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.

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. Since Postal Service policy is not to disclose such data publicly the Postal Service requested that the PRC impose protective conditions on the CSM scores that would limit their use to the complaint proceeding.

In July 2003 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.

In February 2004 the PRC concluded that it was unwilling to grant the CSM scores in question the same protected status as such material had been afforded in the last omnibus rate case. In response to the PRC's order, the Postal Service indicated that it would not seek to rely on CSM scores and maintained that sufficient grounds existed, independent of those scores, to warrant dismissal of the complaint. The case is still pending.

9. Complaint on Stamped Stationery: Docket No. C2004-3

On June 24, 2004, a complaint was filed with the PRC concerning the Disney stamped stationery issued by the Postal Service on June 23, 2004. The stationery consists of sheets of paper imprinted with indicia that are representations of The Art of Disney: Friendship postage stamps. The sheets can be used to write a message and address and, once folded and sealed, can be mailed using First-Class Mail service. The price for 12 sheets is $14.95, including postage. The complainant believes that the stationery is within the jurisdiction asserted by the PRC in the 1970s, similar to stamped envelopes, stamped cards, and aerogrammes. The complainant seeks to have a classification proceeding to establish this product within the Domestic Mail Classification Schedule and to have fees established based on recommendations from the PRC.

The Postal Service filed an answer to these specific allegations on August 31, 2004, and is preparing a motion to dismiss the proceeding.

10. Repositionable Notes Market Test: Docket No. MC2004-5

On July 16, 2004, the Postal Service filed a request for a one-year market test of Repositionable Notes (RPNs), which are self-stick notes affixed to the exterior of letters or flats. Because RPNs are mechanically applied using air pressure, and may have an adhesive strip that is wider than on notes used in typical office settings, they are unlikely to become detached from the mailpiece during handling. After a period of testing and gradual introduction (RPNs are currently allowed on automation letters for no additional charge), the Postal Service proposed to test RPNs further by permitting their use on all letters and flats. The attachment of RPNs to mailpieces does not appear to cause the Postal Service to incur any additional handling costs. Based on the value of the RPN to senders and recipients, the Postal Service proposed rates of 1.5 cents for RPNs on Standard Mail and Periodicals mailpieces and 0.5 cents for RPNs on First-Class Mail pieces.

The PRC determined that the case should be considered as a provisional service case, rather than a market test, a decision which had no significant practical effect on the litigation. A joint motion was filed on August 11 by three parties seeking to have the request dismissed. The parties argued that because the proposed rates were not based on specific costs, the PRC could not even consider the request. The PRC denied the motion on August 30. In December the PRC issued a recommended decision; Board of Governors approval is still pending.

11. Foote and Foote v. United States Postal Service, No. CV03-9431 (C.D. Cal)

Two individuals filed a lawsuit, seeking class action status, against the Postal Service in federal district court in Los Angeles. The plaintiffs alleged that the Postal Service failed to provide mailers of Priority Mail with the level of service that these mailers were led to believe they would receive when they paid Priority Mail rates for items weighing less than 13 ounces and sent to destinations within three zones.