ferred out of the region. And you indicate that only 24 of these vehicles carry the "E" designation. And if that was the case as of March 1, 1955, I would assume that the experiment had well since been spent.

Mr. BANTON. Well, I think we consider the experimental status of those vehicles as finished. But as far as the experiment with vehicles for delivery carrying mail is concerned, the Department never ought to stop experimenting.

There is just too much potential saving in it. There is somewhere around 50 percent of our delivery routes in residential areas that are susceptible to vehicularization.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Gentlemen, I would like to continue. But we can't. We do not have a quorum.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. MOLLOHAN. We will recess until 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the subcommittee recessed until 2 p. m.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Mr. MOLLOHAN. A quorum being present, the subcommittee will come to order.

Mr. Plapinger. Will you continue, please?

Mr. PLAPINGER. We did establish immediately prior to your retirement you were chief industrial engineer of your Department.

FURTHER STATEMENT OF ORMONDE A. KIEB, ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL, BUREAU OF FACILITIES; ACCOMPANIED BY WILHO KALLIO, CHIEF OF PROCUREMENT; M. W. BANTON, FORMER CHIEF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER; ROY D. SCHLEGEL, DIRECTOR OF MOTOR VEHICLES; DANIEL M. O'DONOGHUE, ATTORNEY; CHARLES P. GRADDICK, ASSISTANT INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER; AND ROBERT E. O'DONOVAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL, BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION

Mr. BANTON. Yes, sir.

Mr. PLAPINGER. You were also chief industrial engineer from what date until you retired?

Mr. BANTON. Since about November 1, 1953.

Mr. PLAPINGER. So that you are fairly familiar with the matter at hand. I think that immediately prior to the adjournment we were talking about experimental data.

Mr. BANTON. That is right.

Mr. PLAPINGER. I believe you told us you had not seen the widespread experimental data that Mr. Gunther had referred to at the previous hearing?

Mr. BANTON. That is right.

Mr. PLAPINGER. What type of experimental data had you seen, Mr. Banton?

Mr. BANTON. Well, we the members of the personnel from my Department, working on that—are you referring specifically to this hopscotch experiment in Warren, Ohio?

Mr. PLAPINGER. Not necessarily, sir. Any experimentation with these 250 vehicles. May I refresh your recollection to this extent by

saying that we had received from the Department results of 5 days of comparative work in Warren, Ohio, and some data with respect to the Miami tests earlier in that year?

Mr. BANTON. We were interested in, and took data on performance of carriers on vehicles, in contrast with foot routes.

In other words, we reassigned and reestablished that routes would be appropriate for carriers on a motor vehicle, instead of on foot. And it required a pretty extensive revamping of all the routes, say, out of 1 station, because if you add or detract from 1 route, you have got to make it up from somewhere else.

Mr. PLAPINGER. I understand that, sir.

Mr. BANTON. But to establish the requirements for a whole group of routes, such as out of a station or a small post office.

Mr. PLAPINGER. But would that not be based upon experimental data, sir?

Mr. BANTON. To some extent, yes. That is the experimental data we used initially for establishing that was data we established in Miami on a test track we had down there, which would ascertain the approximate time of vehicle from house to house and from box to box and then a carrier going from a curb to a certain distance to a house. Mr. PLAPINGER. But that was established prior to the Twin Coach vehicle?

Mr. BANTON. Yes; before we could lay out any routes.

Mr. PLAPINGER. What was the experimentation with the Twin Coach vehicle? That is what I am trying to arrive at, sir.

Mr. BANTON. The experimentation with the Twin Coach vehicles was to establish and lay out routes that we considered appropriate for the two carriers on a vehicle, and then try the best you could do was cut and dry.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Would your division do that?

Mr. BANTON. Members of my division and members of Robert Heller's group did that in several Ohio cities.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Do you recall seeing experimental data in that connection?

Mr. BANTON. There was a lot of data taken on the stuff.

Mr. PLAPINGER. The only thing I am trying to arrive at is that, when we asked for data, all we got was what I just referred to a minute ago. I am trying to find out where in the Department is this data.

Mr. Goff, has any search been instituted to find any such data since Mr. Gunther's testimony?

Mr. GoFF. I think Mr. Graddick has some.

Mr. BANTON. Do you have any data that was taken on laying out those routes?

Mr. GoFF. This is Charles P. Graddick in the Office of Industrial Engineer.

Mr. GRADDICK. As far as personal records, I did; I have all the data of the survey made at Youngstown, Ohio, and then there has been furnished your committee certain of the Warren information.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. You said a minute ago you had certain results of a survey as of a certain date and then you had later results. Mr. GRADDICK. In the case of Youngstown, a preliminary planning date.

82284-56- -7

Mr. HOLLOHAN. Do you have any results of the experiment itself? Mr. GRADDICK. I have the information that Mr. Thompson of the Cincinnati region furnished, which I believe has been furnished to your committee.

Mr. PLAPINGER. That relates to Warren. Is that the 5 days in October 1954?

Mr. GRADDICK. The Thompson data relates primarily to the contract savings and his plan of course, it is not data, his plan is to follow it up on the functional savings.

Mr. PLAPINGER. I think you are mistaken, Mr. Graddick. We have some breakdown of cost savings, but nothing else.

We had the Warren data, and we have the timesaving graph in Miami.

Mr. GRADDICK. Don't you have the contract saving in Ohio?
Mr. PLAPINGEIR. Yes.

Mr. GRADDICK. That is it.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Is that what you are referring to?

Mr. GRADDICK. Yes, plus the Youngstown data. I mean the Warren. Mr. PLAPINGER. Did the other people engaged with you have the data?

Mr. GRADDICK. If you want me to go on now, I will explain how I got into the picture.

Mr. PLAPINGER. You say you have data. Are there other members of the post office employed as you are, who should have had data? Mr. GRADDICK. Yes.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Can you name some of those people?

Mr. GRADDICK. They should be in the region. I am sure we could get a great deal of data in the region.

Mr. PLAPINGER. We asked for this some time in March.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Well, now wait a minute

Mr. GRADDICK. I think perhaps maybe the people you asked for the data might have thought you were referring to contract data.

Mr. PLAPINGER. I think we referred to data concerning the experiment. And incidentally, may the staff have permission to insert correspondence and other data submitted by the post office, at an appropriate place in the record rather than ask each time?

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Is there any objection?

Mr. YOUNGER. That is the letter, together with what was submitted. Mr. PLAPINGER. Yes.

Mr. YOUNGER. Okay.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Very well.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Mr. Banton, the tests in Florida-what did they prove to your satisfaction?

Mr. BANTON. The tests in Florida were largely to develop the different advantages or disadvantages of various vehicles that were under consideration. From those we were able to get, we felt, quite conclusive data on the time it requires for a man to serve, to drive up to a box, serve the box, and go on to the next box.

We had a circular track there. First we contemplated doing it on a delivery route, and then we realized that no 2 days would probably be the same. That is the mail volume and content varies from day to day, and we decided to set up a test track. And I think we put out 50 R. F. D. boxes, we established the equivalent of 50 residences with

boxes at the curb. And those, I believe, were at 50 feet apart. And by having them they could skip 1 or 2 boxes, and so forth, and determine the time for varying distances, from 50 to 150 feet, I think. And we also made up mail for each box. A man put mail in each box as it went around and left it there, and then it was picked up, and the thing was rearranged again there for the next test.

We got what we felt was some very conclusive and illuminating data on the features of the various vehicles.

Mr. PLAPINGER. What did you find with respect to the Twin Coach vehicle?

Mr. BANTON. We found that for serving boxes at the curb, or specially where anybody had to mount and dismount; that the saving in time would amount anywhere from 15 to 20 percent.

Mr. PLAPINGER. Was that attributed to the right-hand drive?

Mr. BANTON. The right-hand drive and the fact that the fellow was standing close to the ground ready to get up and off the vehicle. Mr. PLAPINGER. How about the significance of the automatic transmission?

Mr. BANTON. We could not very well determine the use of the automatic transmission, because we did not go to the trouble of obtaining vehicles with and without the automatic transmission, but we found out one thing with the automatic transmission-there was no clutch loss in it and you eliminate a lot of clutch failure.

Mr. PLAPINGER. So you fairly well established to your own satisfaction, at least, that the right-hand drive was more efficient and that the automatic transmission vehicle was more efficient than the manual? Mr. BANTON. Yes.

Mr. PLAPINGER. What was the reason for the experimentation with respect to 250 trucks?

Mr. BANTON. Well, after all, test-track data is not conclusive by any means. We looked at it as an indication. One thing I wanted to get into the record is where a carrier has to mount and dismount from the vehicle that there was a very substantial saving with the Twin Coach as it stands.

Mr. PLAPINGER. With the right-hand drive?

Mr. BANTON. Yes. If a carrier is just merely serving a box or curb, a right-hand drive station wagon, or something like that, if the boxes are all up above 42 inches above the street, they are practically as good as anything else.

But the boxes are not all uniformly installed, and in practically all these places were mounted routes, the carrier has parcel post and things like that that he has to distribute and it is necessary for him to mount and dismount.

We got pretty conclusive evidence with right-hand drive, sit-stand vehicle, or a vehicle like the scooter, when the scooter stops, you are practically on the ground standing, a vehicle carrier can accomplish 15 to 20 percent more stops in the same rate without undue fatigue.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Was not that principle proved a long-time ago by the fact milk and bread deliveries have used it for years? It would certainly not take a tremendous amount of experimentation on your part or anybody else's part to say where you have a great number of getoffs and getons you don't have to get out from under a wheel and step off, it would be a lot easier to step down. It would not take any mastermind to develop that.

Mr. BANTON. I certainly realize it would not take a mastermind. The mastermind was the development of a lightweight vehicle. Mr. MOLLOHAN. The sit-stand has no relation to that.

Mr. BANTON. But the sit-stand is part of a lightweight vehicle. Mr. MOLLOHAN. But the sit-stand has been in a long time. That is what we are placing the emphasis on here. We are not saying about the weight.

Mr. BANTON. We didn't know how many advantages the right-hand sit-stand drive had for the operators mounting and dismounting. We did not have any idea until we ran a test. You say it is better. But how much better, we would like to know.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. You mean what degree?

Mr. BANTON. Yes.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. You know to start with it was better.

If

Mr. BANTON. Yes. But we wanted to know how much better. it was only a little better, we would not bother with it at all. If it was substantially better, and you can pick up an hour a day on a delivery route, is it worthwhile.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. I think I follow you, but I think it would be obvious if there was a sufficient amount of savings to justify the use of them, certainly the commercial companies who have a number of stops in a given distance, have adopted them. The principle has been well established.

Mr. BANTON. Yes.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. The only question in your mind was how much better it was?

Mr. BANTON. Yes.

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Now, can we get to this weight situation. What are the other things we are testing more or less?

Mr. BANTON. One thing, as thrown out in Mr. Kieb's testimony this morning, we were striving to get away from these big, heavy vehicles which are used for a relatively light service. I think that most of the vehicles in the Post Office Department, in 1954, were vehicles that I fancy weighed I guess the lightest weighted probably 4,500 pounds, and probably much more than that, a great many of them, and each heavier. They are cumbersome, have a long wheelbase, they were not maneuverable, and the thing we were after is something a carrier on a streets could get around in between vehicles, because unfortunately vehicles are parked on the streets where you have to pick up mail. The ideal carrier for delivering the mail is a three-wheel scooter that you can turn around on the top of this table, almost.

And there was just nothing like this Marco which was worked up by the research development department, and the Mid-American Research Corp., and when it was tried out it conclusively proved that they were on the right track and we wanted more of them. That is, you could not do very much with one vehicle, because you have pretty nearly got to go into a station there or a location and saturate all the routes in order to get conclusive proof what your advantages are going to be. We were just stymied. Marco would not build them and could not get any manufacturing facilities. It was just through the interest that Twin Coach took in this thing, a new development, that we were able to get the prototype.

Mr. PLAPINGER. How was that interest generated?