Is Post Office rethinking new regs?

Baffled by public outcry regarding regulations which require users of
commercial mail receiving agencies to include a new private mail box
number in their address, the Postal Service has provided an additional
six months for those affected by the regulations to adjust.

WorldNetDaily first reported in May
that the Postal Service had passed new regulations requiring private
mail box owners to fill out Form 1583, which required two forms of
identification. By having both the personal information of the PMB user
on Form 1583 and a new PMB number in the user’s address, the Postal
Service was hoping to deter mail theft and fraud.

Opposition to the regulation grew quickly, however, as concerned
citizens let the Postal Service know the new law would not only infringe
on individual privacy rights but cost small businesses a significant
amount of money as well.

An Internet campaign was quickly launched

in an attempt to stop the Postal Service’s regulations. Leading the
campaign effort is Rick Merritt, a businessman and user of PMBs, who has
started a website known as Postal Watch.

To hopefully appease critics of the new regulation, the Postal
Service has agreed to provide an additional six months, until April 26,
2000, for CMRA customers to include PMB numbers in their mailing
address. The Postal
Service has also “very quietly and unofficially” extended the due date
for
Form 1583 for an additional 60 days until Aug. 26, according to Merritt.

Merritt said although this may be a good gesture on the part of the
Postal
Service, it won’t help much because the costs involved for small
businesses to change mailing address information won’t go away. It only
postpones the inevitable and perhaps gives businesses a bit more time to
update mailing lists.

But the Postal Service has done more than just delay the deadline of
the change of address for PMB users. The Postal Service, as was first
reported by WorldNetDaily, opened up a comment period for a proposed
rule that would change existing federal regulations making it legal to
release the information on Form 1583 to anyone requesting the
information.

With this comment period closing today, the Postal Service may open
yet another comment period asking the public to offer some input
regarding the possibility of not allowing full disclosure of the
information on Form 1583 to those asking for it.

“A notice for public comment will be published in the Federal
Register regarding the proposed updated policy which will prohibit
release, except for law enforcement purposes, of address information of
individuals who use private mail boxes for business purposes (pending
final approval),” said a news release from the Postal Service.

Confusing? Merritt believes it is, and he thinks the confusion may
be intentional.

“Either they’re going way out of their way to make this as confusing
as possible to try to baffle everybody, or they really don’t have their
act together,” said Merritt. “The question begs itself: Why didn’t they
specifically rescind the proposal to make it legal to release the
information?”

Confusing or not, the Postal Service stands by its actions.

“Businesses who use CMRAs (commercial mail receiving agencies) asked
for more time to implement the changes and they wanted additional
safeguards on the privacy of personal information tied to their
businesses. The Postal
Service has listened and is responding,” said Chief Postal Inspector
Kenneth J. Hunter.

“We are fine-tuning improvements we announced in March to make the
nation’s mail more secure, while providing CMRAs, their customers, and
the American public with the same time-tested protections now enjoyed by
U.S. Postal Service post office box customers,” Hunter added.

Regardless of what Hunter says, however, opposition to the
regulations has been increasing. Forty-one co-signers, for example,
have now added their names to House Joint Resolution 55, a bill first
introduced by Congressman
Ron Paul, R-Texas, that would eliminate the Postal regulation.

Various organizations have also voiced opposition to the
regulations. The
National Coalition for the Homeless is against the regulations because
homeless people will be unable to verify a permanent address on Form
1583 as is required.

“Many homeless people who rent private mailboxes will be unfairly cut
off from receiving mail as a result of the regulations,” said NCH
Spokesperson Mary Ann Gleason in a letter to Paul expressing support for
his bill.

“Many homeless people choose to rent private mailboxes so that they
can list a street address rather than a box number on resumes and job
applications,” continued Gleason. “Private mailboxes are a valuable
tool for gaining work and leaving poverty. By requiring that private
mailbox holders include the ‘PMB’ designation, the regulation enables
discrimination by the employers, landlords and countless other people
who are looking for reasons to treat poor people unfairly.”

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence has also expressed
opposition to the postal regulation as well as support for Paul’s bill.

Commenting further on the confusion of the issue, Merritt said,
“Either these guys are like the Keystone Cops who don’t know what the
left hand is doing to the right hand, or they’re intentionally trying to
subvert the rule-making process and comment period by committing to two
diametrically opposed rules at the same time.”