Election Center Postal Committee: Military Addresses, Code 19, ERIC, & the OIG Report Update from Tammy Patrick Bipartisan Policy Center August 19th, 2015

USPS & Military Addresses Military Mail Addressing: •In conjunction with the Navy and the Military Postal Service Agency, the Postal Service will revise the APO and FPO address format to more closely align with Postal and other military addressing standards – using the “UNIT,” “CMR,” or “PSC” designation and number, plus the box number as part of the addressing component. •The use of the ship’s name to reach its destination will no longer be permitted. •These addressing standards are effective June 1, 2015, with a full compliance date required by October 2015. USPS & Military Addresses

Overseas military addresses must conform to domestic addressing standards format, while including the correct APO or FPO and AA, AE, or AP designation. AA, AE, and AP are used for addresses with the 3-digit ZIP Code prefixes 340, 090- 098, and 962-966, respectively. The correct format and correlating examples are as follows: •a. Line 1: Full name. •b. Line 2: The delivery line (the second line from the bottom in the address) must show the word “UNIT”, “CMR”, or “PSC” and number; and box number assigned. •c. Line 3: The bottom line must contain the APO or FPO (“city”) designation and the appropriate two-letter AA, AE, or AP (“state”) abbreviation followed by the ZIP Code or ZIP+4 Code USPS & Military Addresses USPS & Military Addresses

• I have spoken to FVAP and brought this to their attention. • They reached out to MSPA and were advised that the MSPA will deliver the mail regardless of compliance with the new format, but that they understand the need to unify. • Questions remain: • State VR systems will need to incorporate (NASED notified). • Will MSPA will ever get the mail piece if address doesn’t comport with new format? • What will the impact be with Move Update & NCOA for old addresses not in the new format? How will they be coded? USPS & Ohio NCOA “CODE 19 Found COA: New Address not ZIP + 4 coded or New address primary number not DPV confirmable or Temporary Change-of Address – There is a change-of-address on file but the new address be ZIP + 4 coded and therefore there is no 11-digit DPBC to store or return, or the new address primary number cannot be confirmed on DPV or the new address is temporary.

Use Standardized Input record. New address is not ZIP+4 coded or new address primary number not DPV confirmable or new address is temporary.” • The State is having difficulty parsing this out with their vendor. In the past they were advised that Code 19s were designated as temporary changes and it triggered a hold on specific mailings by the State. • During their last list maintenance effort they started getting calls from voters saying that they had not moved, this triggered the conversation with the vendor telling them that Code 19 is also used for the non ZIP+4 codings. • There are roughly 30K voters with this designation in OH. • Information shared with USPS (Jim Wilson in Memphis office). • Update? USPS & ERIC Mailers

• One of the PCEA recommendations was that states join data sharing projects like the IVRCC & ERIC. • The cost of the initial mailings have been prohibitive for some states to join so we are working with USPS to review the mailings of some current members to design/create a template that would adhere to standard mail perimeters and qualify for the lower postage costs. • Mailing samples from VA, NV, & CO were shared and sent to the NY office for review in July. • Update? Office of Inspector General Report • Focus: identify potential for election mail expansion. • Reviewed all types of election mail, with particular attention to voting by mail and ballot delivery and return. • Methodology included data captured by intake which identified election mail—this may severely underestimate volumes. • Interviews of state & local election officials were also conducted. Office of Inspector General Report • Benefits to Voters & Election Officials section is comprehensive, some will argue a few points (accessibility, increased turnout) but many admin issues raised (voting equip age, lack of PP & poll workers, etc.).

“Postal Innovation Act” • Discussion on internet voting as H.R. 3319 & S. 1854 “not ready” but will “continue to Comptroller General to study USPS providing internet service & online explore the possibility of Internet voting. voting within the secure digital credentialing program” as in previous report from 2013. Office of Inspector General Report

• Expansion of VBM in states that already allow: $2M increase revenue (??Low). • Recommendation that USPS devote additional marketing resources to expansion of VBM, rather than solely political mail efforts. • Management disagreed with the It is important to note that management recommendations & will continue has articulated that the focus is on the operational support for VBM & election attention to political mail ($317M yr) mail, not the marketing and expansion versus the smaller market of there of. election mail ($24M yr).