Concerned with USPS mailbox regulations

To my neighbors with mailboxes on a shared platform,

Today I got a notice in the mailbox informing me my mailbox was out of compliance because it was 33 inches from the ground to the bottom of the mailbox (it is supposed to be at least 45 inches).

Where did this rule come from? Has this regulation been buried for years somewhere in some postal manual, to now come to our attention, or was it recently created to help the post office to better deliver the mail?

My first thought was, oh no, this is not good, and my mind was racing, trying to consider any and all options to raise the horizontal beam our (3) mailboxes are fastened to, at least one vertical foot, i.e. 12 inches further off the ground. And I could not come up with any quick, or cheap, or simple solution. Any modification would require the basic hand tools and specific power tools as well. Someone would have to buy new posts, connector plates, wood screws, etc. Who knows how many hours of labor would be needed… what would be the total cost?

And I started wondering how many other mailboxes are there that could be likewise out of compliance. Are there hundreds? Could be. Thousands? Who knows. What would be the total cost to homeowners to modify all the mailbox platforms? I bet it would cost a lot. Would it cost so much that someone would ask how much it would cost to modify some postal delivery vans, so the vehicles would ride lower to the ground? Not likely…

The infraction notice said I had about a month to comply. I started getting nervous again. But I was able to pause, step back, and think this issue through again, one more time.

You know what I really want? I want the Enumclaw U.S. Postal Service to rent out the high school commons on a Sunday afternoon a few weeks from now, and send all mailbox owners affected by this rule an invitation to the meeting.

This is not a trivial matter. All interested parties should be able to participate, to come and lay their cards out on the table, and voice their concerns.

John Schmidt