Authority To Manufacture and Distribute Postage Evidencing Systems, 74753-74755 [2011-30876]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
information on a disk or CD–ROM, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM, and
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is
aware of proprietary information filed
with a comment, the agency does not
place it in the docket. Any such
proprietary information is held in a
separate file to which the public does
not have access, and the FAA places a
note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to
examine or copy this information, it
treats it as any other request under the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.
552). The FAA processes such a request
under Department of Transportation
procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking
documents may be obtained from the
Internet by—
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9680. Commenters
must identify the docket or notice
number of this rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in
developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and
technical reports, may be accessed from
the Internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced in item
(1) above.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 35
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
Safety, Safety.
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend chapter I of Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 35—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: PROPELLERS
1. The authority citation for part 35
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–
44702, 44704.
2. Amend § 35.15 by revising
paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
17:23 Nov 30, 2011
Safety Analysis.
*
*
*
*
(c) The primary failures of certain
single propeller elements (for example,
blades) cannot be sensibly estimated in
numerical terms. If the failure of such
elements is likely to result in hazardous
propeller effects, those elements must
be identified as propeller critical parts.
(d) For propeller critical parts,
applicants must meet the prescribed
integrity specifications of § 35.16. These
instances must be stated in the safety
analysis.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Add § 35.16 to subpart B to read as
follows:
§ 35.16
Jkt 226001
Mail or deliver written
comments to the Manager, Payment
Technology, U.S. Postal Service, 475
L’Enfant Plaza SW., Room 3660,
Washington, DC 20260–4110. Copies of
all written comments will be available
for inspection and photocopying
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, at the Payment
Technology office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marlo Kay Ivey, Business Programs
Specialist, Payment Technology, U.S.
Postal Service, at (202) 268–7613.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The office
formerly known as Postage Technology
Management (PTM) is now known as
Payment Technology. Accordingly, the
Postal Service finds it is necessary to
modify the numerous references to PTM
in 39 CFR 501.14 to reflect the new
name. In addition, the Postal Service
believes it is appropriate to take this
opportunity to make a number of minor
editorial changes throughout § 501.14 to
improve its clarity. None of these
changes is intended to modify the
substantive requirements of the section.
ADDRESSES:
*
Propeller Critical Parts.
The integrity of each propeller critical
part identified by the safety analysis
required by § 35.15 must be established
by:
(a) A defined engineering process for
ensuring the integrity of the propeller
critical part throughout its service life,
(b) A defined manufacturing process
that identifies the requirements to
consistently produce the propeller
critical part as required by the
engineering process, and
(c) A defined service management
process that identifies the continued
airworthiness requirements of the
propeller critical part as required by the
engineering process.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 31,
2011.
Dorenda D. Baker,
Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–30952 Filed 11–30–11; 8:45 am]
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 501
Administrative practice and
procedure.
Accordingly, 39 CFR Part 501 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 501—AUTHORIZATION TO
MANUFACTURE AND DISTRIBUTE
POSTAGE EVIDENCING SYSTEMS
1. The authority citation for 39 CFR
Part 501 continues to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101,
401, 403, 404, 410, 2601, 2605, Inspector
General Act of 1978, as amended (Pub. L. 95–
452, as amended); 5 U.S.C. App. 3.
POSTAL SERVICE
2. Section 501.14 is revised to read as
follows:
39 CFR Part 501
Authority To Manufacture and
Distribute Postage Evidencing
Systems
Postal ServiceTM.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Proposed Amendment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
§ 35.15
74753
ACTION:
The Postal Service is
proposing an editorial revision of the
rules governing the inventory control
processes of Postage Evidencing
Systems (PES) provided to customers by
manufacturers or distributors. The
proposed changes are intended to clarify
the rules, and reflect a change in the
name of the office responsible for
enforcing them.
DATES: Comments on the proposed
procedures must be received on or
before January 3, 2012.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 501.14 Postage Evidencing System
inventory control processes.
(a) Each authorized provider of
Postage Evidencing Systems must
permanently hold title to all Postage
Evidencing Systems that it
manufactures or distributes, except
those purchased by the Postal Service or
distributed outside the United States.
(b) An authorized provider must
maintain sufficient facilities for and
records of the business relationship,
distribution, control, storage,
maintenance, repair, replacement, and
destruction or disposal of all Postage
Evidencing Systems and their
components to enable accurate
accounting and location thereof
throughout the entire life cycle of each
Postage Evidencing System. A complete
record shall entail a list by serial
E:\FR\FM\01DEP1.SGM
01DEP1
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
74754
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
number of all Postage Evidencing
Systems manufactured or distributed
showing all movements of each system
from the time that it is produced until
it is scrapped, and the reading of the
ascending register each time the system
is checked into or out of service. These
records must be available for inspection
by Postal Service officials at any time
during business hours.
(c) To ensure adequate control over
Postage Evidencing Systems, plans for
the following processes must be
submitted for prior approval, in writing,
to the office of Payment Technology.
(1) Check in to service procedures for
all Postage Evidencing Systems—the
procedures are to address the process to
be used for new Postage Evidencing
Systems as well as those previously
leased to another customer.
(2) Transportation and storage of
Postage Evidencing Systems—these are
procedures that provide reasonable
precautions to prevent use by
unauthorized individuals. Providers
must ship all postage meters by Postal
Service Registered Mail® service unless
given written permission by the Postal
Service to use another carrier. The
provider must demonstrate that the
alternative delivery carrier employs
security procedures equivalent to those
for Registered Mail service.
(3) Postage Evidencing System
examination/inspection procedures and
schedule—the provider is required to
perform postage meter examinations or
inspections based on an approved
schedule. Failure to complete the
postage meter examination or
inspections by the due date may result
in the Postal Service requiring the
provider to disable the meter’s resetting
capability. If necessary, the Postal
Service shall notify the customer that
the postage meter is to be removed from
service and the authorization to use a
Postage Evidencing System revoked,
following the procedures for revocation
specified by regulation. The Postal
Service shall notify the provider to
remove the postage meter from the
customer’s location.
(4) Check out-of-service procedures
for a non-faulty Postage Evidencing
System—these must be used when the
system is to be removed from service for
any reason.
(5) Postage Evidencing System repair
process—any physical or electronic
access to the internal components of a
postage meter, as well as any access to
software or security parameters, must be
conducted within an approved facility
under the provider’s direct control and
active supervision. To prevent
unauthorized use, the provider or any
third party acting on its behalf must
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:23 Nov 30, 2011
Jkt 226001
keep secure any equipment or other
component that can be used to open or
access the internal, electronic, or secure
components of a postage meter.
(6) Handling procedures for faulty
meters—the provider must maintain
handling procedures for faulty meters,
including those that are inoperable, misregistering, have unreadable registers,
inaccurately reflect their current status,
show any evidence of possible
tampering or abuse, and those for which
there is any indication that the postage
meter has some mechanical or electrical
malfunction of any critical security
component, such as any component the
improper operation of which could
adversely affect Postal Service revenues,
or of any memory component, or that
affects the accuracy of the registers or
the accuracy of the value printed.
(7) Lost or stolen postage meter
procedures—the provider must
promptly report to the Postal Service the
loss or theft of any postage meter or the
recovery of any lost or stolen postage
meter. Such notification to the Postal
Service will be made by completing and
filing a standardized lost and stolen
meter incident report within ten (10)
calendar days of the provider’s
determination of a meter loss, theft, or
recovery.
(8) Postage meter destruction—when
required, the postage meter must be
rendered completely inoperable by the
destruction process and associated
postage; printing dies and components
must be destroyed. Manufacturers or
distributors of meters must submit the
proposed destruction method; a
schedule listing the postage meters to be
destroyed, by serial number and model;
and the proposed time and place of
destruction to Payment Technology for
approval prior to any meter destruction.
Providers must record and retain the
serial numbers of the meters to be
destroyed and provide a list of such
serial numbers in electronic form in
accordance with Postal Service
requirements for meter accounting and
tracking systems. Providers must give
sufficient advance notice of the
destruction to allow Payment
Technology to schedule observation by
its designated representative who shall
verify that the destruction is performed
in accordance with a Postal Service—
approved method or process. To the
extent that the Postal Service elects not
to observe a particular destruction, the
provider must submit a certification of
destruction, including the serial
number(s) to the Postal Service within
5 calendar days of destruction. These
requirements for meter destruction
apply to all postage meters, Postage
Evidencing Systems, and postal security
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
devices included as a component of a
Postage Evidencing System.
(d) If the provider uses a third party
to perform functions that may have an
impact upon a Postage Evidencing
System (especially its security),
including, but not limited to, business
relationships, repair, maintenance, and
disposal of Postage Evidencing Systems,
Payment Technology must be advised in
advance of all aspects of the
relationship, as they relate to the
custody and control of Postage
Evidencing Systems and must
specifically authorize in writing the
proposed arrangement between the
parties.
(1) Postal Service authorization of a
third-party relationship to perform
specific functions applies only to the
functions stated in the written
authorization but may be amended to
embrace additional functions.
(2) No third-party relationship shall
compromise the Postage Evidencing
System, or its components, including,
but not limited to, the hardware,
software, communications, and security
components, or of any security-related
system with which it interfaces,
including, but not limited to, the
resetting system, reporting systems, and
Postal Service support systems. The
functions of the third party with respect
to a Postage Evidencing System, its
components, and the systems with
which it interfaces are subject to the
same scrutiny as the equivalent
functions of the provider.
(3) Any authorized third party must
keep adequate facilities for and records
of Postage Evidencing Systems and their
components in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section. All such
facilities and records are subject to
inspection by Postal Service
representatives, insofar as they are used
to distribute, control, store, maintain,
repair, replace, destroy, or dispose of
Postage Evidencing Systems.
(4) The provider must ensure that any
party acting on its behalf in any of the
functions described in paragraph (b) of
this section maintains adequate
facilities, records, and procedures for
the security of the Postage Evidencing
Systems. Deficiencies in the operations
of a third party relating to the custody
and control of Postage Evidencing
Systems, unless corrected in a timely
manner, can place at risk a provider’s
approval to manufacture and/or
distribute Postage Evidencing Systems.
(5) The Postal Service reserves the
right to review all aspects of any
relationship if it appears that the
relationship poses a threat to Postage
Evidencing System security and may
require the provider to take appropriate
E:\FR\FM\01DEP1.SGM
01DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
corrective action. By entering into any
relationship under this section, the
provider is not relieved of any
responsibility to the Postal Service, and
such must be stated in any
memorialization of the relationship.
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2011–30876 Filed 11–30–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[Regional Docket Nos. V–2010–1, FRL–
9498–6]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit
Program; Petition for Objection to
State Operating Permit for Carmeuse
Stone and Lime
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Denial of petition.
AGENCY:
This document announces
that the EPA Administrator has denied
a petition from the Sierra Club asking
EPA to object to a Title V operating
permit for Carmeuse Stone and Lime
(Carmeuse) issued by the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR).
Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the
Act provide that a petitioner may ask for
judicial review of those portions of the
petition which EPA denies in the
United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit. Any petition for
review shall be filed within 60 days
from the date this notice appears in the
Federal Register, pursuant to section
307 of the Act.
ADDRESSES: You may review copies of
the final Order, the petition, and other
supporting information at the EPA
Region 5 Office, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. If
you wish to examine these documents,
you should make an appointment at
least 24 hours before visiting day.
Additionally, the final Order for the
Carmeuse petition is available
electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/
region7/air/title5/petitiondb/
petitiondb.htm.
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Genevieve Damico, Chief, Air Permits
Section, Air Programs Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, EPA, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604, telephone (312) 353–
4761.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:23 Nov 30, 2011
Jkt 226001
The Act
affords EPA a 45-day period to review,
and object, as appropriate, to Title V
operating permits proposed by state
permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2)
of the Act authorizes any person to
petition the EPA Administrator within
60 days after the expiration of the EPA
review period to object to a Title V
operating permit if EPA has not done so.
A petition must be based only on
objections to the permit that were raised
with reasonable specificity during the
public comment period provided by the
state, unless the petitioner demonstrates
that it was impracticable to raise issues
during the comment period, or the
grounds for the issues arose after this
period.
On December 15, 2009, EPA received
a petition from the Sierra Club
requesting that EPA object to the Title
V operating permit for Carmeuse. The
Petitioner alleged that the permit is not
in compliance with the requirements of
the Act. Specifically, the Petitioner
alleged that: (1) A Prevention of
Significant Deterioration permit issued
by EPA in 1979 did not allow Carmeuse
to burn petroleum coke as a fuel and the
permit never was modified to allow for
it; (2) WDNR was not authorized to
revise EPA’s 1979 permit; and (3) a
construction permit issued by WDNR in
1995 was flawed because WDNR did not
use the correct permit process, and did
not do the netting analysis or the
modeling and increment analyses
correctly.
On November 4, 2011, the
Administrator issued an Order denying
the Sierra Club’s petition. The Order
explains the reasons behind EPA’s
conclusion.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 16, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011–30843 Filed 11–30–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
48 CFR Part 422
RIN 0599–AA19
Office of Procurement and Property
Management; Agriculture Acquisition
Regulation, Labor Law Violations
Office of Procurement and
Property Management, Department of
Agriculture.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Office of Procurement
and Property Management (OPPM) of
the Department of Agriculture (USDA)
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74755
proposes to amend the Agriculture
Acquisition Regulation (the ‘‘AGAR’’) to
add a new clause at subpart 422.70
entitled ‘‘Labor Law Violations.’’ In the
final rule section of the Federal
Register, the Agency is publishing this
action as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because OPPM views this
as a non-controversial action and
expects no adverse comments. If no
adverse comments are received in
response to the direct final rule, no
further action will be taken on this
proposed rule, and the action will
become effective at the time specified in
the direct final rule. If the Agency
receives adverse comments, a timely
document will be published
withdrawing the direct final rule, and
all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this action.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
written comments to the Department of
Agriculture, OPPM on or before January
30, 2012 to be considered in the
formulation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified in the subject line as ‘‘48 CFR
422 Proposed Rule’’ by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: Procurement@usda.gov.
• Mail: Office of Procurement and
Property Management, Procurement
Policy Division, MAIL STOP 9306, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–9303.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Room 262,
Reporters’ Building, 300 7th Street SW.,
Washington, DC.
Instructions: All submissions must be
identified as ‘‘48 CFR 422 Proposed
Rule’’ for this proposed rulemaking.
Please include your name, company
name (if applicable), email address and/
or phone number where you can be
contacted if additional clarification is
required regarding your comment(s).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Calacone, Office of Procurement
and Property Management, at (202) 205–
4036 or by mail at OPPM, MAIL STOP
9304, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
1400 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–9303. Please cite
‘‘48 CFR 422 (Proposed Rule)’’ in all
correspondence.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
The U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) highly respects and follows the
policies and laws regarding worker
labor protections particularly as they
E:\FR\FM\01DEP1.SGM
01DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 231 (Thursday, December 1, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74753-74755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30876]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 501
Authority To Manufacture and Distribute Postage Evidencing
Systems
AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Postal Service is proposing an editorial revision of the
rules governing the inventory control processes of Postage Evidencing
Systems (PES) provided to customers by manufacturers or distributors.
The proposed changes are intended to clarify the rules, and reflect a
change in the name of the office responsible for enforcing them.
DATES: Comments on the proposed procedures must be received on or
before January 3, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver written comments to the Manager, Payment
Technology, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Room 3660,
Washington, DC 20260-4110. Copies of all written comments will be
available for inspection and photocopying between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, at the Payment Technology office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlo Kay Ivey, Business Programs
Specialist, Payment Technology, U.S. Postal Service, at (202) 268-7613.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The office formerly known as Postage
Technology Management (PTM) is now known as Payment Technology.
Accordingly, the Postal Service finds it is necessary to modify the
numerous references to PTM in 39 CFR 501.14 to reflect the new name. In
addition, the Postal Service believes it is appropriate to take this
opportunity to make a number of minor editorial changes throughout
Sec. 501.14 to improve its clarity. None of these changes is intended
to modify the substantive requirements of the section.
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 501
Administrative practice and procedure.
Accordingly, 39 CFR Part 501 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 501--AUTHORIZATION TO MANUFACTURE AND DISTRIBUTE POSTAGE
EVIDENCING SYSTEMS
1. The authority citation for 39 CFR Part 501 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 410,
2601, 2605, Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended (Pub. L. 95-
452, as amended); 5 U.S.C. App. 3.
2. Section 501.14 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 501.14 Postage Evidencing System inventory control processes.
(a) Each authorized provider of Postage Evidencing Systems must
permanently hold title to all Postage Evidencing Systems that it
manufactures or distributes, except those purchased by the Postal
Service or distributed outside the United States.
(b) An authorized provider must maintain sufficient facilities for
and records of the business relationship, distribution, control,
storage, maintenance, repair, replacement, and destruction or disposal
of all Postage Evidencing Systems and their components to enable
accurate accounting and location thereof throughout the entire life
cycle of each Postage Evidencing System. A complete record shall entail
a list by serial
[[Page 74754]]
number of all Postage Evidencing Systems manufactured or distributed
showing all movements of each system from the time that it is produced
until it is scrapped, and the reading of the ascending register each
time the system is checked into or out of service. These records must
be available for inspection by Postal Service officials at any time
during business hours.
(c) To ensure adequate control over Postage Evidencing Systems,
plans for the following processes must be submitted for prior approval,
in writing, to the office of Payment Technology.
(1) Check in to service procedures for all Postage Evidencing
Systems--the procedures are to address the process to be used for new
Postage Evidencing Systems as well as those previously leased to
another customer.
(2) Transportation and storage of Postage Evidencing Systems--these
are procedures that provide reasonable precautions to prevent use by
unauthorized individuals. Providers must ship all postage meters by
Postal Service Registered Mail[supreg] service unless given written
permission by the Postal Service to use another carrier. The provider
must demonstrate that the alternative delivery carrier employs security
procedures equivalent to those for Registered Mail service.
(3) Postage Evidencing System examination/inspection procedures and
schedule--the provider is required to perform postage meter
examinations or inspections based on an approved schedule. Failure to
complete the postage meter examination or inspections by the due date
may result in the Postal Service requiring the provider to disable the
meter's resetting capability. If necessary, the Postal Service shall
notify the customer that the postage meter is to be removed from
service and the authorization to use a Postage Evidencing System
revoked, following the procedures for revocation specified by
regulation. The Postal Service shall notify the provider to remove the
postage meter from the customer's location.
(4) Check out-of-service procedures for a non-faulty Postage
Evidencing System--these must be used when the system is to be removed
from service for any reason.
(5) Postage Evidencing System repair process--any physical or
electronic access to the internal components of a postage meter, as
well as any access to software or security parameters, must be
conducted within an approved facility under the provider's direct
control and active supervision. To prevent unauthorized use, the
provider or any third party acting on its behalf must keep secure any
equipment or other component that can be used to open or access the
internal, electronic, or secure components of a postage meter.
(6) Handling procedures for faulty meters--the provider must
maintain handling procedures for faulty meters, including those that
are inoperable, mis-registering, have unreadable registers,
inaccurately reflect their current status, show any evidence of
possible tampering or abuse, and those for which there is any
indication that the postage meter has some mechanical or electrical
malfunction of any critical security component, such as any component
the improper operation of which could adversely affect Postal Service
revenues, or of any memory component, or that affects the accuracy of
the registers or the accuracy of the value printed.
(7) Lost or stolen postage meter procedures--the provider must
promptly report to the Postal Service the loss or theft of any postage
meter or the recovery of any lost or stolen postage meter. Such
notification to the Postal Service will be made by completing and
filing a standardized lost and stolen meter incident report within ten
(10) calendar days of the provider's determination of a meter loss,
theft, or recovery.
(8) Postage meter destruction--when required, the postage meter
must be rendered completely inoperable by the destruction process and
associated postage; printing dies and components must be destroyed.
Manufacturers or distributors of meters must submit the proposed
destruction method; a schedule listing the postage meters to be
destroyed, by serial number and model; and the proposed time and place
of destruction to Payment Technology for approval prior to any meter
destruction. Providers must record and retain the serial numbers of the
meters to be destroyed and provide a list of such serial numbers in
electronic form in accordance with Postal Service requirements for
meter accounting and tracking systems. Providers must give sufficient
advance notice of the destruction to allow Payment Technology to
schedule observation by its designated representative who shall verify
that the destruction is performed in accordance with a Postal Service--
approved method or process. To the extent that the Postal Service
elects not to observe a particular destruction, the provider must
submit a certification of destruction, including the serial number(s)
to the Postal Service within 5 calendar days of destruction. These
requirements for meter destruction apply to all postage meters, Postage
Evidencing Systems, and postal security devices included as a component
of a Postage Evidencing System.
(d) If the provider uses a third party to perform functions that
may have an impact upon a Postage Evidencing System (especially its
security), including, but not limited to, business relationships,
repair, maintenance, and disposal of Postage Evidencing Systems,
Payment Technology must be advised in advance of all aspects of the
relationship, as they relate to the custody and control of Postage
Evidencing Systems and must specifically authorize in writing the
proposed arrangement between the parties.
(1) Postal Service authorization of a third-party relationship to
perform specific functions applies only to the functions stated in the
written authorization but may be amended to embrace additional
functions.
(2) No third-party relationship shall compromise the Postage
Evidencing System, or its components, including, but not limited to,
the hardware, software, communications, and security components, or of
any security-related system with which it interfaces, including, but
not limited to, the resetting system, reporting systems, and Postal
Service support systems. The functions of the third party with respect
to a Postage Evidencing System, its components, and the systems with
which it interfaces are subject to the same scrutiny as the equivalent
functions of the provider.
(3) Any authorized third party must keep adequate facilities for
and records of Postage Evidencing Systems and their components in
accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. All such facilities and
records are subject to inspection by Postal Service representatives,
insofar as they are used to distribute, control, store, maintain,
repair, replace, destroy, or dispose of Postage Evidencing Systems.
(4) The provider must ensure that any party acting on its behalf in
any of the functions described in paragraph (b) of this section
maintains adequate facilities, records, and procedures for the security
of the Postage Evidencing Systems. Deficiencies in the operations of a
third party relating to the custody and control of Postage Evidencing
Systems, unless corrected in a timely manner, can place at risk a
provider's approval to manufacture and/or distribute Postage Evidencing
Systems.
(5) The Postal Service reserves the right to review all aspects of
any relationship if it appears that the relationship poses a threat to
Postage Evidencing System security and may require the provider to take
appropriate
[[Page 74755]]
corrective action. By entering into any relationship under this
section, the provider is not relieved of any responsibility to the
Postal Service, and such must be stated in any memorialization of the
relationship.
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2011-30876 Filed 11-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
