**Minutes of the**

**Mailers' Technical Advisory Committee**

**General Session**

**Thursday, March 13, 1997**

Arthur Porwick, Postal Service Vice Chairman, opened the meeting and
introduced Robert Reisner, Vice President, Strategic Planning, who
discussed the USPS five-year strategic plan, mandated by the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993.

**The Government Performance Act of 1993 (GPRA)**

Mr. Reisner explained that the plan process is defined in the Act and to
meet the various deadlines, the basic plan must be formulated during
this spring time frame. The customers needs, he said, would drive the
philosophy and structure of the plan, and protecting that voice amid all
the other special interest voices that exist in Washington, would be a
high priority.

The USPS plan, unlike plans of other agencies whose plans go to the OMB,
would be submitted directly to the President and the Congress with the
following deadlines: The 5-Year Plan is due by September 30, 1997; a
Performance Plan by March 1998 (and every March thereafter); and a
Performance Results Report by March 2000 (and every March thereafter).

The core of the plan is the mission and vision of the USPS, which
embodies the goals and objectives and an articulation of how to achieve
them. The term CustomerPerfect! is part of the system that encompasses
all of the USPS management processes. It is an annual process that
includes setting goals, deploying programs and resources to meet those
goals, an implementation phase and a formal review cycle.

Currently, Mr. Reisner explained, three broad goals have been developed.
The goal for the "voice of the customer" is more than improving customer
satisfaction, which was the earlier wording, and it now targets growth
\-- to improve customer satisfaction by offering superior customer value
in each market and in each customer segment that we target. There is a
"voice of the employee" goal -- to improve employee and organizational
effectiveness by having the right people in the right place with the
right tools at the right time to consistently provide superior customer
value and ensure commercial viability in a dynamic environment. The
"voice of the business" goal is intended to tie these two goals
together, to target growth, to align human resources with the growth
objectives and to achieve bottom line success by "improving financial
performance to assure our commercial viability as a service provider for
the worldwide movement of messages, merchandise and money."

Mr. Reisner noted that the vision of the 2002 destination for the USPS
is to be a dramatically improved version of what exists today by growing
market share, to defend key core businesses, and to create new
businesses and value-added services. The core strategies that will allow
achievement of the goals and objectives include an absolute commitment
to quality customer service and aggressive cost management. That will
enable the USPS to become a 21^st^ century growth company. Finally, the
USPS is committed to creating unique customer value, even though the
products and services may be traditional ones they will need to serve
customers in new ways.

MTAC members were invited to submit comments and suggestions as soon as
possible because of the importance of completing the first part of the
planning process in the spring. In response to various questions from
the members, Mr. Reisner said that the strategic plan would be clear and
specific in terms of mission and direction, and would include the broad
base for performance review. Congressional staff will actively
participate in the dialog as is required by the law. But, the strategic
plan will certainly be a product of USPS requirements. Also, in
soliciting comments, because of the enormity of the USPS and the great
number of special interests who may want to comment, the invitation to
comment will focus on the Federal Register and other required public
announcements, and response to customer suggestions.

**Blue Ribbon Panel Update**

Yvonne Reigle, MTAC Immediate Past Industry Chair, discussed the newly
established Blue Ribbon Committee, which was formed at the suggestion of
Marvin Runyan, Postmaster General/CEO. He wanted to bring together a
group of key individuals in industry and in the USPS to look at the
business plans for the next decade. The Panel was appointed and met and
developed the following objective: "Identify those vital few issues that
are essential to ensure the long-term viability of the mail in meeting
the future needs of our customers. Look for areas of common focus and
chart a course for development of "win/win" solutions."

The Committee is co-chaired by Theodore Deikel (representing industry)
and William Henderson (representing the USPS). It is supported by a
working group including Joe Schick and Yvonne Reigle, on board to
provide a link to MTAC. Although emphasis is on strategic planning,
issues of tactical importance to MTAC and the individual companies
involved will be brought back to MTAC for consideration.

The action plan of the Committee is to examine issues related to the
future with regard to both USPS and industry positions in order to
identify mutually beneficial opportunities. The working group has heard
a number of presentations by USPS managers, including the 5-Year
Strategic Plan presented by Mr. Reisner. The Committee will use the
Postal Forum to report on issues considered and solicit feedback as
fodder for subsequent Committee meetings.

**Support for Customers**

Mr. Porwick introduced the new business support structure under the Vice
President of Customer Relations, which is responsible for the entire
current customer base, consisting of six groups: Business Accounts,
Business Partners, Business Service Network (which directly support
customers), Business Account Services, Customer Relations Program
Management, and Strategic Industry Management.

Pat McGee, Manager of Business Accounts, explained that the focus of the
groups was on present customers and current business. New business is
the responsibility of Tactical Marketing. The Business Accounts group
will proactively seek feedback from customers through Mr. Porwick's
outreach to target associations, and through the current National
Account Managers and account reps.

The Business Partners team, as explained by Jay Freitas, is responsible
for assisting the field in managing relationships with National and
Premier managed accounts who are third-party intermediaries that provide
mail-related solutions to our mutual customers. These partners can
include (but are not limited to) parcel consolidators, manufacturers of
mailing hardware, printers, presort bureaus, and lettershops. The group
segments this customer base and develops marketing strategies for both
sales and service to meet corporate revenue goals and customer
satisfaction targets. Like Business Accounts, this team works with the
field to support the enhancement and implementation of account programs
and plans.

The Business Service Network, Lois Murphy said, works through over 96
Business Service Center sites around the system, focusing on the service
needs of major customers. The group would act as the "consolidator" of
information and feedback to help management throughout the USPS respond
to customer needs more effectively.

Commenting on a question about customer input to the rate making
specialists in the USPS, Ms. Murphy noted that such input would
certainly be important, and it would probably be developed through an
information feedback network that would begin with the customer and move
through the system via the national account managers and account
representatives, who will continue to be the primary front line support
for each customer.

In response to a question about what issues should be referred to the
new support group, Mr. McGee suggested that, ideally, problem issues
would be prevented through use of the feedback to develop effective
policy. Lois Murphy explained that the Business Service Network would
collect feedback and develop weekly information reports to be sent to
area managers, the Business Centers and to headquarters. This would
identify major system-wide problems and "hot spots." The first support
should come from local managers or from the nearest Business Service
Center. Failing there, the issue would be referred up to the Business
Service Network.

Finally, Mr. McGee explained that the Customer Relations Program
Management Group (which would look at specific customer services and
solutions) and the Business Accounts Services Group (which would focus
on training, recognition and promotional aspects) were information and
analysis operations which would provide support to the three other
groups. Attached is an organizational chart with contact names.

**Closing Remarks**

After administrative announcements, Mr. Schick closed

**Mailers' Technical Advisory Committee**

**Minutes**

**Wednesday, March 12, 1997**

**General Issues**

**Welcome**

Chris Rebello , Industry Chair, opened the meeting at 9:07 a.m.

Arthur Porwick welcomed new members of the MTAC: Senny Boone (National
Newspaper Association), Ken Brown (Edison Electric Institute), Nick
Cavnar and Jerry Okabe (American Business Press), Laura Beddini
(Fulfillment Management Association), James Prevost (National Postal
Policy Council), Marvin Six (Offering Envelope Association), and Joseph
Monastro (Recording Industry Association of America).

Mr. Rebello made several administrative announcements and especially
recognized the effort of Carole Overkott in providing support for the
MTAC meeting.

Yvonne Reigle, Immediate Past Industry Chair, announced that a special
broadcast would be made from Nashville on National Postal Customer
Council (PCC) Day on March 20. She would be participating to offer a
brief announcement about the MTAC reorganization. The information shared
would focus on the new structure which enables participation in some
MTAC activities by non-members. Copies of the MTAC roster will be sent
to all PCCs so individuals will have contact information if they need to
discuss an issue with an MTAC member. Ms. Reigle also suggested that it
may be appropriate to develop an MTAC overview that could be used by any
MTAC member when asked to present at a PCC meeting.

**Update on MTAC Restructure**

Discussing the MTAC reorganization process, Mr. Rebello stated that the
steering committee had met several times to iron out details for the
working group process. Referring to a flow chart, he noted that any
initiator would be able to complete an issue proposal form (which
includes a statement of work and a benefits statement), contact an issue
sponsor who would bring it to the MTAC Steering Committee for
consideration. Mr. Rebello stated that the most appropriate sponsor
would be a member involved with the issue subject in the past, but any
member would be acceptable as a sponsor. Further, if no member was
willing to act as sponsor, the initiator could still expect his issue to
be considered by the Steering Committee.

Industry members are Chris Rebello (Industry Chair), Joseph Schick
(Industry Vice-Chair), Yvonne Reigle (Immediate Past Industry Chair),
Mury Salls (First Class/Expedited Mail), Howard Schwartz (Periodicals),
Dan Minnick (Standard Mail), Lloyd Karls (Parcels), Peter Moore
(Addressing and Zip+4), and Joe Lubenow (Engineering &Technology).

The Postal Service participants are Anita Bizzotto (Manager, Business
Mail Acceptance), Michelle Denny (Manager, Customer Mail Preparation),
Jeff Kaniff (Manager, Customer Satisfaction and Measurements), Pat McGee
(Manager, National Accounts), Ralph Moden (Manager, Operational
Requirements), Mike Murphy (Manager, National Customer Support Center),
Art Porwick (Manager, Sales Development), Sammy Seals (Manager, Test and
Evaluation), and Greg Whiteman (Manager, Industry Management).

Mr. Rebello explained that the issue, once received by the Steering
Committee, is subject to several criteria: Can something be done about
it? Would the solution impact be broad or narrow? Who would it affect?
Is the solution worth the effort? Are resources available -- not only
money, but MTAC volunteers for the various working groups?

The issues and the progress of the working groups will be gathered into
a database that will be available online, through the web page, through
RIBBS, and even in hard copy format if needed. Although Mr. Rebello
noted that the information would have to be requested, members suggested
that a more proactive approach should be made by MTAC to develop a
format to announce issues early on, to make information available before
the formal working group is established, and to invite non-members to
participate. MTAC members should be able to designate the mode of
communications.

It was suggested that there be a "fast track" process that would allow
key issues to be acted on expeditiously. Mr. Rebello commented that,
although an issue could be submitted at any time to any Steering
Committee member, issues submitted immediately before a Steering
Committee meeting might be returned for clarification or additional
information. He agreed with a suggestion that an address be established
for submission of issue proposals (although it was emphasized that
working through an issue sponsor would be more efficient). It was also
noted that, even though a working group was formally established,
interested parties could join the process at any time a valid
contribution could be made to the outcome.

Continuing the process discussion, Mr. Rebello explained that the issue
proposal, once submitted, would be discussed by the Steering Committee,
which would accept it and establish a working group or reject it, which
would then require additional justification and support from the sponsor
for reconsideration. In establishing a working group, the Steering
Committee determines whether the issue is policy or process, whether it
pertains to operations, regulations or communications, and identifies
the appropriate representatives in industry and in the Postal Service.

Once the working group resolves the issue, it is submitted to management
and the working group is dissolved.

In conclusion, the members were briefed on the June activities, which
would include a brief training session on committee function (how to
organize a working group, how to run a meeting and develop consensus and
recommendations).

**Standard Mail Subcommittee**

**March 12, 1997**

**Daniel J. Minnick -- Industry Chair**

**Leo F. Raymond \-- Postal Chair**

1.  The Focus Group Report was provided by George Sacco, Pacific Area
    Focus Group Industry Chair. George centered his report around the
    group's February 18 meeting which discussed six major issues:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
a.  ABE -- members expressed concerns that misuse of the system, still
    under deployment and refinement, "can put mailers out of business."

b.  Verification Consistency -- members reported instances of
    inconsistent responses to technical questions, and, therefore,
    competitive disadvantage, when different postal facilities -- or
    employees of the same facility -- were asked.

c.  Rate Case -- members asked postal attendees about whether an omnibus
    rate case was under preparation but did not get a definite answer.

d.  Delivery -- members complained about the inability to expect
    consistent service, with some mailings arriving at addressees
    earlier -- not just later -- than planned.

e.  Changes in Preparation Standards -- members complained that the
    revised preparation standards implemented last year, such as
    replacing state/mixed states with ADC/Mixed ADC, was "costing (them)
    money."

f.  Acceptance Flexibility -- members asked that post offices be more
    flexible in establishing the days/hours of operation of their
    business mail entry units.

George also commented that local postal officials shared industry
feeling that the rigid enforcement of the 150-piece rule "prevents
alternatives" from being implemented as to mailers can be allowed to
prepare mail in emergencies such as the recent floods where smaller
"direct" trays would have bottle-necked or closed facilities. He also
noted that the level of customer participation at focus group meetings
was not as great as he believed could benefit and he asked other area
focus groups to send suggestions about how this can be improved.

2.  Charlie Howard offered a report from his work group on carrier route
    sacks and mixed DDU pallets. (A copy of his group's minutes is
    attached.) His group continues to discuss industry concerns over
    "skin" carrier route sacks and "air" trays with only 150 pieces. The
    discussion was focused on ways to make the contents more efficiently
    containerized, not on changing the minimum eligibility requirements.
    Ralph Moden had represented the Postal Service at the group's
    meeting. He commented that the 150-piece minimum was set within the
    context of the availability of 1-foot MM trays; this causes an
    apparent problem when the mailer uses EMM trays, where 1-foot sizes
    are not available. Ralph will re-examine the 1993 data used in
    drafting the 150-piece standard as part of Classification Reform,
    and will calculate post-Reform volume of carrier route that would
    have been in 3-digit carrier route trays and sacks. MASA will be
    providing data from member mailings to assess the volume and type of
    mail in "air" trays they may include.

Dan Minnick offered that some mailers may be using these circumstances
as an opportunity to move clients' mail from carrier route to
automation. Regarding mixed DDU pallets (i.e., pallets of mail for two
or more 5-digit ZIP Codes served by the same delivery unit), Charlie
said Ralph's comment was that such pallets are not currently under
review for implementation, but would only be allowed for palletized
bundles of Enhanced Carrier Route mail. The issue will be discussed
further at the next work group meeting.

Other comments and discussion followed:

a.  Dan shared that segmentation of lists compromised ability to
    generate 5-digit carrier route sacks.

b.  Responding to Gene Del Polito's question, Charlie said he believes
    resistance to changing the 150-piece rule rests on cost assumptions
    in the Reform case that underlie the rates, as well as a general
    postal preference to move toward a count-based presort system.
    Charlie said he also senses a resistance to "fine tuning" in
    general, and a general view in the Postal Service that the volume of
    mail affected by the 150-piece rule is not "significant." He
    disputed perceived postal concerns that clients would be encouraged
    to produce "fat" letters if the 150-piece rule were replaced by a
    "N"-tray standard.

c.  Don Harle said he is getting complaints of slow delivery from
    clients with 50K-150K national lists. He suggested this problem was
    concentrated in mail placed in ADC and Mixed ADC trays, and that the
    processing facilities where these trays are directed cannot handle
    the volume they're receiving. He said that mailings that were 75-80%
    finely presorted before Reform are now up to 40% ADC/Mixed ADC
    sortation. Don also questioned whether the separator cards between
    routes in 5-digit carrier route trays offered any value other than
    for postal verification.

d.  Responding to Dan's request for a show of hands, many attendees
    indicated their mail has experienced delivery delays, but only two
    hands were raised to indicate nondelivery experience.

e.  Marcus Smith said he believes some delays may be caused by
    incorrectly barcoded labels that cause the tray of mail to be routed
    to the wrong place, sometimes repeatedly.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  Dan asked for discussion of the FSM 1000 and the question, "What do
    we need to know?" in anticipation of the machine's deployment. He
    said that generally mailers need to learn more about the machine
    before they can compose questions about its impact on mailpiece
    design or mail preparation.

Bill Hoyt said it needed to be established whether the FSM 1000 will
have a barcode reader. Walt Pfeiffer said the industry needs to know
whether the FSM 1000 will enable rigid flats to qualify for automation
rates.

Gene Del Polito said the industry needed to learn where the FSM 1000s
will be deployed, whether those locations would be the same as any or
all of the sites equipped with FSM 881s, and whether the FSM 1000 was
developed as a way to lower postal costs or increase mail eligibility
for automation.

Lloyd Karls said the questions his group developed on the same topic
(see attached Parcels Subcommittee minutes) would be added to those of
this group.

-2-

> **Engineering & Technology/Transportation**
>
> **March 12, 1997**
>
> **Automated Flats - Tests of Extended Sizes**
>
> Sherl Johnson discussed the test on automated flats. The flat sorter
> machines can handle 5 5/8 inch flats up to 9 inches with reliability.
> Above that, reliability suffers, so the recommended height limit will
> be 9.5 inches, above which handling problems are unacceptable. There
> are also problems with glossy and highly coated stock at 9 inches and
> it may be an exception issue. Paper weight affects reliability --
> self-covers, paper covers the same weight as the inner pages, may open
> at the end of the process, resulting in some damage to the piece when
> it is ejected into the receiving tub.
>
> Polywrapped pieces, she said, were not included in this particular
> test, but the continuing test of the small card-sized polywrap pieces
> indicate that very few sorters will handle them well.
>
> Ms. Johnson noted that a proposed standard will come out in late April
> and the final rule published in May with an effective date of June or
> July.
>
> Responding to a question about design, Ms. Johnson suggested a minimum
> 6-inch width (which allows a 12-inch height). Barcode location
> problems can be solved by more rigid pieces, since flimsy pieces may
> bend and distort the barcode reading process.
>
> Scott Bombaugh addressed issues related to the barcode reader on the
> FSM 1000. He stated that testing would soon occur to validate the
> concept of reading the barcode as the piece travels through the
> channel. By June tests should be complete for a recommendation to the
> Board of Governors in July, including a request for funding for all
> units to be installed. Deployment of barcode readers would begin in
> December, about 30 units initially and then about 40 units per month.
> The reader would accept PostNet and Code 128 tracking code if
> implemented.
>
> In response to questions, Mr. Bombaugh stated that additional bar
> codes on the piece would not affect the reader capability.
>
> **Automated Barcode Evaluator (ABE)**
>
> Anita Bizzotto introduced the discussion of the Automated Barcode
> Evaluator (ABE) by reviewing the rationale-- providing consistent and
> objective evaluation, including diagnostic feedback. Early on, when
> the General Accounting Office looked at the evaluation process, the
> findings suggested that errors were causing a major loss of revenue.
> The GAO report noted that the USPS was slow to provide appropriate
> tools, the barcodes were often unreadable regardless, and special
> equipment was required to solve the problem. The Postal Service took
> exception to the report, stating that the situation was not as acute
> as described in the report. The development of ABE was a step to
> solving the problems mentioned in the report, even though the Postal
> Service felt that the report overstated the issue..
>
> The reliability standard was set at 70% accuracy. Early prototype
> testing was a little disappointing, but as the bugs were worked out
> reliability increased to the point where failure rate has been reduced
> to 8.1% and the software tests have resulted in a very high
> consistency. The impact printed barcodes cause the major part of the
> 8.1% failures, followed by ink jet. Laser printed barcodes are
> exceptionally reliable.

Concern about maintenance has been allayed with a maintenance handbook,
local and national technical support and a 24-hour hot line for help.

There is promise that verification devices may prove helpful in letter
shops as a less expensive pseudo-ABE process, which would allow
certification of sites to reduce the need for using ABE.

Phase I implementation is expected on May 15 where 85% compliance would
earn full discount, 70%-85% partial discount, and less than 70% discount
disqualification. Phase II, in July, would raise the full discount to
95%.

There was some discussion about the experiences of mailers which
reflected a discrepancy between the ABE failure rate and the actual
sorter equipment success rate, suggesting that the ABE rejected far more
pieces than the sorting equipment. Regarding comments that sorting
equipment has outperformed the ABE, it was noted that improper
installation of software could be a factor. Another software update is
planned. When properly installed, the ABE should reflect the real
sorting capability of sorting equipment.

**Robotic Tray Handling**

John Weller described the robotic tray handling equipment now installed
at a number of locations. A video was shown to visually present the two
models now in use, a pedestal robot (about \$300,000) which can handle
up to 12 sorting stations, and the gantry handler (about \$500,000)
which has up to 20 stations. The speed of operation, with minimal error
rates, is up t**o** 4-5 times faster than manual operations. Advantages
include improved worker safety, reduction of manual operations,
increased accuracy, full integration to TMS, greater standardization and
lower costs.

Mr. Weller commented on the evolution of the use of robots, which began
in 1995 with special adaptations to standard robot equipment, installed
in mid-1996. The control systems are based in the NT platform, and
operators use graphics similar to the home computer (icons, etc.). The
robots can lift more weight, reduce personnel injuries and therefore
injury claims, and they are simply faster.

The impact on mailers, Mr. Weller said, would be an increased importance
of quality bar coded labels. The second requirement will be for more
careful loading of trays. The benefits will include greater accuracy of
sorting, reduced costs, better tracking and controls, and a safer
working environment.

**New Thinking About Pallet Presort**

Joe Lubenow began a discussion on pallet presort, noting that there are
now mixed ADC and mixed BMC pallets accepted, which has the positive
advantage of allowing much greater palletization by mailers, but the
disadvantage of having introduced some delivery delay problems. The
question about continuing mixed pallets is under consideration.

Reverse presort attacks the problem of leftovers when various presorts
are completed. It gives the mailer more options to change the order of
presort to more efficiently sort the mailing. Issues related to reverse
presort are overlaps in ADC/BMC sorts, mixed ADC, the effective use of
MM versus EMM trays, and drop ship destinations.

The working group is considering three areas -- what is currently
authorized, what could be done if the Postal Service would accept the
recommendation, and what would require Rate Commission approval.
Recommendations include making a 3-digit pallet when it does not prevent
making an SCF pallet (otherwise make the SCF pallet even if something
must be borrowed from the 3-digit level).

-2-

A second recommendation is not to take advantage of lower pallet
minimums, which is harmful. Lower pallet minimums should apply to the
last level of sortation, even if a small residual remains.

The third recommendation would be to consider elimination of mixed BMC
and mixed ADC pallets because of the delays that result, additional
workload and so on.

The fourth recommendation, addition of ADC pallets which helps keep mail
out of the BMC's .

Finally, allow reverse presort.

Cheryl Beller explained current regulations with regard to pallet
sortation. The minimums for Standard mail -- pallets required at 500
pounds for 5-digit, SCF, BMC, optional at 250-499 pounds for the same
categories. The 3-digit sort is optional at 250 pounds. The minimums are
the same for periodicals, except that ADC and mixed ADC are substituted
for the BMC categories.

Trays on pallets for 5-digit, 3-digit, and mixed ADC/BMC is optional at
3-plus tiers. For SCF and ADC/BMC, pallets are required at 6 tiers.

Mailers may combine automation and non-automation mail on all pallets
except 5-digit pallets. Examples were provided that would allow mailers
to eliminate the 3-digit pallet and retain mail at the SCF level

Ralph Moden discussed the reclassification mid-course correction
proposal. The focus is mainly on palletization, showing that Standard A
flats lost multi-coded city, the required 3-digit (now optional), and
the unofficial "state" pallets. The required SCF remains. The previously
optional BMC is now required, and the optional sacks for residuals is
augmented with an authorized mixed BMC pallet.

In second class, there was previously an SDC optional pallet, now gone,
as well as the multi-coded city. The 3-digit is optional, SCF is
required, and there is an ADC required for periodicals. Residual can be
sacked or pout on a mixed ADC pallet.

The objectives of palletization, Mr. Moden said, were to achieve bundles
on pallets, trays on pallets, and deeper penetration of the pallets into
the system.

The pallet minimum have dropped from 600 pounds to 500 pounds, with
optional 250 pound makeup. Mixed pallets, requested by industry, have
been authorized. Tray specs are now in the DMM, instead of in
guidelines.

There has been an increase in palletized mail, Mr. Moden said. However,
the increased volume into BMCs because of the mixed pallets have caused
some concerns, especially about delivery delays. The same volume
problems have occurred at the ADCs.

Recommendations are to create an ADC pallet for Standard A, which would
eliminate the BMC pallets. The 250 pound requirement, or some other
similar weight not yet determined, would be instituted only on the last
level of sortation. Studies are under way to evaluate the volume changes
that might occur if these recommendations were adopted.

There was a comment from the floor that there be consideration of
reinstating the SCF sack in periodicals mail, for both rate and service
considerations.

-3-

**Transition to Work Groups**

Mr. Lubenow invited members to consider participation in the existing
work groups, listing them as follows: Pallet/container tracking (Jim
Schemmel), DSAS -- Drop Ship Appointment System -- Enhancements and
Upgrades (Rick Kropski/John Mulkay),;Package, Container and Pallet
Integrity (Russ Shores); Presort Optimization (Joe Lubenow/Ralph Moden);
Information-Based Indicia Program (IBIP) Customer Advisory Group (Pam
Gibert); and Planet Code.

-4-