Qualify
[Revise 3.3 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, addresses appearing on all pieces
claimed at the Presorted rate must be updated within 6 months before
the mailing date by a USPS-approved address update tool (e.g., the
``Address Correction Endorsement,'' ACS, or NCOA). Additional
alternatives currently under development (such as FASTforward SM)
may be used to meet this standard when they have received final
approval. Mailers must certify that this standard has been met when the
corresponding mail is presented to the USPS. This standard applies to
each address individually, not to a specific list or mailing. If a
USPS-approved address update tool is used, a valid update is obtained
regardless of the class of mail on which the address is placed. An
address meeting this standard may be used in mailings at any other rate
to which the standard applies throughout the 6-month period following
its must recent update.
* * * * *
E140 Automation Rates
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.3 Address Quality
[Revise 1.3 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, addresses appearing on all pieces
claimed at the automation rates must be updated within 6 months before
the mailing date by a USPS-approved address update tool (e.g., the
``Address Correction Endorsement,'' ACS, or NCOA). Additional
alternatives currently under development (such as FASTforward SM)
may be used to meet this standard when they have received final
approval. Mailers must certify that this standard has been met when the
corresponding mail is presented to the USPS. This standard applies to
each address individually, not to a specific list or mailing. If a
USPS-approved address update tool is used, a valid update is obtained
regardless of the class of mail on which the address is placed. An
address meeting this standard may be used in mailings at any other rate
to which the standard applies throughout the 6-month period following
its must recent update.
* * * * *
1.5 Enclosed Reply Cards and Envelopes
[Revise 1.5 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, all letter-size reply cards and
envelopes (business reply, courtesy reply, and metered reply mail)
provided as enclosures in automation First-Class Mail must meet the
standards in C810 for enclosed reply cards and envelopes. Mailers must
certify that this standard has been met when the corresponding mail is
presented to the USPS.
2.0 RATE APPLICATION
2.1 Letters or Cards
[Amend 2.1 by revising 2.1d to read as follows:]
First-Class automation rates apply to each piece that is sorted
under M810 into the corresponding qualifying groups:
* * * * *
d. Pieces in origin/entry 3-digit/scheme trays containing fewer
than 150 pieces and all pieces in AADC and mixed AADC trays qualify for
the Basic automation rate.
* * * * *
E200 Periodicals
* * * * *
E230 Nonautomation Rates
E231 Regular Periodicals
* * * * *
3.0 3/5 RATES
[Amend 3.0 by revising 3.0a to read as follows:]
Subject to M210, 3/5 rates apply to:
a. Letter-size pieces in 5-digit or unique 3-digit packages of six
or more pieces each, either placed in 5-digit or unique 3-digit trays
or in an overflow unique 3-digit tray.
* * * * *
5.0 WALK-SEQUENCE DISCOUNTS
5.1 Eligibility
[Revise 5.1 to read as follows:]
The High Density or Saturation rates apply to each walk-sequenced
piece in a carrier route mailing, eligible under 2.2 and prepared under
M210, that also meets the corresponding addressing and density
standards in 5.4. High Density and Saturation rate mailings must be
prepared in carrier walk sequence according to schemes prescribed by
the USPS (see M050).
* * * * *
E240 Automation Rates
E241 Regular Periodicals
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
1.1 All Pieces
[Amend 1.1 by revising 1.1g to read as follows:]
All pieces in an automation Regular Periodicals mailings must:
* * * * *
g. Except under 1.3, bear an accurate barcode meeting the standards
in C840, either a DPBC (if a letter) or a ZIP+4 barcode or DPBC (if a
flat), either on the piece or on an insert showing through a barcode
window.
[[Page 17197]]
1.2 Enclosed Reply Cards and Envelopes
[Revise 1.2 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, all letter-size reply cards and
envelopes (business reply, courtesy reply, and metered reply mail)
provided as enclosures in automation Regular Periodicals must meet the
standards in C810 for enclosed reply cards and envelopes. Mailers must
certify that this standard has been met when the corresponding mail is
presented to the USPS.
1.3 Temporary Exception to Barcoding
[Add 1.3 to read as follows:]
From July 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996, up to 10% of the
pieces in an automation Periodicals mailing of flat-size pieces may
bear only a 5-digit barcode (subject to C840); and up to 10% of the
pieces in an automation Periodicals mailing of letter-size pieces may
be prepared without a barcode or with only a ZIP+4 barcode (subject to
C840). Pieces within this 10% allowance must be combined and presorted
correctly with the balance of the mailing. Postage for pieces in the
10% allowance must be paid at the applicable nonautomation Regular
Periodicals rate and supported by documentation such as that required
under M893 (letter-size) or M897 (flat-size).
2.0 RATE APPLICATION
2.1 Letters
[Amend 2.1 by revising 2.1a and 2.1b to read as follows:]
Automation rates apply to each letter-size piece that is sorted
under M810 into the corresponding qualifying groups:
a. Pieces for a unique 3-digit destination that is part of a 3-
digit scheme group in L003 qualify for the 3/5 automation rate when
placed in a 3-digit scheme tray if grouped separately from pieces for
other 3-digit areas.
b. Pieces in origin/entry 3-digit/scheme trays containing fewer
than 150 pieces and groups of 150 or more pieces in other 3-digit, 3-
digit scheme, or AADC trays or any pieces in mixed AADC trays qualify
for the Basic automation rate.
2.2 Flats
[Amend 2.2 by revising 2.2a to read as follows:]
Automation rates apply to each flat-size piece that is sorted under
M820 into the corresponding qualifying groups:
a. Pieces in 5-digit or unique 3-digit packages of 6 or more pieces
each qualify for the 3/5 automation rate.
* * * * *
E600 Standard Mail
E610 Basic Standards
* * * * *
E612 Additional Standards for Standard Mail (A)
* * * * *
4.0 BULK RATES
* * * * *
4.9 Preparation
[Amend 4.9 by revising 4.9c to read as follows:]
Each Nonprofit, Regular, or Enhanced Carrier Route rate mailing
must be prepared under these general standards:
* * * * *
c. The same mailing may not contain both automation and
nonautomation rate pieces except as permitted under E649.
* * * * *
[Revise heading of E641 to read as follows:]
E640 Automation Rates
E641 Regular and Enhanced Carrier Route Standard Mail
1.0 AUTOMATION REGULAR RATES
* * * * *
1.2 Enclosed Reply Cards and Envelopes
[Revise 1.2 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, all letter-size reply cards and
envelopes (business reply, courtesy reply, and metered reply mail)
provided as enclosures in automation Regular Standard Mail must meet
the standards in C810 for enclosed reply cards and envelopes. Mailers
must certify that this standard has been met when the corresponding
mail is presented to the USPS.
1.3 Rate Application--Letters and Cards
[Amend 1.3 by revising 1.3c to read as follows:]
Regular automation rates apply to each piece that is sorted under
M810 into the corresponding qualifying groups:
* * * * *
c. Pieces in origin/entry 3-digit/scheme trays containing fewer
than 150 pieces and all pieces in full or overflow AADC trays and in
all mixed AADC trays qualify for the Basic automation rate.
* * * * *
[Revise the heading of 2.0 to read as follows:]
2.0 AUTOMATION ENHANCED CARRIER ROUTE RATES
* * * * *
2.4 Enclosed Reply Cards and Envelopes
[Redesignate current 2.4 as 2.5 and add new 2.4 to read as
follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, all letter-size reply cards and
envelopes (business reply, courtesy reply, and metered reply mail)
provided as enclosures in automation Enhanced Carrier Route Standard
Mail must meet the standards in C810 for enclosed reply cards and
envelopes. Mailers must certify that this standard has been met when
the corresponding mail is presented to the USPS.
* * * * *
E650 Destination Entry
E651 Regular, Nonprofit, and Enhanced Carrier Route Standard Mail
* * * * *
2.0 VERIFICATION
2.1 Place
[Amend 2.1 by revising 2.1b to read as follows:]
As directed by the postmaster, the mailer must present destination
entry mailings to USPS employees for verification either:
* * * * *
b. At the destination post office or business mail entry unit.
* * * * *
M MAIL PREPARATION AND SORTATION
M000 General Preparation Standards
M010 Mailpieces
M011 Basic Standards
1.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS
* * * * *
1.4 Mailing
[Revise 1.4 to read as follows:]
A mailing is a group of pieces within the same class of mail and
processing category that may be sorted together under the applicable
standards. Other specific standards may define whether separate
mailings may be combined, palletized, reported, or deposited together.
These types of mail may not be part of the same mailing despite being
in the same class and processing category: automation and nonautomation
mail (except as permitted by the ``85% rule'' where applicable);
automation Enhanced Carrier Route rate and other mail; any
[[Page 17198]]
combination of Enhanced Carrier Route, Regular, and/or Nonprofit
Standard Mail; 3/5 and carrier route Nonprofit Standard Mail.
* * * * *
M012 Endorsements and Markings
* * * * *
2.0 METHOD
2.1 Placement
[Amend 2.1 by revising 2.1b to read as follows:]
Unless otherwise directed or permitted by standard, placement of
markings is subject to these standards:
* * * * *
b. Other rate markings (e.g., ``AUTO,'' ``Carrier Route Presort,''
``ECRLOT'') may be placed in the locations shown in 2.1a; or in the
address area on the line immediately above the address or, preferably,
two lines above the address if the marking appears alone, or if no
other information appears on the line with the marking except postal
optional endorsement line information under M013 or postal carrier
route package information under M014. If preceded by two asterisks, the
``AUTO'' or ``AUTOCR,'' or ``Single Piece'' or ``SNGLP'' information
may also be placed in the line above or two lines above the address in
a mailer keyline or a manifest keyline, or placed above the address and
below the postage in an MLOCR ink jet printed date correction/meter
drop shipment line. Alternatively, the mailer may apply ``AUTO'' or
``AUTOCR'' to the left of the DPBC or below the postage.
* * * * *
[Remove current 2.2 and 2.3 and renumber 2.4 and 2.5 as 2.2 and
2.3, respectively.]
* * * * *
M013 Optional Endorsement Lines
1.0 USE
1.1 Basic Standards
[Amend chart by revising left column under Carrier Route and SCF to
read as follows:]
Carrier Route
(Automation First-Class Mail and automation Enhanced Carrier Route
Standard Mail)
* * * * *
SCF
(Preferred Periodicals, Nonprofit Standard Mail, and bound printed
matter only)
* * * * *
M014 Carrier Route Information Lines
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
[Amend 1.0 by removing ``carrier route'' in the last sentence to
read as follows:]
Packages for individual carrier routes, rural routes, highway
contract routes, post office box sections, or general delivery units
may be prepared without facing slips if prepared with optional
endorsement lines under M013 or with carrier route information lines
under 2.0. These standards apply to automation Carrier Route rate
First-Class, carrier route and Level I/K Periodicals, automation Basic
Carrier Route rate and Enhanced Carrier Route Standard Mail, and
carrier route bound printed matter mailings. Carrier route information
lines may be on all pieces in a mailing, regardless of presort level.
2.0 FORMAT AND CONTENT
* * * * *
2.4 Other Contents
[Amend 2.4 by revising 2.4c to read as follows:]
Other elements of the carrier route information line include:
* * * * *
c. The carrier route information line may also contain the basic
markings required by standard for the class of mail and rate claimed,
prepared under M012.
* * * * *
M030 Containers
M031 Labels
1.0 SACK AND TRAY LABELS
1.1 Basic Standards
[Revise 1.1 to read as follows:]
Only sack labels may be used for sacks, only tray labels for trays.
Machine-printed labels (available from the USPS) ensure legibility.
Legible hand-printed labels are acceptable. Illegible labels are not
acceptable. Container labels for automation rate mailings are subject
to M032.
* * * * *
4.0 PALLET LABELS
* * * * *
[Revise heading of 4.9 to read as follows:]
4.9 Automation and Carrier Route Rates
[Amend 4.9 by removing heading of 4.10 and adding text from 4.10,
redesignating 4.11 through 4.14 as 4.10 through 4.13, and revising the
first sentence of 4.9 to read as follows:]
Pallets containing copalletized automation rate (barcoded) and
carrier route rate mailings must show the words BARCODED/CARRIER ROUTES
(or authorized abbreviation) on the contents line. Pallets containing
automation-rate flat-size mail must show the word BARCODED on the
contents line. The word BARCODED must not be abbreviated on the
contents line.
* * * * *
[Revise the heading of 5.0 to read as follows:]
5.0 SECOND LINE CODES
[Revise 5.0 to read as follows:]
The codes shown below must be used as appropriate on Line 2 of
sack, tray, and pallet labels.
[Replace the chart heading ``Identifier'' with ``For these content
types'' and the heading ``Abbreviations'' with ``Use these codes''; add
``Barcoded'' and ``BC'' on the first line; replace ``Irregular
Parcels'' and ``IRREG'' (Standard Mail only)'' with ``Irregular
Parcels'' and ``IRREG (First-Class and Standard Mail only)''; replace
``Standard Mail'' and ``3C/4C'' with ``Standard Mail'' and ``STD.'']
M032 Barcoded Labels
1.0 BARCODED TRAY LABELS
1.1 Standards
[Revise 1.1 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, barcoded tray labels are required for
automation rate mailings of First-Class, Regular Periodicals, and
Regular and Enhanced Carrier Route Standard Mail letter-size pieces and
for First-Class flat-size pieces. Barcoded tray labels may be used
earlier and may be used on any other mailing. Mailer-produced barcoded
tray labels must meet the standards below. Revisions to preprinted
barcoded labels (e.g., handwritten changes) are not permitted.
* * * * *
2.0 BARCODED SACK LABELS
2.1 Standards
[Revise 2.1 to read as follows:]
Effective January 1, 1997, barcoded sack labels meeting the
standards in this section are required for automation rate Regular
Periodicals and Standard Mail flat-size pieces prepared in sacks. These
sack labels may be used earlier and may be used for other Periodicals
and Standard Mail prepared in sacks. Revisions to preprinted barcoded
labels (e.g., handwritten changes) are not permitted.
* * * * *
[[Page 17199]]
M033 Sacks and Trays
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.3 Tray Sizes
[Amend 1.3 by revising 1.3a to read as follows:]
These approximate measurements define the tray sizes that apply to
all mail preparation standards:
a. Letter trays:
(1) 2-foot MM trays: 21 inches long by 10 inches wide (inside
bottom dimensions) by 4-5/8 inches high.
(2) 1-foot MM trays: 10-1/4 inches long by 10 inches wide (inside
bottom dimensions) by 4-5/8 inches high.
(3) 2-foot EMM trays: 21-3/4 inches long by 11-1/2 inches wide
(inside bottom dimensions) by 6-1/8 inch high.
* * * * *
1.6 Exception
[Revise 1.6 to read as follows:]
If the processing and distribution manager gives a written waiver,
strapping is not required for mixed ADC or mixed AADC letter trays of
First-Class Mail; any letter tray placed on a 5-digit, 3-digit, or SCF
pallet secured with stretchwrap; or any letter tray that originates and
destinates in the same SCF (mail processing plant) service area.
1.7 Origin/Entry SCF/Plant Sacks and Trays
[Revise 1.7 to read as follows:]
Except for Nonprofit Standard and Preferred Periodicals mailings,
after all required carrier route, 5-digit, 3-digit (and, where
permitted, 3-digit/scheme) sacks/trays are prepared, a 3-digit (or 3-
digit/scheme) sack/tray must be prepared to contain any remaining mail
for each 3-digit (or 3-digit/scheme) area served by the SCF (mail
processing plant) serving the post office where the mail is verified,
and may be prepared for each 3-digit (or 3-digit/scheme) area served by
the SCF/plant where mail is entered (if that is different from the SCF/
plant serving where the mail is verified, e.g., a PVDS deposit site).
In all cases, only one less-than-full sack/tray may be prepared for
each 3-digit (or 3-digit/scheme) area.
2.0 FIRST-CLASS, REGULAR PERIODICALS, AND REGULAR AND ENHANCED CARRIER
ROUTE STANDARD MAIL
2.1 Letter Tray Preparation
[Amend 2.1 by revising 2.1b and 2.1i to read as follows:]
Pieces must be prepared to result in the fewest practical number of
packages (where required) and trays to contain the mail sorted to a
destination. Letter tray preparation uses terms defined in M011 and is
subject to these further standards:
* * * * *
b. Regardless of minimum volumes that may be allowed or required
per tray, each tray prepared must be filled before filling of the next
tray is begun, with the contents in multiple trays relatively balanced.
A tray with less mail may be prepared only if permitted by the
standards in 2.1c, 2.1d, and 2.1e and for the rate claimed. Subject to
availability, 2-foot trays must be used whenever available, except that
1-foot trays must be used for lesser volume or as less-than-full trays.
* * * * *
i. As a general exception, pieces do not have to be grouped by 3-
digit ZIP Code prefix in AADC trays if the mailing is prepared using an
MLOCR/barcode sorter and standardized documentation is submitted.
* * * * *
M040 Pallets
M041 General Standards
* * * * *
4.0 PALLET BOXES
* * * * *
4.3 Securing
[Amend 4.3 by revising 4.3a to read as follows:]
Pallet boxes must be secured to the pallet with strapping, banding,
stretchable plastic, shrinkwrap, or other material that ensures that
the pallet can be safely unloaded from vehicles, transported, and
processed as a single unit to the point where the contents are
distributed with the load intact if:
a. The pallet and its contents are transported by the USPS from the
office where the mail is accepted to another postal facility where the
contents are distributed, and
* * * * *
5.0 PREPARATION
* * * * *
5.2 Required Preparation
[Revise 5.2 to read as follows:]
A pallet must be prepared to a required sortation level when there
are 500 pound of Periodicals or Standard Mail packages, sacks, or
parcels or six layers of Periodicals or Standard Mail (A) letter trays.
Up to 10% of the total pallets in any mailing or job may be mixed BMC
(Standard Mail) or mixed ADC (Periodicals). Such pallets must be
labeled to the BMC or ADC (as appropriate) serving the post office
where mailings are accepted into the mailstream. The processing and
distribution manager of that facility may issue a written authorization
to the mailer to label mixed BMC or mixed ADC pallets to the post
office or processing and distribution center serving the post office
where mailings are entered. These pallets contain all mail remaining
after required and optional pallets are prepared to finer levels of
sortation under M045, as appropriate.
* * * * *
M045 Palletized Mailings
* * * * *
2.0 PACKAGES
* * * * *
2.4 Size--Standard Mail (B)
[Amend 2.4 by revising 2.4c to read as follows:]
Package size: 10-pound or 1,000-cubic-inch minimum (whichever
occurs first), 40-pound maximum, except that:
* * * * *
c. Packages must be prepared to carrier route sortations if the
carrier route bulk bound printed matter rate is claimed. Mail at other
rates must be sorted to 5-digit, 3-digit, optional SCF, ADC, BMC, and
mixed ADC destinations, as appropriate.
* * * * *
5.0 PALLETS OF PACKAGES, BUNDLES, AND TRAYS OF LETTER-SIZE MAIL
* * * * *
5.5 Securing Trays
[Revise 5.5 to read as follows:]
Trays must be sleeved and strapped under M033, except that if the
processing and distribution manager gives a written waiver, strapping
is not required for mixed ADC or mixed AADC letter trays of First-Class
Mail; any letter tray placed on a 5-digit, 3-digit, or SCF pallet
secured with stretchwrap; or any letter tray that originates and
destinates in the same SCF (mail processing plant) service area.
* * * * *
M100 First-Class Mail (Nonautomation)
* * * * *
M130 Presorted First-Class
* * * * *
2.0 BASIC PREPARATION--LETTER-SIZE OR CARD-SIZE PIECES
* * * * *
[[Page 17200]]
2.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 2.2 by revising 2.2b to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (full trays except for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)); no overflow; use L002, Column A, for Line
1.
* * * * *
3.0 OPTIONAL PREPARATION--UPGRADABLE LETTER-SIZE OR CARD-SIZE PIECES
* * * * *
3.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 3.2 by revising 3.2b to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (full trays except for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)); no overflow; use L002, Column A, for Line
1.
* * * * *
4.0 PREPARATION OF FLAT-SIZE PIECES
4.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 4.2 by revising 4.2b to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (full trays except for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)); no overflow; use L002, Column A, for Line
1.
* * * * *
5.0 PREPARATION OF PARCELS
* * * * *
5.3 Sack Preparation
[Amend 5.3 by revising 5.3b to read as follows:]
Sack size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (10-pound minimum except for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)); no overflow; use L002, Column A, for Line
1.
* * * * *
6.0 DOCUMENTATION
[Amend 6.0 by revising the last sentence to read as follows:]
A complete, signed postage statement, using the correct USPS form
or an approved facsimile, must accompany each mailing, supported by
documentation produced by PAVE- or MAC-certified software, or
standardized documentation meeting the standards in P012. Documentation
of postage is not required if the correct rate is affixed to each piece
or each piece is of identical weight and the pieces are separated by
rate when presented for acceptance.
M200 Periodicals (Nonautomation)
M210 Regular Periodicals
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.3 Firm Packages
[Revise 1.3 to read as follows:]
A firm package is two or more copies for the same address placed in
one package. If each copy has a delivery address, each may be claimed
as a separate piece for presort and on the postage statement, or the
firm package may be claimed as one piece. A firm package sorted and
claimed as one piece must be accompanied by (but must be physically
separate from) five other pieces packaged to the same destination to
satisfy a six-piece package requirement when applicable, regardless of
the number of copies in the firm package.
* * * * *
2.0 PACKAGE PREPARATION
* * * * *
2.2 Carrier Route Packages
[Revise 2.2 to read as follows:]
Carrier route packages may be placed only in (on) carrier route or
5-digit carrier routes sacks or trays (or pallets). Mailers may choose
to prepare carrier route packages at a higher level of route saturation
(e.g., only if there are at least 15 pieces per route). Under this
option, smaller packages of six or more pieces per carrier route not
prepared for carrier route rates must be prepared for and paid at
another applicable rate.
* * * * *
3.0 SACK PREPARATION (FLATS)
3.1 Sack Preparation
[Amend 3.1 by revising 3.1d to read as follows:]
Sack size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
d. 3-digit: required at 24 pieces (no minimum for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)), optional with one six-piece package
minimum; use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
4.0 TRAY PREPARATION (LETTER-SIZE PIECES)
4.1 Tray Preparation
[Amend 4.1 by revising 4.1d to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
d. 3-digit: required at 24 pieces (no minimum for required origin/
optional entry 3-digit(s)), optional with one six-piece package
minimum; use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
M290 Preferred Periodicals
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.4 Firm Packages
[Revise 1.4 to read as follows:]
A firm package is two or more copies for the same address placed in
one package. If each copy has a delivery address, each may be claimed
as a separate piece for presort and on the postage statement, or the
firm package may be claimed as one piece. A firm package sorted and
claimed as one piece must be accompanied by (but must be physically
separate from) five other pieces packaged to the same destination to
satisfy a six-piece package requirement when applicable, regardless of
the number of copies in the firm package.
* * * * *
M600 Standard Mail (Nonautomation)
M610 Single-Piece and Nonautomation Regular Standard Mail (A)
1.0 SINGLE-PIECE RATES
[Revise 1.0 to read as follows:]
Each piece must be legibly marked ``Standard'' or ``STD,'' or may
also be marked ``Single-Piece'' or ``SNGLP'' under P600 to correct an
incorrect rate marking. Unmarked pieces are treated as First-Class Mail
and charged postage at the applicable First-Class rate.
2.0 BASIC STANDARDS--REGULAR NONAUTOMATION RATES
* * * * *
2.3 Exception--Standard Mail (A)
[Amend 2.3 by removing ``Limited'' in the heading and the
introductory text in italics: The following exception is applicable
until January 1, 1997; after that time, preparation will be based
solely on the standards for the rate claimed and the processing
category of the pieces, whether the same standards apply to other
pieces claimed at other
[[Page 17201]]
rates and produced as part of the same mailing job:''; change 15% to
10% in the last sentence to read as follows:]
When a Standard Mail (A) mailing job could, by size, qualify for
Regular Standard Mail automation rates as either letters or flats, if
part of the job is prepared as palletized flats at automation rates for
flats, the remainder may be prepared as palletized flats at Enhanced
Carrier Route rates and Regular nonletter nonautomation rates if the
number of Regular nonletter nonautomation rate pieces does not exceed
10% of the total number of pieces in the entire mailing job.
* * * * *
3.0 BASIC PREPARATION--REGULAR NONAUTOMATION RATE LETTER-SIZE PIECES
* * * * *
3.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 3.2 by revising the introductory text and 3.2c to read as
follows:]
Only mail eligible for the 3/5 rate (i.e., 150 or more pieces in
total for the 3-digit area) may be prepared in 5-digit and 3-digit
trays under 3.2a and 3.2b. Tray size, preparation sequence, and
labeling:
* * * * *
c. Origin 3-digit(s): required (no minimum); optional for entry 3-
digit(s) (no minimum); use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
4.0 OPTIONAL PREPARATION--UPGRADABLE REGULAR NONAUTOMATION RATE
LETTER-SIZE PIECES
* * * * *
4.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 4.2 by revising the introductory text and 4.2c to read as
follows:]
Only mail eligible for the 3/5 rate (i.e., 150 or more pieces in
total for the 3-digit area) may be prepared in 5-digit and 3-digit
trays under 4.2a and 4.2b. Tray size, preparation sequence, and
labeling:
* * * * *
c. Origin 3-digit(s): required (no minimum); optional for entry 3-
digit(s) (no minimum); use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
5.0 PREPARATION--REGULAR NONAUTOMATION RATE FLAT-SIZE PIECES AND ALL
IRREGULAR PARCELS
* * * * *
5.7 Sack Preparation
[Amend 5.7 by revising 5.7b to read as follows:]
Sack size (subject to 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6), preparation sequence, and
labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (minimum of 125 pieces/15 pounds, smaller
volume not permitted, except for required origin/optional entry 3-
digit(s)); use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
M620 Enhanced Carrier Route Standard Mail
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
1.1 All Mailings
[Amend 1.1 by revising 1.1e to read as follows:]
All nonautomation rate Enhanced Carrier Route mailings are subject
to these general standards (automation rate Enhanced Carrier Route
mailings must be prepared under M810):
* * * * *
e. Subject to M012, all pieces must be marked ``Bulk Rate'' or
``Blk. Rt.'' In addition, Basic, High Density, and Saturation rate
pieces must each be marked ``ECRLOT,'' ``ECRWSH,'' or ``ECRWSS,''
respectively, either in the optional endorsement line under M013 or in
the carrier route information line under M014. Pieces not claimed at
the corresponding rate must not bear the ``ECRLOT,'' ``ECRWSH,'' or
``ECRWSS'' marking unless paid at single-piece rate and a corrective
single-piece rate marking is applied under P600.
* * * * *
1.4 Exception--Standard Mail (A)
[Amend 1.4 by removing ``Limited'' in the heading and the
introductory text in italics: The following exception is applicable
until January 1, 1997; after that time, preparation will be based
solely on the standards for the rate claimed and the processing
category of the pieces, whether the same standards apply to other
pieces claimed at other rates and produced as part of the same mailing
job:''; change 15% to 10% in the last sentence to read as follows:]
When a Standard Mail (A) mailing job could, by size, qualify for
Regular Standard Mail automation rates as either letters or flats, if
part of the job is prepared as palletized flats at automation rates for
flats, the remainder may be prepared as palletized flats at Enhanced
Carrier Route rates and Regular nonletter nonautomation rates if the
number of Regular nonletter nonautomation rate pieces does not exceed
10% of the total number of pieces in the entire mailing job.
* * * * *
2.0 PACKAGE PREPARATION
* * * * *
2.6 Sack Preparation
[Amend 2.6 by revising 2.7b to read as follows:]
Sack size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required at 10 pieces/20 pounds/1,000 cubic inches (no
minimum for required origin/optional entry 3-digit(s)); smaller volume
permitted; use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
M690 Nonprofit Standard Mail
M692 Basic and 3/5 Presort
* * * * *
3.0 SACK PREPARATION
* * * * *
3.2 Machinable, Irregular Parcels
[Revise 3.2 to read as follows:]
If a mailing consists of both machinable and irregular parcels, a
5-digit sack must be prepared when there are 10 pounds of mail for a 5-
digit ZIP Code destination. Sacks containing less than 10 pounds of
mail may be prepared.
* * * * *
3.5 Presort and Labeling
[Amend 3.5 by revising 3.5e to read as follows:]
Sack presort sequence and labeling:
* * * * *
e. Mixed ADC (required); for Line 1, use MXD followed by the city/
state/ZIP of the ADC serving the 3-digit ZIP Code of the entry post
office, as shown in L004 (for flats) or L604 (for irregular parcels),
as applicable.
3.6 Line 2
[Amend M692.3.6 by removing 3.6b and redesignating 3.6c as 3.6b and
3.6d as 3.6c to read as follows:]
Line 2: STD, processing category, and:
a. 5-digit sacks of machinable and irregular parcels: MACH AND
IRREG.
b. Mixed ADC sacks: MIXED ADC.
c. As required by the applicable labeling list, Line 2 processing
code information must be right-justified under the ZIP Code on Line 1.
* * * * *
[[Page 17202]]
M800 All Automation Mail
M810 Letter-Size Mail (Except Preferred Periodicals and Nonprofit
Standard Mail)
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.2 Mailings
[Revise 1.2 to read as follows:]
All pieces in a mailing must meet the standards in C810 and must be
sorted together to the finest extend required. A single automation rate
mailing may include pieces prepared at 5-Digit, 3-Digit, 3/5, and Basic
automation rates, as applicable; all may be reported on the same
postage statement and documentation. The definitions of a mailing and
permissible combinations are in M011.
1.3 Marking
[Revise 1.3 to read as follows:]
First-Class pieces must be marked ``First-Class'' or ``Presorted
First-Class''; Standard Mail must be marked ``Bulk Rate'' or ``Blk.
Rt.'' In addition, pieces must be marked ``AUTO'' (or ``AUTOCR'' for
carrier route rate pieces, as appropriate). Periodicals require no
markings. Pieces not claimed at an automation rate must not be marked
``AUTO'' or ``AUTOCR'' unless paid at single-piece rate and a
corrective single-piece rate marking is applied under P100 or P600.
1.4 General Preparation
[Revise 1.4 to read as follows:]
Grouping, packaging, and labeling are not generally required or
permitted, except packaging is required in any mailing consisting
entirely of card-size pieces and for pieces in overflow and less-than-
full trays; pieces must be grouped as specified in 2.0 and 3.0; and
package labels are required only for Regular Periodicals.
1.5 Carrier Route
[Revise 1.5 to read as follows:]
Carrier route groups may be placed in only carrier route or 5-digit
carrier routes trays. Preparation of mail to qualify for automation
carrier route rates is optional for First-Class and Standard Mail (A)
pieces, subject to E140 and E641.
* * * * *
2.0 PREPARATION--FIRST-CLASS AND STANDARD MAIL (A)
* * * * *
2.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 2.2 by revising 2.2d and 2.2e to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
d. 3-digit/scheme: required (150-piece minimum except no minimum
for required origin/optional entry 3-digit(s)/scheme); overflow
allowed; for Line 1, use L002, Column B.
e. AADC: required (150-piece minimum); overflow allowed; group
pieces by 3-digit ZIP Code prefix (or 3-digit/scheme if applicable);
use L801 for Line 1.
* * * * *
3.0 PREPARATION--PERIODICALS
3.1 Tray Preparation
[Revise 3.1 to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
a. 5-digit: required (150-piece minimum); overflow allowed; use 5-
digit ZIP Code destination of pieces for Line 1, preceded for military
mail by the prefixes under M031.
b. 3-digit/scheme: required (150-piece minimum except no minimum
for required origin/optional entry 3-digit(s)/scheme); overflow
allowed; for Line 1, use L002, Column B.
c. AADC: required (150-piece minimum); overflow allowed; group
pieces by 3-digit ZIP Code prefix (or 3-digit/scheme if applicable);
use L801 for Line 1.
d. Mixed AADC: required (no minimum); group pieces by AADC; for
Line 1, use L802 (mail entered by the mailer at an ASF or BMC) or L803,
as appropriate.
* * * * *
4.0 DOCUMENTATION
[Revise 4.0 to read as follows:]
A complete, signed postage statement, using the correct USPS form
or an approved facsimile, must accompany each mailing, supported by
documentation produced by PAVE-certified (or, except for Periodicals,
MAC-certified) software or standardized documentation under P012.
Documentation of postage is not required if the correct rate is affixed
to each piece or if each piece is of identical weight and the pieces
are separated by rate when presented for acceptance. Combined mailings
of Periodicals publications must also be documented under M210.
Periodicals are not subject to the standard for supporting
documentation produced by PAVE-certified software or standardized
documentation under P012 until January 1, 1997.
M820 Flat-Size Mail (Except Preferred Periodicals and Nonprofit
Standard Mail)
1.0 BASIC STANDARDS
* * * * *
1.2 Mailings
[Amend 1.2 by revising the second sentence to read as follows:]
All pieces in a mailing must meet the standards in C820 and must be
sorted together to the finest extent required. A single automation rate
mailing may include pieces prepared at 5-Digit, 3-Digit, 3/5, and Basic
automation rates, as applicable; all may be reported on the same
postage statement and documentation. The definitions of a mailing and
permissible combinations are in M011.
* * * * *
1.4 Marking
[Revise 1.4 to read as follows:]
First-Class pieces must be marked ``AUTO'' and either ``First-
Class'' or ``Presorted First-Class.'' Standard Mail must be marked
``AUTO'' and either ``Bulk Rate'' or ``Blk. Rt.'' Periodicals require
no markings. Pieces not claimed at an automation rate must not be
marked ``AUTO'' unless paid at single-piece rate and a corrective
single-piece rate marking is applied under P100 or P600.
1.5 Exception--Standard Mail (A)
[Amend 1.5 by removing ``Limited'' in the heading and the
introductory text in italics: The following exception is applicable
until January 1, 1997; after that time, preparation will be based
solely on the standards for the rate claimed and the processing
category of the pieces, whether the same standards apply to other
pieces claimed at other rates and produced as part of the same mailing
job:''; and by replacing ``15%'' with ``10%'' in the last sentence to
read as follows:]
When a Standard Mail (A) mailing job could, by size, qualify for
Regular Standard Mail automation rates as either letters or flats, if
part of the job is prepared as palletized flats at automation rates for
flats, the remainder may be prepared as palletized flats at Enhanced
Carrier Route rates and Regular nonletter nonautomation rates if the
number of Regular nonletter nonautomation rate pieces does not exceed
10% of the total number of pieces in the entire mailing job.
* * * * *
2.0 PREPARATION--FIRST-CLASS MAIL
* * * * *
[[Page 17203]]
2.2 Tray Preparation
[Amend 2.2 by revising 2.2b to read as follows:]
Tray size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required full trays, no overflow, except no minimum for
required origin/optional entry 3-digit(s); use L002, Column A, for Line
1.
* * * * *
3.0 PREPARATION--PERIODICALS
* * * * *
3.2 Sack Preparation
[Amend 3.2 by revising 3.2b to read as follows:]
Sack size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required at 24 pieces, optional with one six-piece
minimum, except no minimum for required origin/optional entry 3-
digit(s); use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
4.0 PREPARATION--STANDARD MAIL
* * * * *
4.3 Sack Preparation
[Amend 4.3 by revising 4.3b to read as follows:]
Sack size, preparation sequence, and labeling:
* * * * *
b. 3-digit: required (125-piece/15-pound minimum, smaller volume
not permitted, except no minimum for required origin/optional entry 3-
digit(s)); use L002, Column A, for Line 1.
* * * * *
5.0 DOCUMENTATION
[Revise 5.0 to read as follows:]
A complete, signed postage statement, using the correct USPS form
or an approved facsimile, must accompany each mailing, supported by
documentation produced by PAVE-certified (or, except for Periodicals,
MAC-certified) software or standardized documentation under P012.
Documentation of postage is not required if the correct rate is affixed
to each piece or if each piece is of identical weight and the pieces
are separated by rate when presented for acceptance. Combined mailings
of Periodicals publications must also be documented under M210.
Periodicals are not subject to the standard for supporting
documentation produced by PAVE-certified software or standardized
documentation under P012 until January 1, 1997.
* * * * *
P POSTAGE AND PAYMENT METHODS
P000 Basic Information
P010 General Standards
* * * * *
P012 Documentation
* * * * *
2.0 STANDARDIZED DOCUMENTATION--FIRST-CLASS MAIL, REGULAR PERIODICALS,
AND REGULAR STANDARD MAIL
* * * * *
2.3 Rate Level Column Headings
[Amend 2.3 by revising 2.3 to read as follows:]
The actual name of the rate level (or corresponding abbreviation)
is used for column headings required by 2.2 and shown below:
* * * * *
c. Enhance Carrier Route Standard Mail
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate Abbreviation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturation............................... WS
High Density............................. HD
Basic.................................... CR
Basic Automation [letters]............... CB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.4 Tray, Sack, Pallet, Package Sortation Level
[Revise 2.4 to read as follows:]
The actual sortation level (or corresponding abbreviation) is used
for the tray, sack, pallet, or package sortation levels required by 2.2
and shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sortation level Abbreviation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrier Route............................ CRD
5-Digit Carrier Routes................... CR5
5-Digit.................................. 5DG
3-Digit.................................. 3DG
3-Digit Scheme [barcoded letters]........ 3DGS
ADC...................................... n/a
AADC..................................... n/a
Mixed ADC................................ MADC
Mixed AADC............................... MAAD
SCF [pallets]............................ n/a
BMC or ASF............................... n/a
Mixed BMC (working)...................... MBMC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
P023 Precanceled Stamps
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
* * * * *
1.5 Amount of Postage
[Revise 1.5 to read as follows:]
The value of precanceled stamps affixed to each piece in a mailing
must be either the exact amount due or another amount permitted by
standard. If the exact amount is not affixed to each piece,
documentation meeting the basic standards in P012 and those applicable
to the rate claimed must be submitted with the mailing unless excepted
by P100 or P600. Refunds for overpayment must meet the standards in
P014.
* * * * *
P030 Postage Meters and Meter Stamps
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
* * * * *
1.7 Amount of Postage
[Revise 1.7 to read as follows:]
The value of meter stamps affixed to each piece in a mailing must
be either the exact amount due or another amount permitted by standard.
If the exact amount is not affixed to each piece, documentation meeting
the basic standards in P012 and those applicable to the rate claimed
must be submitted with the mailing unless excepted by P100 and P600.
Refunds for overpayment must meet the standards in P014.
* * * * *
P100 First-Class Mail
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
* * * * *
1.2 Postage Payment, Documentation
[Revise 1.2 to read as follows:]
A complete, signed postage statement, using the correct USPS form
or an approved facsimile, must accompany each mailing paid by permit
imprint or claimed at other than the single-piece First-Class or
Priority Mail rate. The postage statement must be supported by
documentation as required by P012 and the rate claimed unless the
correct rate is affixed to each piece or if each piece is of identical
weight and the pieces are separated by rate when presented for
acceptance.
2.0 SINGLE-PIECE RATES
* * * * *
2.5 Pieces Presented With Automation or Presort Rate Mailings
[Revise 2.5 to read as follows:]
Regardless of the method of postage payment, pieces of single-piece
rate First-Class Mail may be presented with and reported on the same
postage statement as pieces claimed at automation or presort rates if
the single-piece rate pieces are physically separated from the
automation or
[[Page 17204]]
presort rate pieces; bear no rate marking, are marked only ``First-
Class,'' or (if not affixed with full single-piece rate postage) are
marked ``Single-Piece'' or ``SNGLP'' under M012 in addition to any
other marking; and either have additional postage affixed to yield the
correct amount on each piece or (if prepared with a corrective rate
marking) all additional postage is paid at the time of mailing.
* * * * *
4.0 PRESORTED RATES
* * * * *
4.2 Postage Affixed, Generally
[Amend 4.2 by revising 4.2b and 4.2c to read as follows:]
Unless permitted by other standards or RCSC authorization, when
precanceled postage or meter stamps are used, all pieces in a single
mailing must bear postage under one of these conditions:
* * * * *
b. A precanceled stamp or the full correct postage at the lowest
First-Class first ounce rate applicable to the mailing job, and full
postage on metered pieces for any additional ounces(s) (or nonstandard
surcharge, if applicable); postage documentation may be required by
standard.
c. Postage in an amount not less than the lowest available First-
Class first ounce letter or card rate (as applicable) in the mailing
job if authorized by the RCSC, plus full postage on metered pieces for
any extra ounce(s); postage documentation may be required by standard.
* * * * *
5.0 AUTOMATION RATES
* * * * *
5.2 Postage Affixed, Generally
[Amend 5.2 by revising 5.2a and 5.2c to read as follows:]
Unless permitted by other standards or RCSC authorization, when
precanceled postage or meter stamps are used, only one payment method
may be used in a mailing and each piece must bear postage under one of
these conditions:
a. Each metered piece weighing more than 1 ounce must bear the
correct additional postage to pay for the additional ounce(s).
* * * * *
c. Each piece must bear a precanceled stamp or meter postage in the
exact amount or at the lowest rate applicable to pieces in the mailing
job. If exact postage is not affixed, all additional postage must be
paid at the time of mailing with an advance deposit account or with a
meter strip affixed to the required postage statement.
* * * * *
P600 Standard Mail
1.0 BASIC INFORMATION
* * * * *
1.2 Postage Payment, Documentation
[Revise 1.2 to read as follows:]
A complete, signed postage statement, using the correct USPS form
or an approved facsimile, must accompany each Standard Mail mailing
paid by permit imprint or claimed at any bulk rate. The postage
statement must be supported by documentation as required by P012 and
the rate claimed unless the correct rate is affixed to each piece or if
each piece is of identical weight and the pieces are separated by rate
when presented for acceptance.
1.3 Pieces Presented With Automation or Presort Rate Mailings
[Revise 1.3 to read as follows:]
Regardless of the method of postage payment, pieces of single-piece
rate Standard Mail (A) may be presented with and reported on the same
postage statement as pieces claimed at automation or presort rates if
the single-piece rate pieces are physically separated from the
automation or presort rate pieces; either are marked ``Standard'' or
``STD'' or (if not affixed with full single-piece rate postage) are
marked ``Single-Piece'' or ``SNGLP'' under M012 in addition to any
other marking; and either have additional postage affixed to yield the
correct amount on each piece or (if prepared with a corrective rate
marking) all additional postage is paid at the time of mailing.
* * * * *
3.0 AUTOMATION RATES
* * * * *
3.2 Meter or Precanceled Stamps
[Amend 3.2 by revising 3.2a to read as follows:]
In a metered or precanceled stamp mailing:
a. Each piece must bear a precanceled stamp or meter postage in the
exact postage or at the lowest rate applicable to pieces in the mailing
job. If exact postage is not affixed, all additional postage must be
paid at the time of mailing with an advance deposit account or with a
meter strip affixed to the required postage statement.
* * * * *
R RATES AND FEES
* * * * *
R600 Standard Mail
* * * * *
8.0 Special Standard Mail
[Amend 8.0 by replacing ``Level A Presort'' with ``5-Digit'' and
``Level B Presort'' with ``BMC.'']
* * * * *
An appropriate amendment to 39 CFR 111.3 will be published to
reflect these changes.
Stanley F. Mires,
Chief Counsel, Legislative.
[FR Doc. 96-9595 Filed 4-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P