Mr. REGAN. There are two signature blocks on the advice of delivery form. One is for the signature of the addressee. The other is for the signature of a postal official. Countries which get the signature of the addressee will have the addressee sign the appropriate block. The Soviet Union, however, will have a postal official sign the block or a postal official on that form.

Mr. GILMAN. Does that official have to attest to the fact that not only has he received the letter but also that the addressee has received it?

Mr. REGAN. The receiver on that form is supposed to testify to the fact that the postal official has delivered the item to the addressee. We are limited to accepting the signature. We can't verify that except that the sender himself may be able to question the accuracy of that signature by contact he has had, independent contact he has had, with the addressee.

Mr. GILMAN. Have you received any complaints of addressees not having received the mail after the Soviet postal official indicates he's received it?

Mr. REGAN. Our testimony provide one such example; yes. We do receive a number of examples of that kind.

Mr. GILMAN. What does the U.S. Postal Service do about these cases?

Mr. REGAN. We bring those to the Soviet authorities. We ask them to investigate the complaint and report back to us. We've not been successful in getting responses to those requests for investigation. We've advised the State Department that this is the kind of problem that both the senders and the Postal Service have with Soviet authorities. We've asked the State Department to bring this kind of complaint to the attention of the Soviet officials.

Mr. GILMAN. Have the Soviets ever responded to that kind of a complaint?

Mr. REGAN. Yes, they do respond. They say, "Oh, these are isolated incidents." They deny that there's any official interference or, of course, any deception on the part of their officials.

Mr. GILMAN. When you supply this subcommittee with the information which we've previously requested, could you indicate the number of inquiries that you've received in the last 2 years concerning mail that had been signed for but not delivered, and the nature of the response which the Postal Service received? [See p. 149.]

Mr. REGAN. I don't know if we're able to isolate out those particular occurrences, but we'll definitely look at it and see if we can give you that.

Mr. GILMAN. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Regan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mr. Regan.

Mr. Gilman?

Mr. GILMAN. Just one final thought. Mr. Levinson, has the national conference, and I would assume it probably has, taken up the matter of Soviet interruption of the mail with anyone in the administration, other than the Postal Service? Have there been any meetings or contacts with the President regarding this issue?

Mr. LEVINSON. I don't think it has specifically been brought up as one issue rather than just a bundle of issues that we are concerned

with. Very frankly, most often, this issue seems to have been dwarfed by others, and it's not my intention that it continue to be so. I think that the concept of the delivery of mail is so essential that we would like to make it a more significant part of the national conference's discussions with representatives of the executive branch.

Mr. GILMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Again, I want to thank you, Mr. Levinson, for taking the time to appear before this subcommittee.

Mr. LEVINSON. It's been my pleasure. Thank you very much.
Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mr. Gilman.

Mr. Levinson, just to conclude with a note of gratitude from the committee for the special effort you and Mrs. Levinson have made this morning in traveling to San Francisco to accommodate the committee, and I, incidentally, have read your entire testimony. It is excellent. Aside from the postal aspect of this hearing, I am delighted with your observation, "We are gratified by the recent increase of emigration,' and I am reminded of a rather delightful occasion I had just a week ago last night in my home city, Syracuse, N.Y., and the occasion was a dinner sponsored by Temple Adath Yesharan there. Senator Henry Jackson was the principal speaker. I was privileged to introduce the Senator on that occasion. The real nicety of the program and it was delightful program-but it was especially nice that in the audience there were, I believe, six couples, recent immigrants to the United States, who were also honored and, in particular, one couple who left Kiev Friday morning and were in that ballroom Sunday evening. And I said what a beautifully traumatic experience it had to be for them to have made that kind of transition within the course of 48 hours and to already see American society at work, so I'm delighted with your observation and hope and pray this matter of emigration will continue to improve.

Again, our deep appreciation to you for your input this morning. Mr. LEVINSON. Thank you very much.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you.

And our next witness is the prettier member of the Levinson family, Mrs. Anita Levinson.

I see we have a panel. All right. Mrs. Anita Levinson, Mrs. Mollie Haberman, and Miss Arlene Lepoff, and Myrtle Sitowitz.

Apparently one of the panel is absent; is that correct?

Miss LEPOFF. Yes.

Mr. HANLEY. Which one?

Mrs. SITOWITZ. Mrs. Haberman.

Mr. HANLEY. Ladies, we're delighted to have you with us this morning, if you will proceed.

First is Mrs. Levinson.

STATEMENT OF ANITA LEVINSON

Mrs. LEVINSON. Mr. Chairman and Congressman Gilman, inspired by the Second World Conference on Soviet Jewry in 1976, a group of Los Angeles Jewish women who had been advocating individually on behalf of Soviet Jewry, formed an organization called the Los Angeles Women's Campaign for Soviet Jewry, committee of 35. I am a charter member of that organization.

One of the activities of the committee of 35 has been to monitor mail sent by us to Jewish people in the Soviet Union.

In 1976, our group planned and carried out the first of three such monitoring projects. Twenty-five women participated. Each sent a book of Jewish cultural content to 25 different Soviet Jews. Included in our evidence here, is a list of the names of the women who participated in the project, the title and authors of the books that were sent, and the names of the Soviet Jews who were to receive these books. Also included here are copies of all the receipts from the post office documenting that the books were sent, return receipt requested, and copies of Postal Service Form No. 2865. Only one of these pink form No. 2865, of the 25, was signed and returned. The books were not returned to us. Travelers from Los Angeles subsequently met with some of the people in the Soviet Union to whom we had mailed books. These travelers were told that none of the books had been received. I want to reemphasize that the books sent into the Soviet Union were all of Jewish cultural content.

In 1977, the project was repeated. This time, 30 women participated, sending phonograph records and books to 20 Soviet Jews. In this case, three Postal Service forms No. 2865 were signed and returned. One package was received. None were returned to us.

In 1978, the project was repeated once again. This time, 18 women sent 9 Soviet Jews books and phonograph records. Several Postal Service forms No. 2865 came back with rubber-stamp markings, but not signed by the addressee. One was signed, but not by the person to whom it was sent. None of the books and records were returned to us.

Evidence of the women who participated in the 1977 and 1978 projects, together with the material mailed and those to whom it was sent, are also attached as an exhibit to the original copy of my testimony submitted to Chairman Hanley.

Another project of the committee of 35, was to mail copies of the Congressional Record to Prisoners of Conscience, where their case histories had been read by sympathetic Congressmen.

I wrote to Mark Nashpitz, whose case history was read into the Congressional Record on June 3, 1976, by Congressman Benjamin Gilman. I mailed this copy, enclosed in a letter, to Dr. Nashpitz, registering the letter and requesting restricted delivery.

I also mailed a copy of the Congressional Record and a letter to Dr. Nashpitz' family in Israel. They returned a letter to me, thanking me for my interest in their son's case, and they enclosed a copy of a letter from him bearing his signature.

Some time later, the pink card, form No. 2865, from Dr. Nashpitz' letter, was returned to me, signed, but the signature did not match the copy of Dr. Nashpitz' signature that I have.

I reported this situation to Edward S. Walker, senior mail classification specialist for the International Mail Classification Division of the U.S. Postal Service, when I met him at a conference. He advised me to send the pertinent information to his department. This was done by me.

I then received a letter from the general manager of the International Mail Classification Division. I was told that a request had been made of the Soviet Postal Administration to obtain the signature of the addressee to verify that he had received registered letter No.

80123. I was told that an early response was not anticipated, but that I would be advised when one was received. I did not hear anything further.

Evidence of a copy of the prisoner's signature, the return receipt form, and correspondence from the U.S. Postal Service are attached as an exhibit to the original copy of my testimony.

I am grateful to this committee for giving me the opportunity to protest the Soviet violations of Universal Postal Regulations by testifying before this body on behalf of the Los Angeles Women's Campaign for Soviet Jewry, committee of 35, as well as for myself. Thank you.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mrs. Levinson. The material which is associated with your testimony will be inserted into the minutes of this hearing and we will defer any questions until the panel itself has been heard.

The next witness will be Arlene Lepoff.

STATEMENT OF ARLENE LEPOFF FOR LOS ANGELES HEBREW

HIGH SCHOOL

Miss LEPOFF. I am here representing the student body, faculty, and parents in the Los Angeles Hebrew High School, which is a community Jewish supplementary high school serving the Los Angeles community.

This is about a project that took place during last year.

The Jews of the Soviet Union are unable to obtain Jewish cultural materials and in educating our students and in answer to this need the student body undertook a book-mailing project between January and April 1978, 273 students took part in the project, that is, 273 students in the school each mailed one Jewish cultural book to a Soviet Jewish refusnik.

The books were in Russian and of Jewish cultural content. Examples of some of the titles were "Poems by Judah Ha-Levi," "The Children of Mapu Street," and "Hanna Sennesh." She was a parachutist in Israel. The books were sent registered mail and a return receipt was requested. You have copies of all the return receipts in your other documents there.

Of the 273 books mailed, as of this date, 3 pink cards have been received. This is 11⁄2 years after initiation of the project. Even though international postal law requires that registered items which are not delivered must be returned, not a single book has been returned to us. This means that 270 books have not been delivered and are unaccounted for.

I want to add additionally, and this is not in the testimony, that each student wrote a nonregistered airgram expressing greetings to the refusnik, telling them of the book project, explaining that they were to receive a book, and holiday wishes to each person that participated in this project. Of course, these were not reigstered and there's no way they can be traced, but we believe they have not been delivered because no replies have ever been received.

I want to add something to a comment you made earlier. The only kind of mail we can trace in the Soviet Union is that which is registered, which is expensive and costly and takes a lot of effort and time.

on the part of the person sending it. Anyone who would like to write to someone in the Soviet Union through regular channels of mail, to a refusnik, stands very little chance of that mail ever getting delivered, and there's no way to account for that.

Additionally, members of the Hebrew High School faculty who were in the Soviet Union in May and June 1978 questioned those refusniks to whom we had sent books and not one person had ever received or seen either an airgram or one of the books. We have written records for tracers filed for-and this is an error in the testimony printed; I'm going to correct it-for 75 of the books, and then 25 additional tracers were filed by students at their local post offices. The reason we didn't file tracers for all 273 books is, you can imagine, it's a difficult task for these students, some of whom were 12 and 13 years old, to understand the whole process and to do it correctly.

It is also difficult to get accurate information from our post office. In fact, when we did request 273 forms, we were sent from office to office and person to person, who didn't even have that many forms available and wasn't even certain that the procedure was correct for this massive project. No one seemed very willing to handle this large bundle of tracers either.

To date, and this is an important error, again, a typographical error, no responses to any of the tracers have been received. We received no response and only one tracer has been sent, and they need to be sent again, I guess.

In conclusion, 273 books were sent to Jews in the Soviet Union. These books were not in any way anti-Soviet and spoke only about Jewish culture and history. These books, totaling 273, at the present time, are unaccounted for.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Miss Lepoff. The project you referred to was indeed a very interesting one, most unfortunate that it had such disappointing results. That is a rather classic example of the purpose of this set of hearings.

And next is Mrs. Myrtle Sitowitz.

STATEMENT OF MYRTLE G. SITOWITZ

Mrs. SITOWITZ. I know that you have my testimony, I believe, in front of you. However, I'm not sure if you are going to ask us questions so I hope I don't have to repeat too much that has been said here before.

However, one little point, while I think about it, in connection with the choice of forms which you have to get to follow up on a letter that has not supposedly been received, I have many times gone to one post office after another just merely to pick up two or three such forms, and just to tell you that in my local post office in Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, whatever, many is the time that I came into a post office and the clerk who is supposedly familiar with this will close the window and say he's shut for the day. I can't blame him. I feel he's probably going through so many things, as he says, "These Russians, I just don't know what we can do."

But as far as the form is concerned, sometimes I can not even get a Postal Service Form 542, but just to reiterate, just to tell you once more, when I have not received a pink receipt card which I paid for,