wholly electronic, Internet-based document service. The complaint alleged, among other things, that the Postal Service should have first secured a recommended decision before offering PosteCS service to the public. The Postal Service discontinued PosteCS service in spring 2002. On September 5, 2002, the Postal Service was directed by the PRC to provide a pleading declaring the status of PosteCS service. On September 19, 2002, the Postal Service requested that the Commission dismiss the complaint because the controversy was moot. On November 6, 2002, the Commission dismissed the complaint case at the Postal Service's request.

     On May 19, 2001, a complaint was filed with the PRC, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3662, alleging that in 2000 and 2001 the Postal Service implemented changes in two- and three-day service standards for First-Class Mail service on a nationwide or substantially nationwide basis, without first requesting a Commission advisory opinion, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3661. The complaint also alleged that the First-Class Mail service resulting from these service standard changes did not comply with various policies under the PRA. While the Postal Service admitted that service standard changes occurred during 2000 and 2001, it did not consider that a request for an advisory opinion was required. Rather, it contended that the service standard changes were part of a more extensive realignment plan previously submitted for Commission review in Docket No. N89-1. The Postal Service also did not consider that the service resulting from the changes was inconsistent with any policies of the PRA. The complaint proceeding is still pending before the Commission.

8. Collection Box Removal Complaint Case: Docket No. C2003-1

     On November 21, 2002, a complaint was filed with the PRC, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3662, alleging that recent removal of collection boxes had caused a nationwide change in service for which no request for an advisory opinion had been sought pursuant to Section 3661(b), and had resulted in collection service that was inadequate. The Postal Service filed an Answer in December 2002, explaining that, historically, fluctuations in the number of collection boxes were typical, and that, with the exception of boxes removed for concerns of public and employee health and safety, recent box removals were intended to be conducted in accordance with long-established guidelines. The Postal Service stated its position that the complaint should be terminated without hearings, because the allegations made by the complainant do not support the claim that service is not in accordance with the policies of the PRA.

     To support its position that removals of collection boxes have not had a material effect on customer service, the Postal Service offered to file Customer Satisfaction Measurement (CSM) scores, from customer surveys conducted by The Gallup Organization on behalf of the Postal Service's Consumer Advocate. Since Postal Service policy is not to disclose publicly such data, it requested that the PRC impose protective conditions on the scores that would limit their use to the complaint proceeding.

     In July 2003, after in camera inspection of the relevant CSM scores, the request for protective conditions was denied. The Postal Service moved for reconsideration. On August 11, 2003, the Postal Service filed comments on the certified question noting that similar scores had been subject to protective conditions in the most recent omnibus rate case. The Postal Service's comments explained why it reasonably expected that the CSM scores in the complaint case should likewise be treated as confidential and protected. The comments also explained that information regarding attitudes,