Selected Mail Delivery Provisions in the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 (H.R. 3076)

Selected Mail Delivery Provisions in the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 (H.R. 3076)

INSIGHTi

Selected Mail Delivery Provisions in the
Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 (H.R. 3076)
Updated February 11, 2022
The Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 (H.R. 3076) passed the House on February 8, 2022. It proposes a
series of large- and small-scale changes to the Postal Service’s organization and operations in order to
“put the USPS on the path towards fiscal sustainability and efficiency.” This Insight provides a summary
of the operational reforms proposed in Sections 202, 206, and 208 of the Postal Service Reform Act of
2022.
Section 202. Integrated Delivery Network
Section 202 would require USPS to maintain an integrated network for the delivery of mail, to the extent
practicable, at least six days a week. The bill provides an exception to the six-day delivery mandate for
(1) weeks with federal holidays; (2) emergencies; and (3) geographic areas where the U.S. Postal Service
(USPS) has already established a policy of delivering mail fewer than six days a week as of the date of
enactment.
The term integrated network is not defined in the bill, nor is it defined in USPS guidance, such as the
Domestic Mail Manual. The House report that accompanies the bill states that the integrated network
must be used for mail and packages, perhaps suggesting postal vehicles must be capable of delivering all
categories of mail. By having a single vehicle deliver all mail, the USPS might avoid the increased costs
associated with having various mail types delivered separately to the same address.
Section 206. Flats Operational Study and Reform
Section 206 would require the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), in coordination with the USPS
Inspector General, to conduct a study to identify the causes of inefficiencies in the collection, sorting,
transportation, and delivery of flats. The study must quantify the effects of volume trends, investment
decisions, excess capacity, and operational inefficiencies on the direct and indirect costs attributable to
flats. The PRC would be required to submit a report on the study to Congress and the Postmaster General
not later than one year after the bill is enacted. Not later than six months after the PRC submits the report,
the Postal Service would be required to develop and implement a plan to remedy each inefficiency
identified in the study. If the Postal Service determines a remedy is not practical, it would be required to
submit an explanation of this determination to Congress and the PRC. Prior to implementing the plan, the
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11686
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service
2
Postal Service would need to obtain the PRC’s approval and allow ample time for public comment. The
Postal Service would be required to notify Congress and the PRC once the plan was fully implemented.
This section would also require the Postal Service to consider the findings of the report when adjusting
the rate of any market-dominant product in the five years subsequent to the plan’s implementation. A
market-dominant product in this section is defined by reference to the Domestic Mail Manual as
1. first-class mail letters and sealed parcels;
2. first-class mail cards;
3. periodicals;
4. standard mail;
5. single-piece parcel post;
6. media mail;
7. bound printed matter;
8. library mail;
9. special services; and
10. single-piece international mail.
Section 208. Postal Service Transportation Selection Policy Revisions
This section would require the Postal Service to select modes of transportation that “increase operational
efficiency and reduce complexity” and ensure that the delivery of all mail is “prompt, economical,
consistent, and reliable.” In addition, this section would require overnight transportation to be cost-
effective. In the context of the bill, “modes of transportation” refers to ground (highway, rail, or bus), air,
or water transportation.
In 2021, the USPS awarded a multibillion-dollar contract for the acquisition of up to 165,000 Next
Generation Delivery Vehicles (NGDVs) to replace aging Long Life Vehicles (LLVs). Compared to LLVs,
NGDVs have expanded cargo capacity, thereby facilitating the efficient delivery of both packages and
mail from a single vehicle. NGDVs may enhance the postal fleet’s overall reliability as well, given that
many LLVs have exceeded their expected lives and are experiencing mechanical problems at an
increasing rate.
USPS has stated that the NGDVs may be equipped with either “fuel-efficient internal combustion engines
(ICEs) or battery electric powertrains,” but it has not indicated how many vehicles it will order with each
engine type. New internal combustion and electric vehicle (EV) NGDVs may both be more fuel-efficient
than the current LLVs. However, some policymakers have argued that as part of the government’s efforts
to reduce emissions, USPS should acquire mostly electric postal vehicles. The Postal Vehicle
Modernization Act of 2021 (H.R. 1636) would authorize $6 billion for the purchase of NGDVs, of which
at least 75% must be electric or zero-emission vehicles. The Postal Service Electric Fleet Authorization
Act of 2021 (H.R. 3521) would authorize $8 billion for the USPS to convert its diesel trucks to electric
power and would require USPS to purchase only zero-emission vehicles after 2030. In January 2021,
President Biden signed an executive order that required his climate and energy advisory team to develop a
plan for transitioning the entire civilian federal fleet, including postal vehicles, to “clean and zero-
emissions vehicles.”

Congressional Research Service
3
Author Information

Garrett Hatch

Specialist in American National Government

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN11686 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED