[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34712-34715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15624]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Revision to Mailing Standards for Lithium Batteries

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is revising Publication 52, Hazardous, 
Restricted, and Perishable Mail, in various sections to provide new 
mailing standards for lithium batteries. Publication 52 was developed 
to provide expanded requirements for the mailing of hazardous, 
restricted, and perishable materials.

DATES: Anticipated date of publication in the Postal Bulletin: August 
17, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Lassiter 202-268-2914, or 
Kevin Gunther (202) 268-7208.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Overview

    Pursuant to the Mailing Standards of the United States Postal 
Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM[supreg]) 601.8.2, Publication 52 
provides mailing standards specific to hazardous, restricted and 
perishable items and materials, including lithium batteries. 
Publication 52 is provided in its entirety on the Postal 
Explorer[supreg] Web site at http://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/welcome.htm.

Background

    The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) published 
Addendum No. 3 to its Technical Instructions (TI) on January 15, 2016, 
and Addendum No. 4 on February 23, 2016 (http://www.icao.int/safety/DangerousGoods/Pages/default.aspx). In these addenda, ICAO announced 
new regulations for lithium batteries in international air 
transportation. The ICAO revisions, with an effective date of April 1, 
2016, detailed a number of new provisions including:
     The prohibition of lithium-ion (and lithium-ion polymer) 
batteries, shipped separately from the equipment they are intended to 
operate (categorized as identification number UN3480), on passenger 
aircraft.
     The restriction of UN3480 batteries and cells shipped via 
cargo aircraft to a maximum state of charge (SOC) of no more than 30 
percent.
     The limitation of section II, UN3480 batteries and cells 
to a single package, when sent as a part of a consignment or overpack 
via cargo aircraft.
     The required use of an approved Cargo Aircraft Only (CAO) 
label on all packages of UN3480 batteries and cells transported via 
cargo aircraft.
    On September 7, 2016 (81 FR 61742), the Department of 
Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration (PHMSA) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking [Docket 
Number 2015-0273 (HM-215N)] titled Hazardous Materials: Harmonization 
with International Standards (RRR) with the intention to maintain 
consistency with international regulations and standards by 
incorporating various amendments, including changes to proper shipping 
names, hazard classes, packing groups, special provisions, packaging 
authorizations, air transport quantity limitations, and vessel stowage 
requirements.
    On February 22, 2017 (82 FR 11372), the Postal Service published a 
Federal Register notice, including invitation to comment, titled 
Revision to Mailing Standards for the Transport of Lithium Batteries. 
In this notice, the Postal Service announced its intent to revise 
Publication 52 to align with the ICAO Technical Instructions for the 
Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI) with regard to the 
transportation of lithium batteries by air. Specifically, the Postal 
Service conveyed its intent to:
     Prohibit UN3480 lithium-ion and lithium polymer batteries 
in Postal Service air-eligible products.
     Revise its quantity limitations for UN3480 lithium-ion and 
lithium polymer batteries in surface transportation to align with those 
for lithium metal batteries, changing from the previous 8 cells or 2 
batteries to an aggregate mailpiece limit of 5 pounds (while retaining 
its previous battery capacity limitations of 20 Wh/cell and 100 Wh/
battery).
    The Postal Service also expresses its intent to revise Publication 
52 to align with lithium battery regulations described in PHMSA's 
proposed rule of September 7, 2016. At that time, the Postal Service 
proceeded with its Federal Register notice, expecting the publication 
of PHMSA's final rule to occur shortly thereafter with few significant 
changes to its proposed regulations for lithium batteries. With respect 
to PHMSA's expected revisions to its lithium battery regulations, the 
Postal Service announced its intent to make the following changes to 
its mailing standards:
     Eliminate the current text marking option for mailpieces 
required to bear, or optionally permitted to bear, lithium battery 
markings, and to limit markings to DOT-approved lithium battery 
handling labels only. Mailpieces restricted to surface transportation 
only, including those containing UN3090, lithium metal batteries 
shipped separately, will continue to be required to bear the current 
text marking in addition to a DOT-approved lithium battery handling 
label.
     Eliminate the requirement for accompanying documentation 
with mailings of lithium batteries.
     Add the new DOT class 9 hazard warning label for lithium 
batteries to Publication 52, Exhibit 325.1, DOT Hazardous Materials 
Warning Labels: PROHIBITED IN THE MAIL. Packages containing lithium 
batteries that are required to bear this label are prohibited in Postal 
Service networks.
     Align with PHMSA regarding the requirement for outer 
packaging used to

[[Page 34713]]

contain small lithium batteries to be rigid and of adequate size so the 
handling mark can be affixed on one side without the mark being folded.
     Provide a limited exception to permit the use of padded or 
poly bags when cells or batteries are afforded equivalent protection by 
the equipment in which they are contained, but to limit this exception 
only to batteries meeting the Postal Service definition of a button 
cell battery in section 349.11d of Publication 52.
     Take no action with regard to the requirement for lithium 
battery markings to appear on packages containing lithium cells or 
batteries, or lithium cells or batteries packed with, or contained in, 
equipment when there are more than two packages in the consignment, and 
continue to define a consignment in postal terms as a single parcel.
    On March 30, 2017 (82 FR 15796), PHMSA published a final rule 
titled Hazardous Materials: Harmonization with International Standards 
(RRR), following on its proposed rule of September 7, 2016. It was 
noted that few significant changes were made to the proposals relating 
to lithium batteries, from those published on September 7, 2016.

Comments and Postal Service Responses

    The Postal Service received four responses to its notice of 
February 22, 2017, with all commenters addressing multiple issues. 
Commenters included two pilot associations, one hazardous materials 
transportation trade association, and the Congressional Delegation from 
the state of Alaska.
    The pilot associations generally supported the Postal Service-
proposed restrictions, and requested the Postal Service to implement 
additional controls on lithium batteries not contemplated in its 
proposed rulemaking. The trade association voiced concern with the 
Postal Service's intent to take no action towards alignment with 
PHMSA's revised definition and restrictions relating to consignments of 
more than a single package containing lithium batteries, and with the 
Postal Service-proposed implementation date. The Alaska Congressional 
Delegation expressed concern with regard to the impact of the proposed 
restrictions on those living in remote areas not serviced by cargo 
aircraft or ground transportation. The specific comments and Postal 
Service responses are as follows:

Commenter 1

    One pilot association related its support for the proposed 
revisions as written and suggests the following additional steps be 
taken by the Postal Service:
     The Postal Service should require compliance and 
harmonization with ICAO TI with regard to ``postal pouches and 
containers'' being required to bear markings and be accompanied by 
written notification--consistent with ICAO overpack requirements.
     The Postal Service should require compliance and 
harmonization with Universal Postal Union (UPU) Technical Standards for 
both international and domestic transportation.
     The Postal Service should require all lithium batteries to 
be shipped in non-flammable packaging.
     The Postal Service should permit airlines and other 
freight handlers to inspect postal packages to ensure the package can 
be safely shipped.
     This commenter states that when a carrier is concerned 
with risk mitigation, the Postal Service should not be exempt from 
regulations applying to commercial carriers. The commenter states that 
lithium battery shipments from USPS might be presented (grouped) in 
opaque containers that the carrier is prevented from opening. The 
commenter opines that such a limitation results in the carrier not 
being able to determine which shipments contain lithium batteries, 
limiting the carrier's ability to mitigate that risk. The commenter 
also notes that this limitation prevents the carrier from inspecting 
packages for potential damage to the package contents, possibly 
enhancing the carrier's risk.

Postal Service Response to Commenter 1

    The Postal Service is currently investigating options to require 
the preparation of sacks in accordance with the overpack requirements 
applicable to commercial shippers; this study is ongoing, however, and 
the Postal Service defers action on this matter at this time. The 
Postal Service intends to investigate the feasibility of modifying its 
operational processes to allow for the alignment with DOT overpack 
marking regulations, and to reexamine this issue at a later date. The 
Postal Service expects any such solution to include an enhanced process 
for the identification and segregation of mailpieces bearing lithium 
battery marks in Postal Service networks. As a result, the Postal 
Service is including an additional requirement for lithium battery 
handling marks to be placed on the address side of any and all 
mailpieces bearing these marks.
    In response to the second suggestion regarding harmonization with 
UPU Technical Standards for both international and domestic (air) 
transportation, the Postal Service does not believe that the 
implementation of such restrictions would be a reasonable action at 
this time. Were the Postal Service to adopt UPU lithium battery 
restrictions, this would result in the elimination of all lithium 
batteries packaged ``with equipment'' in domestic air transportation, 
and would reduce the number of cells installed in equipment, from the 
current eight cells to the UPU limitation of four cells. In addition, 
this would eliminate the current exception for very small batteries 
installed in or packaged with equipment. The adoption of these 
limitations would result in the Postal Service being much more 
restrictive than commercial transportation providers and could create 
an undue hardship on mailers with few or no other options.
    With regard to the suggested use of nonflammable packaging for 
lithium battery shipments, including a new requirement of this nature 
would fall outside the scope of this rulemaking. The Postal Service, 
however, is open to exploring the use of nonflammable packaging for 
lithium batteries at a future date. Factors to consider include whether 
such packaging is effective, affordable, and commercially available.
    In response to the final two suggestions regarding airlines and 
other freight handlers inspecting postal packages and risk mitigation 
when postal packages are enclosed in sacks, the Postal Service believes 
any such measure is best addressed by its suppliers in their relations 
with supply management personnel. It must be kept in mind, however, 
that most packages are currently classified as sealed against 
inspection, and as such, any effort to conduct inspections of the 
contents of packages sealed as such would need to account for all 
applicable legal limitations. Moreover, it should be stressed that the 
Postal Service, unlike most commercial carriers, limits lithium 
batteries in its networks to only those meeting the conditions of the 
exception for smaller cells and batteries under 49 CFR 173.185(c).

Commenter 2

    Another pilot association related its support for the proposed 
prohibition of UN3480 batteries in Postal Service air transportation, 
stating that the Postal Service's proposed action is consistent with 
international standards and responsive to the expanding safety hazards 
posed by lithium batteries. In support of the prohibition, the

[[Page 34714]]

commenter maintains that UN3480 batteries can still be shipped in cargo 
aircraft through commercial carriers. In addition, the commenter:
     Expresses its wish that the Postal Service eventually 
implement packaging standards capable of containing any thermal event 
within the package itself, and capable of protecting lithium batteries 
from external fire threats.
     States that the shipment of lithium-ion batteries in air 
transportation should continue with specified additional requirements 
to ensure their safe carriage, including:
     Active fire detection and suppression systems should be 
required on all commercial aircraft carrying lithium batteries.
     The elimination of packaging materials, such as 
polypropylene, that can fuel onboard fires. The Postal Service 
currently uses polypropylene mail totes (assumed to refer to flats and 
letter trays), which should not be used in air transportation.
     States that its concern with polypropylene in commercial 
air transportation is shared by the National Transportation Safety 
Board (NTSB) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); and
     States that all operators engaged in the transport of 
lithium batteries should be required to carry such batteries within an 
aircraft compartment or container with an active fire suppression 
system capable of mitigating the risk of a lithium battery thermal 
event.

Postal Service Response to

Commenter 2

    The Postal Service appreciates the commenter's support for the 
prohibition of UN3480 batteries in Postal Service air networks. With 
regard to the other issues raised by this commenter, some fall outside 
the scope of this rulemaking.
    With regard to the first suggestion, regarding the eventual 
implementation of mailing standards requiring packaging capable of 
containing a thermal event within the package itself or providing 
protection from external fire, the Postal Service repeats that it is 
open to exploring the use of nonflammable packaging for lithium 
batteries at a future date. Factors to consider include whether such 
packaging is effective, affordable, and commercially available.
    In reference to the suggestion regarding fire detection and 
suppression systems on aircraft carrying lithium batteries, this 
comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking. The Postal Service has 
no immediate plans to require its contracted air carriers to use these 
systems as a condition for carrying mail. Of course, all carriers have 
the option to install these systems on their own at any time.
    With regard to the remaining suggestions concerning the use of 
polypropylene mail handling units in air transportation, the Postal 
Service believes these recommendations to be outside the scope of its 
rulemaking, but will nonetheless weigh the merits of this option 
separately.

Commenter 3

    One commenter, a trade association, expresses its gratitude to the 
Postal Service for its continuing efforts to align Publication 52 with 
the DOT's Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR). The commenter states 
that significant differences between the HMR and mailing standards 
create confusion with shippers who use the services of commercial 
transportation providers in addition to the mail. The commenter also 
states that alignment with the HMR is especially critical in the 
current environment where the Postal Service may cover only the first 
or last mile and a commercial carrier (regulated by the HMR) completes 
the remaining component of the transportation. In addition, the 
commenter expresses concern with the Postal Service proposal to define 
a consignment as a single package, noting that there may be situations 
where multiple packages are tendered to the Postal Service or one of 
its commercial carriers, and requests that the Postal Service consider 
requiring the lithium battery mark in these situations. The commenter 
advises that some air carriers have implemented prohibitions of lithium 
batteries prepared under the exception for smaller cells or batteries, 
and states that without the requirement for the marking of batteries 
included in a single consignment, some package shippers could utilize 
this exception to tender large quantities of lithium batteries to the 
Postal Service that could ultimately be transported by commercial air 
carriers. The commenter requests that the Postal Service consider 
revising Publication 52 to require a mailer tendering two or more 
packages, containing no more than two batteries or four cells, to mark 
each of those packages with a lithium battery handling mark, or (until 
December 31, 2018) a lithium battery handling label. The commenter 
further recommends that the Postal Service adopt the same 2-year 
transitional period offered by the HMR and the international entities 
with regard to the use of lithium battery marks. The commenter 
recommends that the Postal Service permit use of the new mark 
immediately, but allow for use of existing marks and labels until 
January 1, 2019.

Postal Service Response to

Commenter 3

    With regard to defining and restricting lithium battery 
consignments, the Postal Service has reconsidered its earlier proposal 
and has decided to add language to Publication 52 to define a lithium 
battery consignment within the context of shipments transported through 
the mail, and to add new restrictions for packages prepared within a 
single consignment. The details of these new mailing standards will be 
described later in this notice.
    With regard to the transitional period for the use of marks and 
labels, the Postal Service intends to align its transitional period 
with that permitted in the HMR. As the Postal Service has done in the 
past, it will add language to Publication 52 that requires the use of a 
DOT-approved lithium battery handling mark. This will allow mailers to 
use previously approved marks and labels through the duration of the 
DOT transition period. At present, the Postal Service expects to allow 
mailers to continue to use previously approved lithium battery marks 
until December 31, 2018, the date announced by PHMSA in its final rule 
of March 30, 2017.

Commenter 4

    The Alaska Congressional Delegation requests the Postal Service to 
include a provision to authorize the continued transport of lithium 
batteries needed to support urgent patient needs on passenger aircraft 
to remote locations and ``at a state of charge greater than 30%.'' The 
Alaska Congressional Delegation also requests that consideration be 
given to the following points:
     First, the Alaska Congressional Delegation questions 
whether the Postal Service has assessed the impact of the proposed 
restriction of UN3480 batteries on rural communities not regularly 
serviced by cargo aircraft.
     Second, the Alaska Congressional Delegation asks whether 
the Postal Service will provide appropriate provisions for the shipment 
of UN3480 batteries used to power medical devices, as well as other 
lithium battery powered equipment (emergency beacons, generators and 
back-up power), to these remote locations in the ``interim final rule'' 
to avoid significant public health and safety impacts.

[[Page 34715]]

Postal Service Response to Commenter 4

    The Postal Service would be willing to entertain requests for 
exceptions from medical equipment suppliers specific to the mailing of 
UN3480 batteries in Postal Service products transported through the 
air, when these batteries are needed for the emergency support of 
critical medical devices, fall within the established capacity limits 
for lithium-ion batteries in Postal Service networks, and no other 
reasonable alternative exists. In response to any such request, 
supported by adequate justification, the Postal Service would provide 
written authorization to the medical equipment supplier to mail UN3480 
batteries via USPS air-eligible products. To minimize the risk of 
conflicting with DOT provisions, the Postal Service plans to consult 
with the DOT prior to the approval of specific authorizations relating 
to UN3480 batteries in USPS air transportation.
    With regard to other lithium battery-powered devices, such as 
emergency beacons, the Postal Service will provide an option for the 
mailing of UN3480 in air transportation. This option will be restricted 
to UN3480 batteries meeting the current USPS capacity limitation of 20 
Wh/cell and 100 Wh/battery, and the current quantity limitations of 
eight cells or two batteries. Batteries mailed under this option must 
meet the conditions described in 349.222 of Publication 52, and 49 CFR 
173.185(c), and will be restricted to intra-Alaska shipments (both 
mailed from, and delivered in Alaska).

Revisions to Publication 52

    Within the next several weeks, the Postal Service will revise 
Publication 52 to reflect the new mailing standards. With regard to 
lithium batteries, the Postal Service will:
     Generally prohibit UN3480 lithium-ion and lithium polymer 
batteries in USPS air-eligible products.
     Revise its quantity limitations for UN3480 lithium-ion and 
lithium polymer batteries in surface transportation to align with those 
for lithium metal batteries, changing from the previous eight cells or 
two batteries to an aggregate mailpiece limit of 5 pounds.
     Accept and evaluate requests for exceptions to mail UN3480 
batteries, used to support critical medical devices, via domestic air-
eligible products. The batteries must be within current Postal Service 
capacity and quantity limitations, needed for the emergency support of 
critical medical devices, and no other reasonable alternative exists to 
affect their delivery within an acceptable time period. The Postal 
Service expects to defer revision to Publication 52 relating to these 
authorizations until it has determined the level of interest, and need 
for these exceptions. Prior to granting any authorizations, the Postal 
Service plans to consult with PHMSA to assure alignment with their 
approval processes for commercial carriers. Interested mailers may 
direct requests to the Manager, Product Classification (see Publication 
52, section 214 for the complete address).
     Provide that UN3480 batteries, meeting the current Postal 
Service capacity limitations and quantity restrictions, may be mailed 
via air-eligible products, provided these mailings are both mailed and 
delivered within the state of Alaska.
     Eliminate the current text marking option for mailpieces 
required to bear, or optionally permitted to bear, lithium battery 
markings, and limit markings to DOT-approved lithium battery handling 
marks only.
     Require a separate text marking in addition to a DOT-
approved lithium battery handling mark for mailpieces containing UN3480 
and UN3090 batteries, restricted to surface transportation only.
     Permit the optional use of previously authorized lithium 
battery marks during PHMSA's transitional period for these marks.
     Eliminate the requirement for accompanying documentation 
with mailings of lithium batteries.
     Add the new DOT class 9 hazard warning label for lithium 
batteries to Publication 52, Exhibit 325.1, DOT Hazardous Materials 
Warning Labels: PROHIBITED IN THE MAIL.
     Require the outer packaging of mailpieces containing small 
lithium batteries to be rigid and of adequate size so the handling mark 
can be affixed to the address side without the mark being folded.
     Require lithium battery handling marks to be placed on the 
address side of all mailpieces bearing these marks.
     Permit the use of padded and poly bags as outer packaging 
for mailpieces containing button cell batteries properly installed in 
the equipment they are intended to operate, provided the batteries are 
afforded adequate protection by the equipment and the batteries meet 
the USPS definition of a button cell battery in 349.11d of Publication 
52.
     Define a lithium battery consignment as one or more 
mailpieces containing lithium batteries, entered into USPS networks by 
one mailer or mail service provider within a single mailing or retail 
transaction, or included in the same manifest or shipping services 
file, and intended for delivery to a single consignee at a single 
destination address.
     Require DOT-approved lithium battery markings on all 
mailpieces containing lithium cells or batteries contained in equipment 
when there are more than two mailpieces in a single consignment in 
domestic mail.
     Limit a single consignment to two mailpieces containing 
lithium batteries for international and APO/FPO/DPO mail.
    These revisions will be published in the Postal Bulletin on August 
17, 2017, but the Postal Service will provide for a transitional period 
until January 1, 2018. During the transitional period, mailers are 
urged to comply with the new mailing standards, but compliance will not 
be mandatory until January 1, 2018. Mailers and other interested 
parties can view details of these revisions in edition 22471 of the 
Postal Bulletin, to be published on August 17, 2017. The Postal 
Bulletin is available at https://about.usps.com/postal-bulletin/pb2017.htm.
    The Postal Service will incorporate these revisions into the next 
online update of the Publication 52, which is available via Postal 
Explorer[supreg] at http://pe.usps.com.

Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-15624 Filed 7-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P