[Dx-qsl] New style IRCs vs. Old Style IRCs

Mon Mar 27 20:34:55 EST 2006

I just turned in 80 old (small) IRC's at the post office in Pontiac 
Michigan and they copied the pages straight from the manual for me. 
If somebody wants them for their website let me know, but here is a 
brief rundown.
Of the 80 there were 18 which were stamped in the U.S. The ONLY way 
they can be turned in is if YOU are the ORIGINAL purchaser. Since 
none of them had the PONTIAC, MI stamp they had to be brought back home.
12 were unstamped and no postal part number so those are a flat 0ドル.60 
each with no argument.
18 were dated from 7/9/95 - 1/6/01 with part number 339400 on them 
and those are worth 0ドル.60 each
30 were dated from 1/7/01 - 12/31/01 with part number 339600 on them 
and those are worth 0ドル.80 each.
2 of them were dated after 12/31/01 and those are worth 0ドル.84 each.
The document I have goes on to tell about those that have stamps 
affixed to them and their value but I did not have any that fell into 
that category.
The document is dated 1/18/02 and they still live by it and do NOT 
deviate one little bit.
As another note the post office takes the value of the returned IRC's 
and allows you to buy any denomination stamps you wish as long as it 
falls within that value or you cough up the difference.
This was my own personal experience and I am sure you might find a PO 
employee that will unknowingly give more. Or maybe LESS.
Important dates:
Prior to 1/1/1993 No Value unless Postal Inspector decided different
1/1/93 - 7/8/95 0ドル.50 Item #339700
7/9/95 - 1/6/01 0ドル.60 Item #339400
1/7/01 - 12/31/01 0ドル.80 Item #339600
The Signee was Robert Brown from the Troy Michigan post office and 
his phone number is 248-546-3813.
Hopes this helps some. GL and 73 de K8SIX
At 02:11 PM 3/27/2006, Dave G4GED wrote:
>Tom,
>If all POs in all UPU countries abided by the Universal Postal 
>Union rules there would be no difference.
>Either style IRCs should be exchangable for a basic rate airmail 
>letter postage stamp at the current price.
>Only difference is, "old" style IRCs do not have an expiry date so 
>should never expire but "new" style IRCs will expire on 30th Dec. 
>2006, as printed on them.
>However, it seems many POs and postal admins. in many UPU countries 
>are quite happy to make up their own rules, or interpretation of the 
>UPU rules, and many seem to have decided to reject the "old" in 
>favor of the "new" only.
>You are lucky that your local PO abides by the rules as do any that 
>I've used in the UK for exchanging IRCs (and whether they are 
>endorsed or not) but it would be very risky to use the "old" style 
>IRCs for your QSL requests as there's a very strong likelihood 
>that DX stations in many countries will reject it, and you will 
>never receive a reply.
>73 Dave
>>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom LeClerc W1TJL" <w1tjl at arrl.net>
>To: <dx-qsl at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 7:35 PM
>Subject: [Dx-qsl] New style IRCs vs. Old Style IRCs
>>>>OK folks, I have a question. New v.s old style IRCs. What is the
>>real difference?? At my local post office there doesn't seem to be a
>>difference. They take them both for 1 first class overseas postage.
>>Couldn't find anything on the USPS website about it either...
>>>>73, Tom W1TJL
>>>>--
>>Tom LeClerc, Amateur Radio Station W1TJL
>>(past calls WB1CBY, /VE8, /VE1, /VO8)
>>>> LeClerc Consulting
>> eBay ID Fangers
>> email: w1tjl at arrl.net
>> PC/Network Consulting
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>&quot;Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've 
>>got...till it's gone.&quot; from Big Yellow Taxi (Joni Mitchell) 
>>but also true about QSL.NET if more users don't open their wallets 
>>and help financially. Please contribute TODAY !!
>>>&quot;Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've 
>got...till it's gone.&quot; from Big Yellow Taxi (Joni Mitchell) but 
>also true about QSL.NET if more users don't open their wallets and 
>help financially. Please contribute TODAY !!