1. ® Presented by: Jeremy Wells, MDP, Supervisor Birmingham BMEU Alabama District MAILERS GUIDE to FOLDED SELF-MAILERS Greater Birmingham PCC April 19, 2011

2. 2  Emerging designs in marketplace  Letter-size booklets and folded self-mailers ●Estimated at 20-30% of total letters, and growing Shift from Letter Envelopes Mail mix is Changing… Challenging for Customers & Postal Service  Creativity outpaced DMM automation letter standards ●Standards don’t account for emerging elements / designs ●Acceptance sites unsure how to rule or classify pieces ●Appeals escalated, process is time-consuming  PCSC exceptions are not the answer ●Unlevel playing field ●Can create unfair competitive advantage

3. 3 Operational Implication  Folded self-mailers do not behave like enveloped pieces ●Tend to jam in equipment ●Can become significantly damaged ●Lower processing thruput Letters automate at a rate of 10 pieces per second

4. 4 Operational Implication  Divert pieces to flat-sorter or manual operations ●Pro – reduced jam and damage rates ●Con – increased processing and delivery costs; and can lead to service impacts and loss of visibility Operations reaction to machinability problems

5. 5  Reduce confusion, discrepancy and delay of local rulings  Reduce time / cost both parties spend on the appeal process  Enable smoother transition for getting new formats into mail  Reduce diversion to manual or flat operation  Contain costs by increasing efficiency Mutual Benefit to New Standards Booklets rules were updated Sept 2009 Now what needs to happen? Revise and update the current DMM standards for Folded Self-Mailers What Do We Do? Striving for Balance! Innovation & Machinability

6. 6 What Do We Do?  Conducted study with industry to address situation ●Folded Self-Mailer study is the continuation and completion of the letter booklet study (2008-2009) ●Mailers desire reasonable, clear standards as a guide ●Mailers want creative options  Good news! Proposed standards account for all design elements submitted in test ●Some may require slight variation of a mailpiece element Folded Self-Mailer Study

7. 7 Study Participants  13 mailing associations participated in study ●8 associations submitted samples for testing  Several independently submitted through BSN and PCC  Received over 200 different samples sets ●What is, or what is desired to be produced ●Sample sets included 500+ pieces ●Nearly 250k pieces tested  Mailers given opportunity to observe the tests ●50% of tests were observed by mail owner and/or preparer Industry Supplied Mailpieces

8. 8 Analysis Phase  Primary characteristics analyzed ●Dimensions ●Paper basis weight of cover ●Thickness, total weight, number of layers/panels ●Fold style / orientation ●Closure method; tabs, glue tack, glue line  Additional attributes examined ●Loose inserts secured in pocket ●Attachments - interior ●Die-cut window ●Flap type closure and orientation ●Perforations

9. 9 Test Results – Summary  Machinability considerations & correlation ●Thru-put rate - decreased  as piece size and weight increased  as paper basis weight of cover decreased  when sealed with translucent tabs or glue tacks ●Jam rate - increased  as piece size and weight increased  as paper basis weight of cover decreased  when sealed with translucent tabs or glue tacks ●Damage rate - increased  as piece size and weight increased  as paper basis weight of cover decreased  when sealed with translucent tabs or glue tacks

10. 10 Length and Paper Basis Weight  Correlation of low paper basis weight with more length ●Lead edge curling, tears, jams

11. 11 Paper Cover Basis Weight  Jams, damage, poor stack quality, stacker-curl

12. 12 Flap Orientation / Style  Address side bottom; short flap on oblong ●Damage, inter-wedging and jams in stacker ●Impossible to spray barcode in clear zone

13. 13 Analysis Phase Creative Design Elements  Die-cuts & perforations are problematic without standards

14. 14 Perforated Flap – Tear Off Strip  Perforated extended cover at top ●Severe damage, jams, loss of closure integrity ●Camera/photocell blockage from loose torn pieces ●Potential loss of mailpiece contents

15. 15  Developed framework of optimal standards ●based on test data  Presented 10 category model to industry participants  Learned potential for streamlining, reducing complexity ●without limiting flexibility of options ●match terminology with industry language ●and still meet machinability needs  Reviewed items needing further clarification  Revised proposed standards model  Reviewed new model again with industry participants Development of Standards

16. 16  Establishes distinction from envelopes, cards & other non- envelope style mailpieces ●Booklets - revised standards in effect ●Folded self-mailers - proposed standards developed ●Un-enveloped letters – default category for pieces having complete seal along all four sides (DMM 201.3.1)  Clarity for USPS acceptance and industry, creative designers etc Now, let’s delve into folded self-mailers… Now Where Are We? Creating clearer delineation in letter types

17. 17 A folded self-mailer is formed of panels created when a single or multiple unbound sheets of paper are folded together and sealed to form a letter-size mailpiece. Folded Self-Mailer Definition

18. 18 “ Showcasing” SELF-MAILER CONSTRUCTION (Basic & Creative Elements) Proposed Mailing Standards NOT FINAL

19. 19 *PROPOSED*

20. 20 Proposed Basic Design Elements  Dimension ●Height – 3.5” to 6” max ●Length – 5” to 10.5” max  Weight – up to 3oz  Paper cover basis weight - Book grade (Text, Offset) ●Basic Folded Self-Mailer design  70lb min for 1oz mailpiece; 80lb over 1oz up to 3oz ●Optional elements added  Basis weight ranges from 80lb to 120lb*  Basis weight increases when piece weight is over 1oz ●Newsprint paper allowed : quarter-fold design only  55lb min paper and three tabs required

21. 21 Proposed Basic Design Elements  Closure method - Glue (adhesive or cohesive)  Closure method - Tabs (2 or 3 based on mailpiece design) ●Placed either at Top or Lead / Trail  tab placement - within 1" from edge Continuous Glue Line 1/8” W to within 1/4” of each edge Glue Spots 3/8” radius 3- 4 spots based on mailpiece design Elongated Glue Lines 1/8” W by 1/4” L or 1/4”W x 1/2”L 3- 4 lines based on mailpiece design 1” 1.5” 2”

22. 22 Proposed Basic Design Elements  Fold style / orientation ●Horizontal - final fold at bottom  Panel folded up to top on non-address side  External flap folded down from top on non-address side ●Vertical - final fold on lead edge to non-address side These are only representative illustrations of potential designs.

23. 23 Proposed Basic Design Elements  Flap - used for closure of mailpiece ●horizontal folded mailpiece, external flap is final fold ●vertical folded mailpiece, external flap must be the final fold ●die-cut shape external flaps allowed  glue line sealed along the contour of the edge recommended  glue spots or elongated glue lines sufficient to seal flap to panel Horizontal fold No closer than 1” to trail edge Vertical fold No closer than 1” to bottom edge 1.5” min flap 5” min flap Die-cut Non-address side view Lead Edge on left Trail Edge on right

24. 24  Panels - created when a sheet(s) of paper are folded ●each folded section of a sheet is a separate panel ●equal - nearly equal size; varied fold styles with panels of differing sizes, short panels covered by full-size panel(s) ●internal partial panels count toward # panels allowed ●final fold panel creates non-address side of mailpiece by folding from bottom to top, or lead to trail edge Proposed Basic Design Elements

25. 25  Panels - formed when a sheet(s) of paper are folded Proposed Basic Design Elements 2 Panels Single sheet of paper folded once in half ( Bi-fold ) 4 Panels Two nested sheets folded once in half One sheet folded three times One sheet quarter-folded perpendicular 3 Panels Single sheet of paper folded twice ( Tri-fold )

26. 26 Quarter-Fold Design These are only representative illustrations of potential designs. Two folds perpendicular create a quarter-fold mailpiece Folds must be on the lead and bottom edge *PROPOSED*

27. 27 Tear-Off Opening Device Lead or Trail Edge Perforations are vertical lines no more than 9/16” from lead and/or trail edge Cut-to-Tie ratio based on the total mailpiece weight Complete seal along all unfolded edges May have a perforated horizontal line joining the lead / trail edge perforation These are only representative illustrations of potential designs. *PROPOSED*

28. 28 Interior Attachment or Loose Enclosures These are only representative illustrations of potential designs. Max thickness of attachments and/or loose enclosures is based on total weight of mailpiece Attachments must be secured on panel 1/2” from all edges Loose enclosures must remain secure in pocket or other method; pocket does not count as a panel *PROPOSED*

29. 29 Attachments  Internal attachments (must be adhered to panel) ●multiple attachments must be nearly uniform in thickness ●when multiple attachments are adhered on separate panels, combined thickness is applied to maximum thickness allowed if those attachments align stacked. ●where multiple attachments are placed adjacent across length, thicker attachment applies to maximum allowed Attachments aligned stacked Attachments aligned adjacent *PROPOSED*

30. 30 Perforations on Non-Address Side Pop-Open Panel* - three sides perforated Pull-Open Vertical Strip Pull-Open Horizontal Strip in Flap Pop-Out Panel* - full perimeter perforation *Rectangle, square, circle, oval shape Size, placement, amount, and cut-to-tie ratio are based on design element used *PROPOSED*

31. 31 Die-Cutout on Cover Address window or up to two die-cut holes Die-cut holes can be address or non-address side panel Circular or rectangular* shaped Size, placement will be limited No “through-holes” allowed *up to ½” radius corners *PROPOSED*

32. 32 Recommended Standards  Co-efficient of Friction ●kinetic coefficient of friction (paper to same paper) 0.26 to 0.34  Static ●static charge less than 2.0kv  Coating on address and non-address side cover ●full coverage coating  Address placement ●when paper is uncoated, addresses should be placed at mid to left position within the optical character reader (OCR) area as defined in DMM 202.2.1

33. 33  Exhibit 2.1 OCR Read Area OCR Read Area

34. 34 Summary Proposed basic elements  Height: 6” max  Length: 10.5” max  Weight: up to 3oz max (closure method based on mailpiece weight)  Paper Basis Weight: Minimum 70lb and higher ●varies based on design and total piece weight ●newsprint min 55lb; only allowed with quarter-fold design  Interior attachments / loose enclosures ●secured to panel; enclosures in pocket or other secure method  Number of host piece panels determined by design

35. 35 Summary Proposed basic elements  Closure method options - varies based on design/weight ●Continuous glue line or elongated glue lines, glue spots ●Tabs: 2 or 3 non-perforated tabs  Die-cutout window ●Placement, size, shape and amount defined  Perforation: cut-to-tie ratio vary by design  Exterior attachments based on current DMM standards  Friction, static, coating - will be recommendations only

36. 36  Top picture shows what pieces look like using current Reqts – 60lb paper with one tab at top center  Bottom shows what pieces using new Reqts look like - 70lb paper with two tabs at top edges Will Revised Standards Make a Difference? Old vs. New Standards Applied

37. 37 Next Steps Tentative Timeline : ●Federal Register Proposal - Summer 2011 ●Federal Register Final rule - Fall 2011 ●Implement – January 5, 2013 ●DMM standards effective - Summer 2012

38. 38