New Mailing Standards for Hazardous Materials Outer Packaging and Nonregulated Toxic Materials, 8174-8179 [2025-01618]

Agencies

• Postal Service

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 16 (Monday, January 27, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8174-8179]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01618]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Parts 111 and 211


New Mailing Standards for Hazardous Materials Outer Packaging and 
Nonregulated Toxic Materials

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is amending Publication 52, Hazardous, 
Restricted, and Perishable Mail (Pub 52 or Publication 52) by adding 
new section 131 to require specific outer packaging when mailing most 
hazardous materials (HAZMAT) or dangerous goods (DG), to remove 
quantity restrictions for nonregulated toxic materials, and to remove 
the telephone number requirement from the lithium battery mark.

DATES: Effective January 27, 2025. Applicable beginning January 19, 
2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Kennedy, (202) 268-6592, or 
Jennifer Cox, (202) 268-2108.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal Service amends Publication 52, 
Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail (Pub 52 or Publication 52), 
with the provisions set forth herein. While not codified in title 39 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Publication 52 is a regulation 
of the Postal Service, and changes to it may be published in the 
Federal Register. 39 CFR 211.2(a)(2). Moreover, Publication 52 is 
incorporated by reference into Mailing Standards of the United States 
Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) section 601.8.1, which is 
incorporated by reference, in turn, into the Code of Federal 
Regulations. 39 CFR 111.1 and 111.3. Publication 52 is publicly 
available, in a read-only format, via the Postal Explorer[supreg] 
website at https://pe.usps.com. In addition, links to Postal Explorer 
are provided on the landing page of USPS.com, the Postal Service's 
primary customer-facing website, and on Postal Pro, an online 
informational source available to postal customers.

Summary of New Measures

    The Postal Service is the sole regulatory authority for the mail 
but aligns with regulations within 49 CFR in some instances. Per the 
regulations in 49 CFR 171.1(d)(7) the Postal Service is not subject to 
the regulations in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR). Due to 
the increase of eCommerce shipping over the last several years, HAZMAT/
Dangerous Goods (DG) incidents have increased significantly. Historic 
postal data from 2020 through 2022, showed a significant increase in 
HAZMAT/DG incidents, which prompted the Postal Service to implement new 
policies requiring mailers to present HAZMAT/DG separately from non-
HAZMAT/DG and to include HAZMAT Service Type Codes (STC) and Extra 
Service Codes (ESC) when packages contain HAZMAT/DG. These 
requirements, at least in part, resulted in a 20% reduction of overall 
HAZMAT/DG incidents in 2023.
    Except as otherwise specified below, the Postal Service will 
require mailers shipping HAZMAT or DG to utilize rigid outer packaging 
that meets a minimum edge crush test requirement of at least 32 or 200 
lbs. burst test strength for packages weighing 20 pounds or less and at 
least 44 edge crush test or 275 lbs. burst test strength for packages 
weighing more than 20 pounds. By implementing these requirements, the 
capability of packages to withstand normal processing and handling from 
induction to delivery point will be increased, reducing the overall 
potential for HAZMAT or DG incidents.
    Previously, the uses of padded and poly bags as outer packaging 
were permitted only when the mailpiece contained button cell batteries 
installed in the equipment/device they operate. This change will now 
allow mailers to use padded or poly bags as outer packaging for 
shipments containing lithium batteries installed in the new or 
manufacturer refurbished equipment/device they operate when placed 
within in a secondary container (i.e., the manufacturer's box) that can 
withstand a 1.2-meter drop test, and only if they do not display and 
are not required to display HAZMAT text, marks or labels as provided in 
sections 349.221a6, 622.51f, and 622.52g of Publication 52.
    The Postal Service will remove quantity restrictions for 
nonregulated liquid and solid toxic materials, for products such as 
pesticides, insecticides, and herbicides in section 346.232 of 
Publication 52, but any such items must be contained within outer 
packaging meeting the requirements of section 131 of Publication 52.
    Lastly, the Postal Service will align with Pipeline and Hazardous 
Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA) decision to remove the 
telephone number requirement from the lithium battery mark.\1\ The 
Postal Service encourages mailers to switch to a mark that does not 
include a telephone number as soon as possible and be fully compliant 
by January 1, 2027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous 
Materials Safety Administration, Hazardous Materials: Harmonization 
With International Standards, 89 FR 25434, 25490 (Apr. 10, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This new rule reduces complexity and provides consistency for all 
customers. Therefore, the Postal Service believes this rule will 
provide a continued reduction in incidents and enhance the safety of 
our employees, our networks, and our transportation partners.

Response to Comments

    In response to the proposed rule (88 FR 86868, December 15, 2023), 
the Postal Service received six formal responses to the proposed 
changes.
    The comments received are as follows:
    Comment: One commenter requested a 60-day extension to the public 
comment period.
    Response: The Postal Service was unable to grant this request.
    Comment: One commenter indicated they didn't believe outer 
packaging requirements should be based on the weight of hazardous 
materials, but instead on the total package weight and provided 
alternate language for new section 131.
    Response: The Postal Service agrees with the alternate language and 
has incorporated it within new section 131.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that the last sentence of proposed 
section 131 was very obtuse and may be misconstrued that it is 
applicable to

[[Page 8175]]

item b. The commenter suggested revisions to include a new item c. and 
updates to items a. and b. to incorporate the revision.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates the feedback and 
understands there may be room for improvement, therefore, proposed 
section 131 has been revised to clarify that the lithium battery 
related exception is not in reference to the previous item.
    Comment: Two commenters supported the update to nonregulated toxic 
materials in section 346.232 of Publication 52 but suggested removing 
the reference to 49 CFR 172.101 (the Hazardous Materials Table) in the 
proposed Publication 52 revision.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates the supportive comment and 
recommendations regarding the reference to the 49 CFR hazardous 
materials table. Section 346.232 has been revised accordingly.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the entire package should be 
reviewed for strength not just the outer layer. This commenter further 
suggested that a lower minimum crush test requirement be considered for 
pieces weighing less than three ounces.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates this feedback. To prevent 
additional complexities to the regulations, the Postal Service is 
moving forward with the originally proposed outer package strength 
requirements. Mailers who believe their packaging configuration meets 
the necessary strength requirements may request consideration for use 
of such packaging in writing to the Postal Service's Director, Product 
Classification.
    Comment: Two commenters believed that setting minimum strength 
requirements for strong outer packaging goes beyond the requirements of 
the HMR and far exceeds what is necessary. In doing so, the Postal 
Service will increase costs to its customers and will hurt 
sustainability efforts.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates the feedback regarding the 
outer packaging strength requirements. However, the Postal Service 
believes this change is necessary to establish clear parameters for all 
customers, not just those customers who are well versed and trained in 
hazardous material shipping requirements. In the past, customers have 
expressed confusion when the word, ``rigid'' was used for outer 
packaging requirements. This term is open to interpretation and, for 
instance, some customers believe that card stock or clay-coated paper 
is rigid and would be sufficient as outer packaging. By clarifying and 
specifying the requirements, all Postal Service customers will have a 
clear understanding of the requirements. Many manufacturers are already 
constructing packaging that meets or exceeds the new outer packaging 
requirements, contributing to sustainability.
    Comment: Two commenters suggested the Postal Service share 
aggregate reports of incidents, including the type of packaging 
utilized, and conduct stakeholder meetings to discuss incidents to 
inform the public of the challenges the Postal Service is facing during 
normal handling of hazardous materials.
    Response: Aggregate incident report data has been shared in the 
Summary of New Measures. However, the report does not include the type 
of packaging utilized. Currently, the Postal Service contacts customers 
regarding incidents and routinely consults with them until their 
packaging meets current requirements. The Postal Service appreciates 
the suggestion to consult with the public and will consider this in 
future endeavors.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that while they support the 
removal of quantity restrictions for nonregulated toxic materials, it 
is inappropriate to subject these products which do not meet the 
classification of hazardous materials to the same standards as those 
that do.
    Response: The Postal Service has unique challenges due to the 
nature of its business and implements rules to address such challenges. 
The purpose of requiring the same outer packaging for nonregulated 
toxic materials as for regulated hazardous materials is due to the 
significant incidents some of these products have caused during postal 
handling. However, these products are not being subjected to the same 
standards as Division 6.1 hazardous materials quantity restrictions, 
secondary packaging, leakproof or cushioning requirements that these 
products were subject to prior to this rule.
    Comment: Two commenters requested that if the Postal Service were 
to move forward with the proposed amendments, it should allow a minimum 
of one year before the changes go into effect in order to educate the 
downstream distribution channels on finalized requirements.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates this feedback. With more 
than 500,000 employees and more than 31,000 facilities nationwide, the 
Postal Service understands and shares the same challenges related to 
educational efforts. However, the Postal Service cannot delay 
implementation.
    Comment: Two commenters indicated that setting minimum burst 
strength or edge crust test requirements by weight will introduce 
complexity in the supply chain and ultimately lead to confusion and 
noncompliance.
    Response: As indicated in a previous response, the Postal Service 
believes setting these clear, simplistic parameters will reduce 
complexity and in fact provides clarity as the previous use of 
``rigid'' requirements proved to be an area of confusion that was left 
open for interpretation.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that requiring minimum burst test 
or edge crush test exceeds HMR and air requirements for limited 
quantities. Air requirements for limited quantities are more stringent 
and require limited quantities to be capable of a 1.2-meter drop test 
and 24 hours stack test. Limited quantity packages are limited to 
30kgs/66lbs. gross weight by all modes of transport. The necessity to 
require minimum burst or edge crush test requirements is not evident 
and the proposal provides no justification.
    Response: Although the Postal Service largely only accepts 
hazardous materials that are classified as limited quantities, there 
are other mailable hazardous materials that do not qualify as limited 
quantities. Allowing limited quantities to be exempt from the outer 
packaging requirement would create more complexity than the more 
simplistic approach taken as each material would have specific 
requirements.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that large manufacturers and 
distributors will be unable to comply with the requirement to have 
different burst or edge crush tests. This is because many hazardous 
materials entering postal networks are part of a multimodal 
distribution model which must be prepared in accordance with 49 CFR, 
and once introduced within the postal network must comply with Pub 52.
    Response: Large manufacturers and distributors should be well 
versed in handling complexities when they are preparing hazardous 
materials for transport as each mode of transport (e.g., air, rail, 
ground, vessel) has its own requirements. The Postal Service is self-
regulated, and our regulations must be unique since most customers are 
not hazardous materials professionals.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that UN3841, Lithium-Ion batteries 
contained in equipment being shipped to military destinations from a 
larger distribution company to a postal induction site must be marked 
when there are more than two packages in the

[[Page 8176]]

consignment for this type of movement per Department of Transportation 
(DOT) regulations, which conflicts with Pub 52. The commenter further 
requested the ability to mark these packages to military destinations 
with the lithium battery mark.
    Response: The Postal Service realizes the challenges larger 
distribution companies face regarding the mode of transportation when 
shipping lithium batteries contained in the equipment/device to 
military destinations. As indicated previously, the Postal Service is 
self-regulated. Military mail sent overseas receives the benefit of 
domestic mail pricing through associated products, however the contents 
are required to adhere to international rules. As an example, 
domestically the lithium battery mark is permitted for eligible items 
containing lithium batteries, whereas internationally the use of a 
lithium battery mark is prohibited. Therefore, these packages must not 
display the lithium battery mark, or they will be rejected.
    Comment: One commenter stated that allowing the use of padded or 
poly bags as outer packaging for lithium batteries contained in 
equipment is not viable because it would cover the necessary lithium 
battery mark in accordance with 49 CFR and would be considered an 
overpack according to 49 CFR.
    Response: The commenter may misunderstand the intent of the padded 
or poly bag outer packaging. The allowance for the padded or poly bag 
as outer packaging in the proposed rule specifically stated ``. . . the 
Postal Service proposes to allow mailers to use padded or poly bags as 
outer packaging for shipments containing lithium batteries installed in 
the equipment, they operate that are not required to display and do not 
display hazardous text, marks or labels . . . .'' The purpose of this 
allowance is specifically for international mail, including our 
deployed military personnel, as manufacturer boxes often provide a 
detailed description of the contents and that there are batteries 
within the package. The policy for mailing lithium batteries to these 
destinations states there cannot be any marks or labels indicating the 
contents are lithium batteries. Often, such manufacturer boxes are 
intercepted at our international service centers and returned to the 
mailer.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that proposing a more rigid 
standard than required by 49 CFR for road or rail transport or as 
required by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) would 
further the inconsistency between the HMR and Pub 52. They further 
indicated that training employees to comply with different requirements 
and determine the transport mode for products is unrealistic and cost 
prohibitive and would render the Postal Service impractical in the 
distribution chain.
    Response: With more than 500,000 employees and more than 31,000 
facilities nationwide, the Postal Service understands and shares the 
challenges that training employees brings to an organization. The broad 
Postal Service customer base requires the Postal Service to accommodate 
everyone regardless of their level of HAZMAT/DG understanding. The 
outer packaging change is necessary to provide clarity about HAZMAT 
packaging requirements, which ultimately increases the level of safety 
for everyone.
    Comment: One commenter stated that packaging and marking/labeling 
of products classified as hazardous materials are determined at the 
time of packaging and preparation for retail sales and at that point 
shippers do not know the destination address or movement type for these 
products. An application of multiple different packaging requirements 
is impossible and there is simply no way to comply with multiple 
standards and requirements for the same product based upon the final 
distribution method. This commenter urges the Postal Service to 
consider the impact to the industry in adopting these requirements and 
apply a more wholistic approach to further harmonize with the HMR. The 
commenter estimated annual training cost of $6,480,000 per year to 
comply with these various requirements.
    Response: As previously stated, the Postal Service understands and 
shares the same challenges related to training employees within large 
organizations. The broad Postal Service customer base requires it to 
accommodate everyone regardless of their level of HAZMAT/DG 
understanding.
    Comment: One commenter opposed allowing the use of poly or padded 
mailers as outer packaging for lithium batteries contained in equipment 
due to the challenge of training employees to differentiate between 
overpacks and covering items with poly mailers without identifying them 
as hazardous materials. Since the Postal Service doesn't recognize 
overpacks, employees trained in the HMR would have confusion with 
applying requirements for overpacks when transported under the HMR 
versus within postal networks under Pub 52.
    Response: The poly/padded mailer exception is not intended for use 
on packages that must display a lithium battery mark or label. Doing so 
would be considered purposely not declaring these items as hazardous 
material and could lead to civil penalties.
    Comment: One commenter questioned the Postal Service's decision to 
include the drop test height of 1.7 meters. Hazardous materials mailed 
under Pub 52 can only be mailed in limited quantities and the HMR does 
not require testing on packages for limited quantities, it requires 
strong outer packaging. For air transport, section 2.7.6.1 of IATA's 
Dangerous Goods Regulations requires a limited quantity packaging to be 
capable of withstanding a 1.2-meter drop test. In 49 CFR 173.185(c)(2), 
the drop test is not applicable to lithium batteries contained in 
equipment and states that they must be packaged in strong, rigid outer 
packaging ``unless the cell or battery is afforded equivalent 
protection by the equipment in which it is contained.''
    Response: The Postal Service originally included the 1.7-meter drop 
test height requirement due to the highly mechanized environment within 
the postal network. After careful consideration of the comments and 
continuing efforts to protect our air transportation networks, the 
Postal Service has decided to change the drop test requirement to 1.2-
meters.
    Comment: One commenter stated that setting minimum burst test or 
ECT requirements for outer packaging may appear to be a simple solution 
to ensure safe transport of HAZMAT but setting the minimum at 200 lb. 
burst test or 32-edge crust test for packages weighing 20 pounds or 
less and 275 lb. burst test or 44-edge crust test for packages weighing 
more than 20 pounds far exceeds what is necessary. These proposed 
minimum requirements will increase costs to Postal Service customers 
looking to transport good and impact sustainability efforts for 
companies trying to minimize the use of packaging materials.
    Response: As previously indicated, the increase in eCommerce 
shipping has led to increased HAZMAT/DG shipping, which led to 
increased HAZMAT/DG incidents in the mail. The Postal Service is not a 
manufacturer of shipping/packaging containers or in the business of 
testing them. It is our hope that our customers would appreciate our 
commitment to safety and understand our reasons for taking a more 
simplistic approach to the outer packaging requirements for HAZMAT/DG. 
Lastly, the Postal Service is committed to sustainability, the 
requirement is for the strength of the box. There are no

[[Page 8177]]

prohibitions against mailers using sustainable outer packaging if it 
meets the applicable strength requirements.
    Comment: One commenter believes the packaging proposed in this new 
section can be readily met by those who ship hazardous materials 
through the Postal Service's network, and that the required packaging 
is available from packaging suppliers and would help ensure the safety 
of these hazardous materials.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates the support and agrees the 
packaging proposed will increase the level of safety for handling and 
transporting hazardous materials packages and it is easy to obtain.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that Pub 52, section 
349.221(a)(5)(c), requires the inclusion of a telephone number and 
indicated that the United Nations Committee of Experts on the Transport 
of Dangerous Goods and on the Globally Harmonized System of 
Classification and Labeling of Chemicals adopted changes to the UN 
Model Regulations that removes the telephone number requirement as part 
of the lithium battery mark. The commenter recommended that the Postal 
Service also remove the telephone number requirement for the lithium 
battery mark from its regulations to maintain harmonization with both 
international and domestic regulations.
    Response: The Postal Service appreciates this input and is making 
the necessary changes within Pub 52 to align with this global change by 
removing the telephone number requirement from the lithium battery 
marking.

Kevin Rayburn,
Attorney, Ethics & Legal Compliance.

    The Postal Service adopts the following changes to Publication 52, 
Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail, incorporated by reference 
into Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic 
Mail Manual (DMM) section 601.8.1, which is further incorporated by 
reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. 39 CFR 111.1 and 111.3. 
Publication 52 is also a regulation of the Postal Service, changes to 
which may be published in the Federal Register. 39 CFR 211.2(a). 
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the Postal Service 
amends Publication 52 as follows:

Publication 52, Hazardous, Restricted and Perishable Mail

1 Introduction

13 Additional Information

    [Add new section 131 to read as follows:]

131 Hazardous Materials Outer Packaging

    Except as otherwise specified, rigid outer packaging must be used 
for shipments containing hazardous materials. Outer packaging, as 
defined in Appendix D, is the outer most enclosure that holds the 
primary receptacle, and if applicable, secondary container/packaging, 
absorbent and/or cushioning material.
    When shipping hazardous materials, the following outer packaging is 
required:
    (a) Mailpieces containing hazardous materials weighing 20 pounds or 
less (except for item c.), must use outer packaging rated at 200 lb. 
burst test or 32-edge crush test strength or equivalent, at minimum.
    (b) Mailpieces containing hazardous materials weighing more than 20 
pounds (except for item c.), must use outer packaging rated at 275 lb. 
burst test or 44-edge crush test strength or equivalent, at minimum.
    (c) Lithium batteries installed in the equipment/device they 
operate that are permitted to be mailed under sections 349 and 622 may 
utilize padded or poly bags as outer packaging, provided they are 
within a secondary container (i.e., original manufacturer's box) that 
can withstand a 1.2-meter drop test before being placed inside the 
padded or poly bag. These items must meet the following requirements:
    1. The equipment/device must be new, or manufacturer refurbished.
    2. The lithium batteries are afforded adequate protection by the 
equipment/device.
    3. The outer packaging does not display, and is not required to 
display hazardous text, markings or labels as permitted in 349.221a6, 
622.51f and 622.52g.

    Note: USPS-Produced packaging must not be utilized for shipping 
mailable hazardous materials. See DMM 601.6.1.

* * * * *

3 Hazardous Materials

* * * * *

32 General

* * * * *

325.3 Mailable Warning Labels

    [Replace lithium battery mark with the following image in Exhibit 
325.3a]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27JA25.005

* * * * *

34 Mailability by Hazard Class

* * * * *

346 Toxic Substances and Infectious Substances (Hazard Class 6)

* * * * *

346.232 Other Nonregulated Toxic Materials

    [Revise paragraph to read as follows:]
    Liquids and solids such as pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, 
and irritating material (346.11e), that do not meet the classification 
criteria of a hazardous material under 49 CFR 172.101 with an oral 
LD50 value greater than 300 mg/kg are mailable but must be 
packaged in rigid outer packaging (see 131) and be able to withstand 
normal transit and handling. Liquids must also follow the conditions 
provided in 451.3a.
* * * * *

[[Page 8178]]

349 Miscellaneous Hazardous Materials (Hazard Class 9)

* * * * *
    [Insert new 349.221 to read as follows:]

349.221 Lithium Batteries

    a. General. The following applies to the mailability of all lithium 
batteries:
    1. Each cell or battery must meet the requirements of each test in 
the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, part III, and subsection 38.3 as 
referenced in 49 CFR 171.7.
    2. Lithium battery outer packaging must be rigid (see 131), sealed 
and of adequate size.
    3. The use of padded or poly bags as outer packaging is permitted 
only when:
    a. Mailpieces contain lithium batteries properly installed in the 
equipment/device they intend to operate.
    b. The equipment/device must be new or manufacturer refurbished.
    c. The batteries are afforded adequate protection by the equipment/
device, and
    d. The secondary container (e.g., original manufacturer box), 
containing the equipment or device prevents damage and accidental 
activation, can retain the device without puncture of the packaging 
under normal conditions of transport and can withstand a 1.2-meter drop 
test. Button cell batteries, meeting the classification criteria in 
349.11d, installed in the device they operate are not required to be 
within a secondary container that can withstand a 1.2-meter drop test 
prior to utilizing a padded or poly bag as outer packaging.
    e. The outer package containing batteries does not display, and is 
not required to display hazardous materials text, marks, or labels.
    4. All outer packages must have a complete delivery and return 
address.
    5. Lithium battery marks are required on mailpieces containing 5 to 
8 lithium cells installed in the equipment/device they operate.
    a. The marks must be applied to the address side without being 
folded or applied in such a manner that parts of the mark appear on 
different sides of the mailpiece. See 325.1.
    b. The mark must be a DOT-approved lithium battery mark, as 
specified in 49 CFR 173.183(c)(3)(i) and Exhibit 325.2a.
    c. Lithium metal cells or batteries must be marked with UN3090.
    d. Lithium metal cells or batteries installed in or packed with the 
equipment/device they intend to operate must indicate UN3091.
    e. Lithium-ion cells or batteries must be marked UN3480.
    f. Lithium-ion cells or batteries installed in or packed with the 
equipment/device they intend to operate must indicate UN3481.
    6. Lithium battery marks are not required on packages:
    a. Containing only lithium button cell batteries installed in the 
equipment/device they operate; or
    b. Containing no more than 4 lithium cells or 2 lithium batteries 
installed in the equipment/device they operate.
    7. All used, damaged, or defective electronic devices with lithium 
cells or batteries contained in or packed with device (excluding 
electronic devices that are new in original packaging, and 
manufacturer-certified new or refurbished devices) must be marked with 
the text ``Restricted Electronic Device'' and ``Surface Transportation 
Only'' on the address side of the mailpiece.
* * * * *
    [Renumber existing section 349.221 to 349.222]

349.222 Lithium Metal (Nonrechargeable) Cells and Batteries--Domestic

    [Revise item a. as follows:]
    a. General. The following restrictions apply to the mailability of 
all lithium metal (or lithium alloy) cells and batteries:
    1. Each cell must contain no more than 1.0 gram (g) of lithium 
content per cell.
    2. Each battery must contain no more than 2.0 g aggregate lithium 
content per battery.
* * * * *
    [Renumber existing section 349.222 to 349.223]

349.223 Lithium-Ion (Rechargeable) Cells and Batteries--Domestic

    [Revise item a. as follows:]
    a. General. The following additional restrictions apply to the 
mailability of all secondary lithium-ion or lithium polymer cells and 
batteries:
    1. The watt-hour rating must not exceed 20 Wh per cell.
    2. The watt-hour rating must not exceed 100 Wh per battery.
    3. Each battery must bear the ``Watt-hour'' or ``Wh'' marking on 
the battery to determine if it is within the limits defined in items 1 
and 2.
* * * * *

62 Hazardous Materials: International Mail

621 General Requirements

* * * * *
    [Insert new section 621.2 and renumber existing 621.2 through 621.4 
as 621.3 through 621.5]

621.2 Outer Packaging Requirements

    Except as otherwise specified, rigid outer packaging must be used 
for shipments containing dangerous goods following the instructions in 
131.
* * * * *

Appendix C

USPS Packaging Instruction 9D

    [Revise third bullet in the Required Packaging section to read as 
follows:]

Required Packaging

Lithium Metal and Lithium-Ion Batteries

    [ssquf] Lithium batteries permitted to be mailed under section 349, 
that are installed in the device they operate, are afforded adequate 
protection by that equipment/device, and do not display hazardous text, 
markings or labels as permitted in 349.221a6, 622.51f and 622.52g may 
utilize padded and poly bags as outer packaging provided the device is 
within a secondary container (i.e., original manufacturer's box) that 
can withstand a 1.2-meter drop test. Button cell batteries, meeting the 
classification criteria in 349.11d, installed in the device they 
operate are not required to be within a secondary container that can 
withstand a 1.2-meter drop test prior to utilizing a padded or poly bag 
as outer packaging.
* * * * *

Markings

    [Delete item 4., renumber existing number 5 to number 4 in 
section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium metal batteries properly installed in the equipment 
they are intended to operate: * * *
    [Delete item 3. And renumber item 4. To 3. In section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium metal batteries packed with the equipment/device 
they are intended to operate: * * *
    [Delete item 3. And renumber item 4. To 3. In section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium metal batteries not packed with or installed in 
equipment/device (individual batteries: * * *
    [Delete item 3. And renumber item 4. To 3. In section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium-ion batteries properly installed in the equipment/
device they are intended to operate: * * *
    [Delete item 4. And renumber item 5. To 4. In section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium-ion batteries packed with the equipment/device they 
are intended to operate: * * *
    [Delete item 3. And renumber item 4. To 3. In section:]
    [ssquf] Lithium-ion batteries not packed with or installed in 
equipment/device (individual batteries: * * *
* * * * *

[[Page 8179]]

USPS Packaging Instruction 9E

    [Insert new second bullet in the Required Packaging section to read 
as follows:]

Required Packaging

Lithium Metal and Lithium-Ion Batteries

    [ssquf] Lithium batteries installed in the device they operate, 
that are permitted to be mailed under section 622.5, may utilize padded 
and poly bags as outer packaging provided the device is within a 
secondary container (i.e., original manufacturer's box) that can 
withstand a 1.2-meter drop test. Button cell batteries, meeting the 
classification criteria in 349.11d, installed in the device they 
operate are not required to be within a secondary container that can 
withstand a 1.2-meter drop test prior to utilizing a padded or poly bag 
as outer packaging.
* * * * *

Appendix D

Hazardous Materials Definitions

* * * * *
    [Revise definition of Rigid to read as follows:]
    Rigid means unable to bend or be forced out of shape; not flexible. 
Rigid outer packaging is generally interpreted to mean a fiberboard 
(cardboard) box or outer packaging of equivalent strength, durability, 
and rigidity. See 131.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-01618 Filed 1-24-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P