FURTHER INFORMATION RELATED TO PARTS I AND II OF KLC AND CHERNIVTSI OVERPRINTS. PART C.
Read part A of the article here and part B here.
Andrew Baines’ 1990s provisional holdings include substantial overprinted material generated by
Chernivtsi Oblast postal authorities. Of these, three types are discussed here with much that is additional to past articles, through information and copies recently supplied by Andrew.
‘Taxe-Perçue (TP) Overprint’, and the Three
Value ‘Bukovyna Dot Set-of-Twelve’
Hryhoriy Lobko’s second (2000)  and third edition (2007)  texts both indicate that the TP stamp was issued sometime in January 1992. An article in the Ukrainian Philatelist in 2015  added to this release date by suggesting that it may have seen use as early as 11 January. Further, while they cite October 1993  as the month within which the Bukovyna Dot Set-of-Twelve was issued for use (three revalues that include two colours per revalue and two varieties per revalue), the progress of time and the acquisition of knowledge later saw specialized catalogues (2008) cite the specific day of release as 18 October 1992. 
After the UPNS website posted an audiovisual presentation on the provisionals of this genre during October 2016 , more information began to come forward. Amongst this was the following on Chernivtsi that Baines e-mailed on 28 December 2016.
Both Figures 2 and 3 appear to be ‘authorization statements’, upon which is a beautiful oblast crest, a black dated cancel that ties each stamp to the platform page, and a violet post office hand-stamp. The outer ring within this post office hand-stamp says ‘Ministry of Communications’, the inner ring giving the name of the company ‘Chernivtsizv iazok Production Association’. It is important to observe the additional handwritten text in Figure 3 showing the Bukovyna Dot Set as compared to that for the TP. The top line from the Dot Set text says ‘To printing’; left of signature ‘By order of the director- general’; signature to the right ‘I.A. Tohynets’ [clearly, the director-general] .
The dated cancel reads ‘1993 October 18’, the issue date for this set. To sum up, this figure has all of the noted information and cancel on it that would legally take it to the printing and issue stages.
Now, Figure 2 and the TP. Why does it only include the jurisdiction cancel, the statement ‘order of the director-general’, and a cancel dated ‘1992 June 11’? Why is the ‘Tohynets’ signature missing, and why is there no text to properly take it to the printing and issue stages? Add to this, the following e-mail information from Baines on 21 May 2017 based upon direct-source notes that he completed during December 1992:
“[F]rom my notes I can confirm this cachet was used on international mail from January 1992 to the end of May 1992 from the main post office in Chernivtsi only, where the postal clerk accepted international mail for sending abroad. The clerk, having weighed the letter/ packet etc., would calculate the amount of postage to be paid, and enter the amount on the overprinted stamps.”
Within another e-mail exchange a few days later on the 24th, Baines noted that the TP example (Figure 2) was referred to as a ‘presentation sheet’, supplied by the post office and given to ‘a few persons’.
What this TP Information Seems to Suggest
What may be derived from both the lack of handwritten text on the TP presentation sheet and Baines’ 21 May e-mail, and indeed further, why is the Tohynets signature missing and why is there no text to take it to the printing and issue stages?
Part of the answer might be that it is due to these stamps NOT having been overprinted, but handstamped instead. However, if in fact this is accurate, at least part of the answer also seems alluded to in the Baines e-mail, from which the following may be concluded.
The TP stamp was in use prior to the cancel-date (11 June 1992) on the scan, and that only ‘vague authorization’ or ‘recognition’ was finally completed through the document shown in Figure 2 due to this prior use ‘for the record’ as finally acquiescing to pressure from the national level. This may explain why there is no statement on it that takes it to the printing-issue-use stages, as this had already begun to take place a few months earlier.
‘Oblast Arms Invert Overprints’
Parts of an e-mail that Baines sent 18 January 2017 are shown as follows: “Just looked at my Chernivtsi collection, I have these revalues in complete sheets: [all] five denominations [10, 15, 25, 50, 100Krb] on the 2k imperforate and the 3k perforate. See scan [Figure 6] for the transposed type which appears on all the sheets that I have. … These sheets I obtained from a person involved in the production of these overprints … . I was given the breakdown figures as to where the sheets had gone: one set (all five denominations) I have, one set in Moscow, two sets in Ukraine, and one set split up … .This must be ground-breaking information?”  The answer is probably ‘yes’. Having all five revalued sheets on these USSR platform panes means that for these, Baines has all invert varieties as well as all revalue denominations as inverts. Stunning!
A ‘shifted overprint’ variety on cover was shown as part of its franking in an article in the Ukrainian Philatelist No.115.  A mint example of this stamp is now available from the Baines collection see Figure 7). The Baines collection also includes an ‘interesting’ overprinted sheet. It is compared to a standard overprint pattern (Figure 9)  which demonstrates a set series of two revalues in the order of eightysix 100Krb singles and four 400Krb block-of-four singles. However the second overprint pattern (Figure 10) includes four 100Krb block-of-four singles, and the following ‘one-stamp’ singles: sixteen each of 10Krb, 15Krb, 25Krb, and 50Krb, and twenty 100Krb. This latter overprint pattern is shown (Figure 11) as completed on a 2k USSR platform pane .
With 2017 being the 25th anniversary year of the initial use for Ukraine’s 1990s provisionals, it is most interesting to see that new material continues to surface, adding to intriguing philatelic history. This mirrors, at least in part, the ‘dynamics’ of conditions as they fell together during the early point in time related to this genre!
Sources and End Notes:
1. Lobko, Hryhoriy. The Provisional Postage Stamps of Ukraine 1992-1995, Second Edition [in English], translated by Andrew Martyniuk, Published by Ukrainian Philatelic Resources, 2000 page 173.
2. Lobko, Hryhoriy. ‘Провизорные Выпуски Украины 1992-1999 гг.’, Third Edition (in Russian), 2008, page 335.
3. Stelmacovich, Mark.”Contemporary Ukrainian Provisionals Issued Before Decree 52 on 25 March 1992” Ukrainian Philatelist, No. 113 2015. page 53.
4. ibid ‘1’ page 169; ibid ‘2’ page 330.
5. Honchariuk, Ihor V. and Rupela, Dmytro V. Україна 1918-2008 (Ukraine 1918-2008), Divari Publishers, Bratislava Slovakia. 2008. page 188, column 2.
6. Stelmacovich, Mark. Ukrainian Provisional Postage Stamps, 1992 - 1995: Revalues, Surcharges, and Overprinted Stamps, 2016. Available on www.upns.org.
7. Figures 2 and 3 translation courtesy of Jerry Kalyn, who also notes the following: Chernivtsizv’iazok
Production Association’: a ‘production association’ may essentially be the same as an ‘LLC’, which stands for ‘limited liability company’; you can find reference to Tohynets when you complete
an on-line search (Baines notes Tohynets name as Hohynets).
8. e-mail communiqué dated May 21, 2017 8:40 AM.
9. e-mail communiqué dated May 24, 2017 5:57 PM.
10. e-mail communiqué dated January 18, 2017 12:38 PM.
11. Stelmacovich, Mark.‘‘Ukraine’s Early-Mid 1990s Provisionals; Part 2: Chernivtsi 11: Errors, Freaks and Oddities” Ukrainian Philatelist No. 115. 2016. Page 55.
12. Panchuk, Oleh and Hontsaryuk, Ihor. ‘The Second Issue of Overprinted Provisionals From Bukovyna”
Ukrainian Philatelist No. 73/74 1995.
13. All Figures are from the Baines Collection, except Figures 7 and 9. Read part A of the article here and part B here.