Notice2026-17986
Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 1, 2026
Issuing agencies
Postal Service
Abstract
The United States Postal Service (USPS) is responding to public comments regarding the creation of a new General Privacy Act System of Records (SOR) USPS 820.225, Federal Ballot Mail. The new SOR coincides with the Postal Service's publication of the Final Rule amending the Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), regarding the transmission of mail-in or absentee ballots for federal elections. The Postal Service created the SOR to maintain a list of individuals, each individual's address, the unique Intelligent Mail barcodes printed on each individual's outbound and return ballot envelope for a federal election, and the state or political subdivision thereof that issued such ballot for inclusion on a state's Mail-in and Absentee Participation List, as required by the new DMM section. There will be no changes to the new system of records in light of public comments received.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 168 (Tuesday, September 1, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 168 (Tuesday, September 1, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56368-56370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-17986]
[[Page 56367]]
Vol. 91
Tuesday,
No. 168
September 1, 2026
Part III
Postal Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2026 /
Notices
[[Page 56368]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTAL SERVICE
Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records
AGENCY: Postal Service.
ACTION: Notice of new system of records; response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Postal Service (USPS) is responding to
public comments regarding the creation of a new General Privacy Act
System of Records (SOR) USPS 820.225, Federal Ballot Mail. The new SOR
coincides with the Postal Service's publication of the Final Rule
amending the Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service,
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), regarding the transmission of mail-in or
absentee ballots for federal elections. The Postal Service created the
SOR to maintain a list of individuals, each individual's address, the
unique Intelligent Mail barcodes printed on each individual's outbound
and return ballot envelope for a federal election, and the state or
political subdivision thereof that issued such ballot for inclusion on
a state's Mail-in and Absentee Participation List, as required by the
new DMM section. There will be no changes to the new system of records
in light of public comments received.
DATES: The new General Privacy Act System of Records (SOR) USPS
820.225, Federal Ballot Mail was scheduled to be effective without
further notice on the latest of (1) 30 days from the publication date
of the notice, if no comments were received; (2) the publication date
of the Postal Service's responses to comments received (which would
under no circumstances be published prior to 30 days from the
publication date of the notice); or (3) the effective date of any final
rule amending the DMM with respect to ballots for federal elections. As
comments were received, and consistent with (2) above, the SOR is
effective with this publication of the Postal Service's responses to
comments received (which is more than 30 days from July 17, 2026, the
publication date of the SOR notice).
The Final Rule was effective August 21, 2026, and published in the
Federal Register on August 26, 2026. Ballot Mail for Federal Elections,
91 FR 54966 (August 26, 2026).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Privacy Office, 202-268-2000, or
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3065636063604259465153497655546255577e5f4459535570454340431e575f46"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ca9f999a999ab8a3bcaba9b38cafae98afad84a5bea3a9af8abfb9bab9e4ada5bc">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 17, 2026, the Postal Service
published a Federal Register notice about its intent to create a new
system of records, USPS 820.225, Federal Ballot Mail, to provide notice
to the public and to support the amendments to the DMM regarding the
transmission of mail-in or absentee ballots for federal elections. The
publication of an SOR in the Federal Register complies with Privacy Act
requirements to promote transparency and provide notice to individuals
about the maintenance of a System of Records by a Federal agency,
including but not limited to information that will be collected and
stored, what it will be used for, the authority for collection and
usage of the information, how the information may be disclosed and how
long it will be retained.
The Postal Service provides the following responses to the comments
received pursuant to its Federal Register notice, Document Citation 91
FR 44880, for the creation of the new SOR, USPS 820.225 Federal Ballot
Mail. Most commenters discussed Executive Order 14399, Ensuring
Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections, and the
related changes to the DMM, rather than the System of Record at issue
here. This includes commenters referring to, or appending, their
comments submitted in response to the related changes to the DMM. While
not relevant to the topic, the Postal Service will briefly address each
comment in turn out of respect for commenters.\1\ The Postal Service
also refers those commenters to our Final Rule in that rulemaking for a
more fulsome response to these topics. Ballot Mail for Federal
Elections, 91 FR 54966 (August 26, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Postal Service provides these responses to implied
questions contained in comments from commenters, as identified in
subsequent footnotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Question 1: \2\ Does the new DMM section regarding Ballot Mail
for Federal Elections usurp state authority over elections?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Letter comments of the State of Utah (Aug. 17, 2026); Joshua
Thornton (Jul. 17 2026); a coalition of 24 state attorneys general
(Aug. 14, 2026); and the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy Defenders
Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. Neither the SOR, nor the DMM language, usurps such
authority. The rule does not recast the Postal Service as an election
administrator, and does not dictate the manner of elections in the
states. On the contrary, it sets forth mailpiece design and data
reporting standards tied to the use of the mail. States maintain
complete control over their own voter registration rolls, deciding who
within their jurisdiction is eligible to vote by mail. States also
retain complete autonomy to determine the extent to which they utilize
the postal system as an aspect of their elections.
The new DMM language does not involve or authorize inspection of a
mail-in ballot's contents, review of individual voter's eligibility, or
auditing of state voter rolls. It instead focuses exclusively on
exterior mailpiece criteria and barcode scan data.
2. Question 2: \3\ Does the Executive Order provide the authority
for the new DMM section regarding Ballot Mail for Federal Elections?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Letter comments of a coalition of 24 state attorneys general
(Aug. 14, 2026); the League of Women Voters and a coalition of
organizations (Aug. 14, 2026); and the Campaign Legal Center/
Democracy Defenders Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The Postal Service relied on existing statutory
authority to promulgate the Final Rule. 91 FR 94968-94977. Executive
Order 14399 was relevant to the Postal Service's consideration of this
subject and began the deliberative process that is now resulting in
this rule. While the Executive Order did not mandate a final rule, the
Postal Service determined that, to help achieve the goals articulated
by the Order as necessary to faithfully execute federal law and also to
advance the Postal Service's operational interests, it is appropriate
to exercise its statutory and regulatory authority to promulgate the
Final Rule, which is consistent with the Postal Service's longstanding
best practice recommendations for ballot mail.
As set forth in the Final Rule, see 91 FR at 54971-72, 39 U.S.C.
401(2) authorizes the Postal Service ``to adopt, amend, and repeal such
rules and regulations, not inconsistent with this title, as may be
necessary in the execution of its functions under this title and such
other functions as may be assigned to the Postal Service under any
provisions of law outside of this title,'' and further grants the
Postal Service ``all other powers incidental, necessary, or appropriate
to the carrying on of its functions or the exercise of its specific
powers,'' id. Sec. 401(10). Furthermore, Section 404 grants the Postal
Service specific powers, including the power ``to provide for the
collection, handling, transportation, delivery, forwarding, returning,
and holding of mail, and for the disposition of undeliverable mail.''
Id. Sec. 404(a)(1). Setting mail preparation and acceptance standards
and data-reporting standards for a defined category of mail fits
squarely within this statutory authority.
In short, the Final Rule prescribes tailored requirements regarding
the use of the mail--the design of Federal Ballot Mail envelopes and
the provision of mailpiece-level data concerning such ballot mailings--
to help both ensure the faithful execution of federal law and advance
the Postal Service's ability to efficiently handle Federal Ballot Mail,
[[Page 56369]]
consistent with its statutory functions. See, e.g., 91 FR at 54972,
54985.
3. Question 3: \4\ Does the Postal Service possess the requisite
statutory authority to collect the information noticed in the SOR?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Letter comments of the State of Utah (Aug. 17, 2026); Joshua
Thornton (Jul. 17 2026); a coalition of 12 secretaries of state
(Aug. 13, 2026); a coalition of 24 state attorneys general (Aug. 14,
2026); and the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy Defenders Fund (Aug.
14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: Yes. The information noticed in the SOR is information that
is visible on the outside of mailpieces submitted to the Postal Service
for delivery--that is, the names and addresses of mail recipients and
the barcodes associated with mailpieces. The Postal Service has the
statutory authority to set forth mail preparation, acceptance, and
entry standards that are necessary to achieve the functions assigned to
it by law, which include delivery of mail (including sensitive mail)
and investigation into the potential misuse of the mail. See 39 U.S.C.
401(2); cf. 18 U.S.C. 3061(b); 52 U.S.C. 10307, 20511.
4. Question 4: \5\ Does the new DMM section regarding Ballot Mail
for Federal Elections violate federal elections law?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Letter comments of the League of Women Voters and a
coalition of organizations (Aug. 14, 2026); Joshua Thornton (Jul. 17
2026); a coalition of 24 state attorneys general (Aug. 14, 2026);
and the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy Defenders Fund (Aug. 14,
2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The new DMM section regulates the use of the mail, and
does not interfere with or supplant the schemes established under
federal election law. The rule requires merely that states that choose
to use the U.S. mail as part of their elections adhere to certain
standard mailpiece design and data reporting standards when sending
Federal Ballot Mail.
5. Question 5: \6\ Does this SOR violate any current injunctions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Letter comments of the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy
Defenders Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The government obtained relief from previous
injunctions that had precluded implementation of any final rule
governing ballot mail for the November 3, 2026 election. No court order
in place at the time of publication prevents publication of the SOR
itself. The SOR, which does not alter the DMM or any election rules,
simply provides notice as to how information regarding federal ballots
collected pursuant to the DMM provisions (including voluntary use of
certain provisions) will be handled consistent with the Privacy Act.
6. Question 6: \7\ Is the Postal Service acting as an election
gatekeeper?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Letter comments of a coalition of 24 state attorneys general
(Aug. 14, 2026); and the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy Defenders
Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. Again, states maintain complete control over their own
voter registration rolls, deciding who within their jurisdiction is
eligible to vote by mail. States also retain complete autonomy to
determine the extent to which they utilize the postal system as an
aspect of their elections. Moreover, the Final Rule's requirement to
report mail piece-level data into the Federal Ballot Mail Portal is not
tantamount to election gatekeeping or administration. States determine
who is enrolled in their respective Mail-In and Absentee Participation
Lists. The Final Rule requires that states provide to the Postal
Service certain information inscribed on the Outbound and Return
Federal Ballot Mail envelopes that they mail to voters, prior to or at
the time of the outbound mailing. This information, which necessarily
lies in the states' possession, would not be subject to revision by the
Postal Service. Eligible voters will therefore be listed by and at the
discretion of election officials, and the Postal Service will not
second-guess the states' submissions.
7. Question 7: \8\ Are the Postal Service's SOR and rule arbitrary
and capricious under the APA?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Letter comments of Joshua Thornton (Jul. 17, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No, the Postal Service has considered, evaluated, and
responded to all significant comments, and has thoroughly explained the
reasons why the Postal Service is implementing the rule, and this
related SOR.
Moreover, in the context of the instant rulemaking, the Postal
Service is not subject to the APA. See 39 U.S.C. 410(a), 3001(m).
8. Question 8: \9\ Does this SOR violate the First Amendment
provision of the Privacy Act?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Letter comments of a coalition of 24 state attorneys general
(Aug. 14, 2026); a coalition of 12 secretaries of state (Aug. 13,
2026); and Joshua Thornton (Jul. 17, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. As explained in the Rule, see 91 FR at 54970, the
Privacy Act provision regarding First Amendment activity, 5 U.S.C.
552a(e)(7), prohibits the gathering and maintaining of records
indicating ``how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the
First Amendment.'' Courts have interpreted this prohibition to
encompass the ``content'' of an individual's exercise of their First
Amendment rights (i.e., the content of an individual's ballot, and thus
the candidate for which an individual voted). That is not the type of
information being collected under the rule or maintained by the SOR.
The state-specific Mail-In and Absentee Participation Lists indicate
whether a state planned to mail a blank ballot to any given individual.
This information does not describe ``the content'' of expressive
activity under the First Amendment, but simply indicates the specific
means by which an individual may have chosen to receive or return their
ballot.
The Postal Service is not collecting or recording party affiliation
and will not inspect ballot contents. Postal Service personnel are not
authorized to open mail sealed against inspection. Instead, through the
Federal Ballot Mail Portal, the Postal Service will maintain only data
of the sort that is routinely generated for mail from the exterior of
the mailpiece, including addressing and barcode information.
9. Question 9: \10\ Are the disclosures noted in the SOR in scope
for Postal Service authority?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Letter comments of a coalition of 24 state attorneys
general (Aug. 14, 2026); Jo Panitch (July 2, 2026); and a coalition
of 12 secretaries of state (Aug. 13, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: Yes, the disclosures within the SOR, including the
provision allowing disclosure to law enforcement and government
agencies, are consistent with standard authorized uses represented in
the Federal Register and otherwise stated in the USPS AS-353, Guide to
Privacy, the Freedom of Information Act, and Records Management.
Records will only be disclosed if the disclosure is in line with a
Postal Service routine use or a Privacy Act authorized use and that
disclosure is related to the purpose for which it was collected, as
identified in the Purposes section of the SOR.
10. Question 10: \11\ Is the record access provision sufficient
under the Privacy Act?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Letter comments of a coalition of 12 secretaries of state
(Aug. 13, 2026) and a coalition of 24 state attorneys general (Aug.
14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: Yes. Record access provisions within the context of this
SOR remain the same as those in other Postal Service SORs. Those
seeking access to their records may utilize the notification procedures
identified in the SOR and their access will be treated the same as any
other SOR, to extent that the records belong to the Postal Service and
not to another entity.
11. Question 11: \12\ Does the SOR appropriately disclose the
intended data sharing with the Department of Homeland Security?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Letter comments of the League of Women Voters and a
coalition of organizations (Aug. 14, 2026); a coalition of 24 state
attorneys general (Aug. 14, 2026); and a coalition of 12 secretaries
of state (Aug. 13, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: This question reflects a misunderstanding of the new DMM
[[Page 56370]]
language and the SOR. Neither the DMM language, nor the SOR,
contemplate intended data sharing with the Department of Homeland
Security. To the extent that the Department of Homeland Security has a
law enforcement need for the data covered by the SOR, disclosure would
be authorized by either Authorized Use 7, under the Privacy Act, or
standard routine use 2, as listed in the AS-353, Guide to Privacy, the
Freedom of Information Act, and Records Management.
12. Question 12: \13\ Does the SOR appropriately take into account
the Data Integrity Board?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Letter comments of the League of Women Voters and a
coalition of organizations (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: The role of Data Integrity Boards is to monitor computer
matching agreements with other agencies. The Data Integrity Board does
not have a role in routine collection of information that the Postal
Service requires to perform its necessary functions.
13. Question 13: \14\ Does the SOR establish the accuracy of
records?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Letter comments of the League of Women Voters and a
coalition of organizations (Aug. 14, 2026); a coalition of 24 state
attorneys general (Aug. 14, 2026); and the Campaign Legal Center/
Democracy Defenders Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. States maintain complete control over their own voter
registration rolls, deciding who within their jurisdiction is eligible
to vote by mail. The Postal Service will exercise no discretion or
authority over whether an individual should or should not be on the
list a state provides, and the Postal Service will not second-guess the
states' submissions.
14. Question 14: \15\ Does the exclusion of non-listed voters imply
inaccurate and untimely databases?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Letter comments of the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy
Defenders Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: This question reflects a misunderstanding of the new DMM
language and the SOR. States maintain complete control over their own
voter registration rolls, deciding who within their jurisdiction is
eligible to vote by mail. The Postal Service will exercise no
discretion or authority over whether an individual should or should not
be on the list a state provides.
15. Question 15: \16\ Are the records retained for an inappropriate
length of time?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Letter comments of Joshua Thornton (Jul. 17, 2026); a
coalition of 12 secretaries of state (Aug. 13, 2026);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: The Postal Service has analyzed the use and business need
for the records that are being collected. These records are retained
for the minimum amount of time necessary to accomplish the business
needs for this function.
16. Question 16: \17\ Are the technical safeguards sufficient under
the Privacy Act?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Letter comments of a coalition of 12 secretaries of state
(Aug. 13, 2026) and a coalition of 24 state attorneys general (Aug.
14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: Yes. The Privacy Act requires only that agencies
maintaining records on individuals establish appropriate technical
safeguards, and the Postal Service has satisfied this obligation. The
Act does not, however, require that the SOR itself disclose the
specifics of those safeguards, which are appropriately left to agency
discretion. The SOR identifies the general data elements to be
collected as associated with the Federal Ballot Mail Portal and
discusses the requisite safeguarding of this information. Laying out
the precise safeguards would place the data at risk, and thus the
Postal Service declines to do so.
17. Question 17: \18\ Does this SOR stifle voting based on race,
age and domicile?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Letter comments of the League of Women Voters and a
coalition of organizations (Aug. 14, 2026);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The Final Rule sets forth neutral, uniform, and non-
discriminatory mailpiece design and data reporting standards that apply
uniformly to all Federal Ballot Mail. Indeed, the Final Rule applies
objective requirements to all Outbound and Return Federal Ballot Mail
envelopes without distinction, and the data entry and verification
processes likewise apply equally to all states and all voters--
regardless of race, age, or domicile. Accordingly, the rule and this
corresponding SOR are neutral on their face and uniform in application.
18. Question 18: \19\ Would this SOR take too long to implement?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Letter comments of the Campaign Legal Center/Democracy
Defenders Fund (Aug. 14, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. This SOR reflects one of two disclosures required by
the Privacy Act before the Postal Service may begin receipt of the
information identified, or collect the information required for Federal
Ballot Mail Portal access. General technical architecting, transmission
agreements, and other underlying work are able to proceed so long as
they do not collect or receive data outlined in the SOR. The Federal
Ballot Mail Portal will contain the second disclosure, in the form of a
Privacy Act Statement.
19. Question 19: \20\ Does this SOR interfere with the Postal
Service's obligations to deliver the mail?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Letter comment of Karen Williams (July 21, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The SOR permits the Postal Service to maintain certain
information; it does not implicate postal operations. Moreover, under
the new DMM provision, once Federal Ballot Mail enters the mailstream,
it will be processed and delivered consistently with current
operational practices. Furthermore, while the Postal Service's existing
processes are designed to support the timely delivery and smooth
processing of ballot mail, it has long recognized that across-the-board
compliance with its longstanding best-practice recommendations would
further improve efficient handling, processing, and delivery. The Final
Rule's mailpiece design requirements will thus help ensure timely
delivery of ballot mail to and from voters, thereby advancing execution
of the Postal Service's statutory obligations.
20. Question 20: \21\ Is this SOR a violation of the Postal
Service's privacy policy?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Letter comment of Jo Panitch (July 2, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: No. The Postal Service's <a href="http://USPS.com">USPS.com</a> Privacy Policy outlines
how the Postal Service handles information arising from the use of its
website and web resources. The Postal Service's Privacy Policy
represents the Postal Service voluntarily aligning with some relevant
disclosures within the E-Government Act. Although the Postal Service is
not required to comply with the E-Government Act, in some instances the
Postal Service has aligned with certain portions to ensure
transparency. The SOR is released under the Privacy Act of 1974 and
does not in any way relate to the Postal Service's partial, voluntary
alignment with the E-Government Act.
Kevin Rayburn,
Attorney, Ethics and Legal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2026-17986 Filed 8-31-26; 2:30 pm]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 1, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.