DOCKET SECTION
BEFORE THE
POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20268-0001
RErjE1VE.D
SEP;!9
5 58 Pti
‘97
POS,,,LE.!:CCCW’ISSI@N
,,FFlCiOFTHESECRElARY
POSTAL RATE AND FEE CHANGES, 1997
Docket No. R97-1
i
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
WITNESS MODEN TO INTERROGATORIES
OF
DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
(DFClUSPS-T4-12-17)
The United States Postal Service hereby provides responses of witness Moden
to the following interrogatories
on September
of Douglas F. Carlson:
DFC/USPS-T4-12-17,
15, 1997.
Each interrogatory
is stated verbatim and is followed by the response.
Respectfully
submitted,
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
By its attorneys:
Daniel J. Foucheaux,
Scott L. Reiter
475 L’Enfant Plaza West, SW.
Washington, D.C. 20260-I 137
(202) 268-2999; Fax -5402
September 29, 1997
Jr.
filed
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE WITNESS
TO INTERROGATORIES
OF DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
DFCIUSPS-T4-12.
Please provide a list similar to the one that you provided in your
response to DFCIUSPS-T4-8
that identifies the SLOCR type - Burroughs or Pitney
Bowes - that each facility on your list has or had.
Response:
See attached list.
MODEN
Attachment to DFCRTSPS-T4-12 (Page 1 of 1)
SLOCR Sites
MOJAVE CA
EUREKA CA
REDDlNG CA
BATON ROUGE LA
OKLAHONA CITY OK
TULSA OK
AMARILLO TX
ALBANY GA
COLUMBUS GA
JOHNSON CITY TN
JACKSON TN
MID MISSOURI MO
BALTIMORE MD
CUMBERLAND MD
NJI BMC
KENNEDY AMC
CENTRAL MA
BOSTON
BROCKTON MA
CAPE COD MA
EASTERN MAINE
BURLINGTON VT
PLATTSBURGH NY
WATERTOWN NY
GREENSBURG PA
DUBOIS PA
ERIE PA
ALTOONA PA
WILLIAMSPORT PA
SCRANTON PA
WHEELING WV
ZANESVILLE OH
STEUBENVILLE OH
MANSFIELD OH
BRISTOL VA
BECKLEY WV
GREENSBORO NC
COLUMBIA SC
GREAT FALLS MT
BUTTE MT
MISSOULA MT
DENVER CO
GRAND JUNCTION Cl3
CASPER WY
ROCK SPRINGS WY
POCATELLO ID
SALT LAKE CITY UT
PROVO UT
PHOENIX AZ
PORTLAND OR
MEDFORD OR
BEND OR
EVERETT WA
WENATCHEE WA
YAKIMA WA
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Bell 8 Howell
Bell 8 Howell
Bell 8 Howell
Bell 8 Howell
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
Burroughs
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE WITNESS MODEN
TO INTERROGATORIES
OF DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
DFCIUSPS-T4-13.
a.
During which years were new Burroughs and Pitney Bowes OCR’s
originally deployed?
b.
How many OCR’s of each type were purchased {and deployed?
Were the Burroughs OCR’s generally deployed in the northern half of the
country and Pitney Bowes OCR’s deployed in the southern half of the country?
Response:
a. The Burroughs and Pitney Bowes SLOCRs were deployed between 1982 and 1985
There were 126 machines of each type for a total of 252 machines.
b. I am told that the information is no longer available.
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE WITNESS MODEN
TO INTERROGATORIES
OF DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
DFCIUSPS-T4-14.
Suppose a letter has a mailer-applied
wide-area delivery-point
bar
code in the address block but no FIM.
a.
If this letter is processed on an AFCS that is operating in ISS mode, will
the RBCS system (including the RCR) attempt to resolve the address, or will it defer to
the mailer-applied
b.
MPBCS-OSS
C.
mailer-applied
bar code?
If the RBCS system will defer to the mailer-applied
bar code, will the
spray a bar code at the bottom of the envelope?
If the letter is processed on an MLOCR, will the MLOCR defer to the
bar code, or will it attempt to verify the address?
Response:
a. It is assumed that mail with a mailer applied bar code will be typed.
If the AFCSllSS
is operating in the “lift script” mode, the bar code will be ignored and the mailpiece
will be routed to the stacker for the OCR. The OCR will attempt to read and sort on
the mailer applied bar code. If the AFCS/ISS is operating in the “lift everything”
mode, the image will be sent to the RBCS system.
The RCR has no capability to
resolve bar codes, so it will attempt to resolve the address.
b. Not applicable.
c. The MLOCR defers to the mailer applied bar code.
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE WITNESS
TO INTERROGATORIES
OF DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
DFCIUSPS-T4-15.
Please refer to your response to DFCIUSPS-T4-8.
large ADC’s such as Minneapolis, Greensboro,
MODEN
Why would
and Denver still have an SLOCR?
Response:
The equipment
on information
list that was provided as an attachment to DFCIUSPS-T4-8
contained in AUTO. As mentioned in the response to lOCA/USPS-T4-
20(b), the information in AUTO is not up-to-date.
equipment
was based
is no longer located at those facilities.
Therefore, it is possible that the
Attachment to DFCIUSPS-T4-16 (Page 2 of 6)
Cross Reference -Processing and Distribution Center to
Remote Encoding Center
P&DC Supported
1
REC Name
Attachment to DFC/USPS-T4-16 (Page 3 of 6)
Cross Reference -Processing and Distribution Center to
Remote Encodrng Center
P&DC Supported
“---
--‘.I
REC Name
1
I
‘.-
*=== City, MO
Kar,,-=
Kilmer (r&w L?n,n.uirx,
.“.._..._.,, NJ 1
Knoxville, TN
Knknmn
-‘-I
-..-1
IN
I
I
-
.akeland, FL
ancaster. PA
ILansing, MI
L; rcVena+
- = --,
I
I
NV
Lehigh Valley, PA
LeYinntnn KY
Lima, un
Lincoln, NE
Little Rock, AR
Lonn Reach CA
Los Angeles, CA
I
I
..=--__..,
-. /
I nt tiwilb
.Wichita: KS
Princeton. .NJ
Bowling Green, KY
Kalamazoo. MI
KY
ion, WI
.,-,,_ jota, FL
anchester. NH
nhattan. NY #l
an, NY #2
ato. MN
II--nod), CA
Mawsville
,._. , _ ..._. (CA
McAllen. TX
Memf )his, TN
,.,.,mi, FL
Mid Florida FL
lclrrnd
NY
,,- I~lylIy,
.
h“irl
Mid-Hudson, NY
Middleser-F=cav
. ----^ MA
Midland, TX
Milwaukee, WI
I
1
I
,
I
Tampa, F’
York, PA
.~.
Fort Wayne _, lN
Glendale. .Az
Lehigh Valley, PA
Louisville. KY
vaywll. “n
Des Moines, IA
Little Rock, AR
San Bernadino. CA
Riversrde, CA
Louisville. KY
Duluth,
Birminghs n. AL
Nashua, NH
Fishkill, NY
Fishkrll, NY
Duluth, k
f&Allen.
Modesto, CA
Beaumont, TX
Tampa, FL
Birminghar n. AL
Jacksonville, FI
Princeton
--.-~ , NJ
Western Nassau, NY
Lvnchbura.
-. VA
-,~~McAllen. TX
~.
Des Moinf ?s. IA -I
I
I
Attachment to DFCIUSPS-T4-16 (Page 4 of 6)
Cross Reference - Processing and Distribution Center to
Remote Encoding Center
P&DC Supported
I
Iwapolis, MN
Mobile, AL
lnuth NJ
_ _ _,
lville, TN
New Castle, PA
New Haven, CT
New Orleans, LA
rark, NJ
No Jew ?y (DVD), NJ
Nor folk, NE
Norfolk, VA
North Bay, CA
NM
._, th Houston, TX
North Metro, GA
Nnrth
Texas, TX
._
No.rthnm \/2 VA
(
REC Name
I
Davenport, IA
Jacksonville, FL
Western Nassau. NY
I
Antiock. in
Pit&burg. PA
Albany, NY
Baton Rouge, LA
Kearny, NJ
Kearny. NJ
Wlchlta, KS
Newport News, VA
Selma, CA
..-..
,1,111,,,
.-,
.,I
Northwe st (Waltham)
Oak land, CA
Oklahoma (3ity OK
Olyr npia. WA
Omaha, NE
Orlando, FL
Oshkosh, WI
Oxnard, CA
Palatine, IL
Pasadena, CA
Pasco. WA
Iterson, NJ (NJ Metro)
Pensacola, FL
Peoria, IL
Philadelphia, PA
Phoenix, AZ
Piitsburg.
PA
. ..
Portland, ME
Portland. OR
Portsmov+h NH
Providence, RI
Raleigh, NC
Reading, PA
Q.ann NV
. -. .‘er. MN
hester, NY
1
,
i
Albany, NY
Hayward. CA
Tulsa, OK
Portland, OR
Des Moines, IA
Tampa, FL
Wichita. KS
Chula Vista, CA
Peoria, IL
McAllen, TX
Twin Falls, ID
Fishkill, NY
Jacksonville, FL
Kalamazoo, MI
Lehigh Valley, PA
Glendale, AZ
Pittsburgh, PA
Syracuse, NY
Salt Lake City, UT
Lvnchburg. VA
Lynchburg, VA
Salem, VA
York, PA
Portland. OR
Falling Waters, VvV
Davenpo” In
Syracuse
Attachment to DFWJSPS-T4-16
(Page 5 Of6)
Cross Reference - Processing and Distribution Center to
Remote Encodlng Center
P&DC Supported
REC Name
Attachment to DFCIUSPS-T4-16 (Page 6 of 6)
Cross Reference - Processing and Distribution Center to
Remote Encoding Center
PBDC Supported
REC Name
1
--1
Trenton, NJ
Tucson, AZ
Tulsa, OK
Tyler, TX
Utica, NY
Waco, TX
Wxhinnt~n,
DC
Waterbury, CT
Wat erloo. IA
WausaL I, WI
West Jers ey, NJ
West Palm Bieach, FL
Westchester, NY
I
Western Nassau, NY
j
White River ~Itmrtinn VT I
Wichita
Wilke
Wimingtc
Worchest
Youngstoi
Princeton, F
-1J
Glenda1 e, b.2
-..
Tulsa. OK
Sherwoc
Lynchbu
Beaumont. 1
Greensbom
Albany
Davenp
Des MOII
Kearny. N.
Birmingh
WE
==k===
---
RESPONSE OF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE WITNESS MODEN
TO INTERROGATORIES
OF DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
DFCIUSPS-T4-17.
Suppose a typewritten letter is processed on an AFCS that is
operating in ISS mode. Will the AFCS lift the image and send it to the RBCS system for
resolution, or will it not lift the image and instead send the letter to a stacker for transfer
to an MLOCR?
circumstances
If the AFCS can operate in either mode, please explain the
under which the AFCS would be operated in each mode.
Response:
The subsequent
processing of a letter after it goes through the AFCSIISS
on whether the AFCSllSS
advantage
is operating in “lift script only” or “lift everything”
is dependent
mode. The
of operating in the “lift everything” mode is you save a mail handling on type
written mail that the MLOCR can’t resolve. The problem with using the “lift everything”
mode is one of capacity.
It puts a lot more images through the RBCS network (i.e. the
LAN that connects the image lift to the rest of the system), increases the images
processing capability requirements
for the RCR, and adds mail to the OSS. Therefore,
facilities generally use the “lift script only” mode.
DECLARATION
I, Ralph J. Moden, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing
answers are true and correct, to the best of my knowledge,
belief.
Dated:
s/zq/s
3
_-.
information and
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document
participants
of record in this proceeding
in accordance
with section 12 of the Rules of
Practice.
Scott L. Reiter
475 L’Enfant Plaza West, SW.
Washington, D.C. 20260-l 137
September 29, 1997
upon all