January 29, Certified Mail Tracking Number:

Transcription

1 January 29, 214 Mr. Mark Dimondstein President American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO 13 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC Certified Mail Tracking Number: Dear Mark: As information, enclosed is a copy of the first Post Implementation Review (PIR) for the Jonesboro, Arkansas Customer Service Mail Processing Center (CSMPC) Area Mail Processing (AMP). In accordance with the Non-Disclosure Agreement dated February 11, 213, the Postal Service is providing both redacted and unredacted copies of the PIR. If you have any questions, please contact Rickey Dean at extension Sincerely, Patrick M. Devine Manager Contract Administration (APWU) Enclosures (CA214-68)

2 REDACTED I Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Facility Name & Type: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Street Address: 345 Moore Rd City: Jonesboro State: AR 5 Facility ZIP Code: 7241 District: Arkansas Area: Southwest Finance Number: Current 3 ZIP Code(s): 724, 725 Miles to Gaining Facility: 66 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: Anita C Brownlee (A) Senior Plant Manager: Michael Hart District Manager: Robert D Carr Facility Name & Type: Memphis TN P&DC Street Address: 555 S 3rd ST City: Memphis State: TN 5 Facility ZIP Code: 3811 District: Tennessee Area: Eastern Finance Number: Current 3 ZIP Code(s): 375,38,381,386,723 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: David Jones Senior Plant Manager: James G Drummer District Manager: David J Dillman Approval Date: February 23, 212 Implementation Date: Apr PIR Type: 1st PIR Date Range of Data: Processing Days per Year: 31 Bargaining Unit Hours per Year: 1,745 EAS Hours per Year: 1,822 Date of DAR Factors/Cost of Borrowing! New Facility Start-up Costs Update June 16, 211 Apr-1-213: Sep Date & Time this workbook was last saved: I :52 4. Other Information Area Vice President: Vice President, Network Operations: Area AMP Coordinator: NAI Contact: JoAnn Feindt I Joshua D. Colin David E. Williams Steve Jackson I Bob Roseberry Cindy Venable I Todd Katkow PIR Data Entry Page

3 2

4 Executive Summary Last Saved December 3t 213 Date Range of Data PIR Type: 1st PIR Apr Sep Losing Facility Name and Type: Street Address: City: State: Current SCF ZIP Code(s): Type of Distribution Consolidated: Gaining Facility Name and Type: Street Address: City: Savings/Costs 1st PIR vs Pre AMP 1st PIR vs Approved Function 1 Workhour Savings Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings (less Maint!Trans) PCESIEAS Workhour Savings Transportation Savings Maintenance Savings Space Savings from Workhour Costs Combined from Other Curr vs Prop from Other Curr vs Prop from Transportation HCR and Transportation PVS from Maintenance from Space Evaluation and Other Costs Total Annual Savings Total One-Time Costs ($22,328) ($132, 18) from Space Evaluation and Other Costs Total First Year Savings Staffing Craft Position Loss PCESIEAS Position Loss from Staffing-Craft from Staffing-PCESIEAS Service Losing Current Qtr Gaining Current Qtr FCM Service Performance (EXFC & PFCM /N) 97.86% 97.9% from Service Performance & CSM FCM Service Performance (EXFC & PFCM 2 Day) 95.88% 96.31% from Service Performance & CSM FCM Service Performance (EXFC & PFCM 3 Day) Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Residential at PFC level Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Small Business at PFC level 93.86% 95.9% 92.12% 87.7% from Service Performance & CSM from Service Performance & CSM from Service Performance & C SM PIR Executive Summary

5 Calkulatioo Befenmces Combined Losing and Gaining Facility Data: Pre AMP Proposed 1st PIR Function 1 Workhour Costs $44,437,13 $43,729,785 $42,273,23 Non-Processing Craft Workhour Costs (less Maintenance & Transportation) $2,326,441 $2,297,731 $1,592,86 PCES/EAS Workhour Costs $5,768,58 $5,65,265 $5,663,419 Transportation Costs $6,744,488 $6,226,15 $7,94,375 Maintenance Costs $13,355,24 $12,515,513 $13,49,422 Space Savings $ $ $ Total Annual Cost $72,631 '141 $7,374,399 $7,878,532 Total One-Time Costs $ $7,148 $22,328 Total First Year Costs $72,631 '141 $7,444,547 $71,8,86 Staffing Craft Position Total On-Rolls PCES/EAS Position Total On-Rolls st PIR vs Proposed 1st PIR vs Pre-AMP (A~~roved) AMP Approved AMP Function 1 Workhour Savings $2,163,9 $1,456,555 $77,345 $734,355 $75,645 $28,71 Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings (less Maint!Trans) PCES/EAS Workhour Savings $14,639 ($58,154) $162,793 Transportation Savings ($1,195,887) ($1,714,27) $518,383 Maintenance Savings ($54,398) ($893,99) $839,511 Space Savings $ $ Total Annual Savings $1,752,69 $2,256,742 Total One-Time Costs ($1 18) ($7, 148) Total First Year Savings $1,55,281 $2,186,594 Staffing Craft Position Loss 12 (17) 29 PCES/EAS Position Loss PIR Executive Summary

6 Summary Narrative Last Saved: December 31, 213 Losing Facility Name and Type: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 724, 725 Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Gaining Facility Name and Type: Memphis TN P&DC Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 375,38,381,386,723 Background: The Eastern Area, with the assistance of the Tennessee District, Southern Area and Arkansas Districts, has completed the first Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the Area Mail Processing (AMP) that consolidated originating and destinating mail from the Jonesboro AR CSMPC into the Memphis TN PDC. This AMP consolidated originating and destinating letter, flat and parcel volumes from Jonesboro AR 724 offices into the Memphis PDC (381 ). The transfer of both the originating and destinating mail from the Jonesboro AR CSMPC to the Memphis TN PDC began on February 16, 213. The data for the Pre-AMP period was July 1, 21- June 3, 211 and it included all operations for the Jonesboro AR CSMPC and the Memphis TN PDC. The data for this first PIR was April1, 213 thru September 3, 213 for both plants. Financial Summary: Total Annual Savings Total First Year Savings First PIR Vs Pre-AMP $1,752,69 $1,55,281 First PIR Vs Approved ($74,5) ($636,313) The first PIR savings shows a First Year Savings of $1,55,281 which is less than the projected First Year Savings by $636,313. However, making adjustments for non-amp related expenses and for costs related to two other AMPs into Memphis PDC occurring during this same period, the First Year Savings for this AMP is $7,8,13. The only area that did not meet target, after adjustments, was Transportation, although it was within 1 % of meeting the goal. The consolidation transferred an average daily volume of 626,46 pieces TPH ( pieces FHP) from the Jonesboro AR CSMPC to the Memphis TN PDC. Transportation was realigned to maintain and establish new overnight service commitments between 724 Jonesboro AR and 381 Memphis TN. Customer Service Considerations: The overnight, 2-day and 3-day mail service performance is shown below for the Memphis TN PDC, which includes the absorbed 724 Jonesboro AR volumes. Each category of indicators shows a slight improvement through Quarter 4, 213. No change to BMEU. Distribution Changes: Jonesboro (724) moved into Memphis. Batesville (725) was moved into Jonesboro and is now moving into Little Rock. The AMP data period pre-dates the Batesville move, so the AMP really is Jonesboro (724 only). There should have been a shift of 724 to SCF 38 and 725 to SCF 72. Transportation Changes: This first PIR shows an increase in Transportation in costs of ($1, 195,887) vs. the Pre AMP and ($1,714,27) vs. the Approved Plan. The reason for the additional cost is because Memphis PDC instituted a PVS initiative to eliminate/reduce HCR costs PIR Summary Narrative

7 between the Memphis STC and all Memphis processing facilities. This initiative was not AMP related. In addition, trip was in place prior to the AMP but was not listed as it was implemented by the Memphis NDC, not the Memphis P&DC. Staffing Impacts: The approved AMP proposal identified a potential reduction of 29 craft employees and 2 EAS employees due to the consolidation of operations into the Memphis TN PDC. Complement data at the end of Quarter 4, FY 213 shows that the complement has actually been reduced by 12 craft employees and 3 EAS employees. Jonesboro CSMPC showed 2 additional F4 clerks over plan and 8 additional employees over plan in Maintenance. Memphis PDC showed reductions in all crafts except for 33 additional PVS drivers, which is not AMP related. 1 Craft= FTR+PTR+PTF+Casuals 1 Craft= FTR+PTR+PTF+Casuals 2 Craft = F1 + F4 at Losing; F1 only at Gaining The Postal Service ensures that its standard practices comply with the Workers Adjustment and Retaining Notification (WARN) Act. Maintenance Impacts: The approved AMP projected an annual Maintenance savings of $1,39,879 with the consolidation of mail processing operations from the Jonesboro CSMPC into the Memphis PDC. The first PIR is exhibiting an increase in Maintenance costs of $54,398. This is a difference of ($893,99) from the plan. Other initiatives, Jonesboro AR and Jackson TN into Memphis TN had an impact of $1,344,899. The adjusted Maintenance savings is $1,29,51. PIR Summary Narrative

8 Space Impacts and One-Time Facility Costs: The approved AMP projected one-time costs associated with the consolidation were $7,148. The actual one-time costs were $22,328 for a difference of ($132, 18). However, there is an approved deviation of $1,66, for additional one-time costs. These expenditures will show in the Final PIR as they were spent after the 1st PIR reporting period. Summary: The 6 month PIR shows a 1st Year Savings of $1,55,281. This is $636,313 less than the projected $2,386,961 savings. Taking into account other current AMP and the non AMP related transportation initiative, the adjusted 1st Year Savings is $7,8,13 which exceeds the projected $2,386,961 savings. PIR Summary Narrative

9 Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement Last Saved: December 31, 213 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR District: Arkansas PIR Type: 1st PIR Implementation Date: 4/1/13 After AMP Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC District: Tennessee After AMP (15) Notes: :t.u:sm111er Satisfaction Measurement (CSM) became Customer Experience Measurement Data reflects most recently completed quarter available in CEM. Overall Satisfaction (Overall Experience) Satisfaction with Receiving (Experience wrth receiving). ;:...:.;;...::.:::,.:..:..;:..:.;;.....:.;:.:..::.;;.;:.::...JLikely to recommend the USPS..:....:...:..:..... Satisfaction with Sending (Experience with sending)... Satisfaction with most frequently visited PO (Experience wrth most frequently visited PO) Satisfaction with most recent contact with USPS (Experience wtth most recent contact witt PIR Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement

10 [- Combined Facilities I Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities Last Saved December 31, 213 PIR Type":.~~.:-.~~ 1.-,;:l,~n~,., """""' 1 ;.,..,r~ ~IR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Date Range of Data: ~:!_:-213 to -~p P!R WorkhourCosts ~Combined Facilities

11 PI R Work.hour Costs - Combmed F aclht1es

12 P!R WorkhourCosts- Combmed Facilities

13 (27) NOTES: tev1j4~ PIR Workhour Costs~ Combtned Facilities

14 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Workhour Costs Losing Facility Last Saved December 31, 213 PIR Type,.; ~:I: :~~IR <'Ai< rnn<> "" "'"n~~ Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Date Range of Data: _Apr..1~213 to -~...!E_ PlR Workhour Costs Los1ng

15 P!R Workhour Costs - Losing

16 P1R Workhour Costs- Los1ng

17 P!R Workhour Costs- Losing

18 P!R Workhour Costs - Losmg

19 Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC Workhour Costs -Gaining Facility Last Saved December 31, 213 PIR Type : ::::.: ::':o,o,,, ''"'" ~:c=o o Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Date Range of Data: ~~:~13 to Sep P!R Workhour Costs Gaming

20 P1R Workhour Costs Gaming

21 PlR Work.hour Costs- Gatnlng

22 PIR Workhour Costs - Ga1mng

23 (1) l$1!71 8 ll>l ~! (16} Annual FHP Volume Annual TPH or NATPH Volume Annual Workhours Annual Produ~vity Annual Workhour Costs Operation I'm AMI' J I Pl'oposed 1stPlR ""'AMI'" I I.Proposed 1stP1R PmA~.~ Proposed 1stPfR PmA11!1' Pr- 1stPfR PI'OAMI' Proposed 1stPIR Numbers I l I I I $ $ PlR Workhour Costs- Gammg

24 (27)NOTES: PlR Workhour Costs - Gatnmg

25 [.. Other Workhour Move Analysis I PIR Other Work hour Costs

26 tl ()

27 PIR Other Workhour Costs

28 PI R Other Wori<hour Costs

29 PI R Other Wori<hour Costs

30 PIR Other Workhour Costs

31 1st PIR. Combined Work.hours "' 3,42 $1,359,21 $ -22, " -$819, % 22, $7,371,1 $ 53, $1,183, , ,23 $1.79,89 $ 12, $83, '1< 5,89 19,68 $5,663,41 $ $58, ,146 8,654 $232,86 $ 3, $114, i8o/r 3,223 58,356 $25,417,41 $ 46,328 86W' $1,365, ?5.1. PIR Other Workhour Costs

32 Staffing - Craft last Saved: December 31, 213 PIR Type: 1st PIR Data Extraction Date: 9/24/13 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Finance#: m (2) cs1 I (4) cs> (6.. (7)... (8} (9) I-;::[F-uml-;-:-ctio--:;n1---;::: CC:-11Ce-;-rrka_ft_P_os-iti-on_s ---11=.. ;;;::P=re A... ""'r J,:.--., 1otPIR Non-Career On-Rolls Part Time On-Rolls Full Time On-Rolls Total On-Rolls 1otPlR I~ 1otPIR ;,;,.~< Propoo: 1 1PIR!Function 4- Clerk I Function 1 - Mail Handler!Function 4- Mail Handler 3 I Function 3A -Vehicle Service J!Function 3B-Mail'"'"',.."" ~ !Functions lmtd/rehab/wc ~~O~ther~F:Iu~nctii~,ons~~==~~ !Total I 12 1 I o o _ 1 u.. u.. ~~.. Total On-Rolls Change ( 1 O) ( 11 ) Analysis 1:::~~;s 1st vs Positions!43) 9 Percent 62% 52.9% Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC {12) (13) (14} (15) Non-Car~er On-Rolls PartJime On-Rolls Craft Positions Pre AMI? 1st PIR PreAMP 1st PIR..... Function 1 - Clerk 33 6 Function 1 - Mail Handler Function 3A- Vehicle Service Function 3B - Maintenance faw-i :, Functions lmtd/rehab/wc!other Functions [Total I L J8 3 (16} I _(_17) Full Time On-Rolls >.. 1st PIR _ Finance#: (18} (19) (21 Total On-Rolls preamp Proposed 1st PIR { ,...,_,,.-;; ,-.. ' (23), (24),! 1st PIR vs Pre AMP! 1st PIR vs Proposed! Total Craft Position Loss:~ 12! (17)! L L ~ (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary) Change Analysis Variances Total Rull<. (21) (22) 1st PIR vs Proposed 1st PIR vs PreAMP c, 31 8 Percent 4.3% 1.1% rev4/5/1 PIR Staffing -Craft

33 Staffing PCES/EAS Last Saved: December 31, 213 PIR Type: 1st PIR Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Data Extraction Date 9/ Finance#.;;...:.44.:..;6.;;.5.: PCES/EAS Positions Authorized Staffing On-Rolls (1) (2) (3) Position Title Level PreAMP POSTMASTER (F) EAS-24 1 MGR MAINTENANCE EAS-18 1 ERVICES EAS-17 1 ' V MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS-17.. '1 5 POSTMASTER EAS ,>: ' 8. : :. 23 I 24 j < > ' I. : rth I.. 59 I 6 I Totals I (4) 1st PIR ($) (6) (7) Proposed 1stPIR > ~~... : ~ Variances Total On-Rolls (15) (16) Change 1st PtR vs 1st PIR vs Analysis Pre AMP Proposed Positions (2) Percent -5.%.% PIR Staffing - PCES/EAS

34 ~,_, Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC Finance#...:4.:..75;:,.6;,.;6.;;.6 Data Extraction Date: 9124/213 PCES/EAS Positions Authorized Staffing On-Rolls (19) (2) t~l) (22) (23) (24) (25) Line Position Title Level PreAMP 1stP!R PreAMP Proposed 1st P!R 1 PLANT MANAGER (2) PCES MGR MAINTENANCE EAS MGR IN-PLANT SUPPORT EAS MGR DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS EAS MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS OPERATIONS INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER (FI EAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS SUPPT EAS NETWORKS SPECIALIST EAS-18 1 '1 1 1 FF=F 1 OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS SUPV DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS EAS SUPV MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS SUPV TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS EAS NETWORKS SPECIALIST EAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS SECRETARY (FLO) EAS PLANT MANAGER (3) PCES MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS MGR TRANSPORTATION/NETWORKS EAS-21 1 EAS-2. 1 NS SUPPT EAS ~s PECIALIST EAS NETWORK SPECIALIST EAS ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT (FLO) EAS ' I : Totals.114 l>\ \1 48 ~= ~ Variances Total On-Rolls (33) (34) Change Analysis 1st PIR vs Pre AMP 1st PIR vs Proposed Positions (1) (1) Percent -2.% -2.% r,_,_,_,_,_,_,_,_,-r,-'_,_,_,_,_,_"_,_,_,_,_,_,_,, j Total PCES/EAS' ( 37 ) ' ( 38 > ' j Position Lossj 3 j 1 j,_,,_,_,~,_,_,_,_,_,_,_j_, ~ (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary) PIR Staffing - PCES/EAS

35 Transportation - PVS Last Saved: December 31,213 PIR Type: 1st PIR Date Range of Data: Apr to -- Sep Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Finance Number: (1) (2) (3) PreAMP Proposed 1st PIR PVS Owned Equipment Seven Ton Trucks Q Eleven Ton Trucks Single Axle Tractors Q Tandem Axle Tractors Spotters (4) (5) tl Variance 1st Variance 1st PIR vs Pre PIRvs j AMP Prooosed ' Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC Finance Number: ~~~ (6) (7) PreAMP Proposed PVS Owned Equipment Seven Ton Trucks Eleven Ton Trucks Single Axle Tractors Tandem Axle Tractors Spotters (8) (9) Variance 1st PIR PIR vs Pre AMP (1) Variance 1st PIRvs Prooosed PVS Transportation Number of Schedules Total Annual Mileage Total Mileage Costs $ $.. PVS Leases Total Vehicles Leased Total Lease Costs $ $ $ $ $ $ $ PVS Transportation Number of Schedules Q Total Annual Mileage Total Mileage Costs $ PVS Leases < Total Vehicles Leased Total Lease Costs $ $ $ $ $ $ $. PVS Workhour Costs LDC 31 (617, 679, 764) $ $ $ LDC 34 (765, 766) $ $ $ Total Workhour Costs, $ $ $ $ $ PVS Workhour Costs LDC 31 (617, 679, 764) $5,4.49 $5,449 LDC 34 (765, 766) $5,687;549 $5,687,549 Total Workhour Costs_ $6,187,9~ $6,187,999 $592,358 $91,99 $6,778,661 $1,91,111 $7,371,19 $1,183,2 $91,99 $1,91,111 $1,183,2 (11) Total 1st PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-PVS Savings: $1,183,2 (This number added to the Executive Summary (12) Total 1st PIR vs Proposed Transportation-PVS Savings: $'1,183,2 (This number added to the Executive Summary) (13)No~s= rev 118/28 PIR Transportation - PVS

36 Transportation - HCR Last Saved: December 31, 213 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Data of HCR Data File: PIR Type: CT for Outbound Dock: 1st PIR (3) (4) (5) (6) (9} (1) Route# PreAMP 1st PIR 1st PIR Annual Cost PreAMP 1st PIR PIR Transportation HCR - Losing

37 Totals Change Analysis 1st PIR vs Pre AMP I 1st PIR vs Proposed Notes: PIR Transportation HCR - Losing

38 Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Date of HCR Data File: Transportation - HCR Last Saved: December 31, 213 CET for Inbound Dock: CET for Cancellations: PIR Type: 1st PIR CET for OGP: CT for Outbound Dock: (1) (2) (3) (4) (6) (9) (1) Route# 1st PIR Proposed Annual Cost I 1st PIR Annual Cost 1st PIR Annual Cost/Mile PIR Transportation HCR Gaining

39 Change Analysis Summary HCR Losing & Gaining (11) (12) (13) 1 (14) 1st PIR vs Pre AMP I 1st PIR vs Proposed 1st PIR vs Proposed Losing Gaining (13) Total 1st PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) (14) Total 1st PIR vs Proposed Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) $531,25 Total Transportation (15) 1st PIR vs Pre AMP HCR $12,867 PVS $1183,o:w (15) Total 1st PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation (PVS & HeR): $1 (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary). (16) 1st PIR vs Proposed $ $1,183,2 Notes: (16) Total 1st PIR vs Proposed Transportation (PVS & HeR): (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary) $1 PIR Transportation HCR -Gaining

40 MPE Inventory Last Saved: December 31,213 Data Extraction Date: 1/2/13 PIR Type: 1st PIR Date Range of Data: Apr to-- Sep Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC {1) (2) (3) (4} (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Proposed 1st PIR Variance in PreAMP Proposed 1st PIR PreAMP Proposed 1st PIR Relocation Relocation Costs Equipment Costs Costs AFCS AFCS $ $ $ Equipment AFCS2 AFCS 2 o. 5 $ $ $ AFSM-ALL AFSM-ALL $ $ $ APPS APPS $ $ $ ClOSS ClOSS $ $ $ CSBCS CSBCS $ $ $ DBCS 3 DBCS $27,574 $3,45 {$24, 169) DBCS-OSS DBCS-OSS $ $ $ DIOSS 2 DIOSS $27,574 $2,2 {$25,374) FSS FSS $ $ $ SBPSIAPBS SBPSIAPBS $ $ $() UFSM 1 UFSM $ $ 5 FC I MICRO MARK FC I MICRO MARK $ $ $ ROBOT GANTRY ROBOT GANTRY 2 2 $ $ $ HSTS/HSUS HSTSIHSUS $ $ $ LCTSI LCUS LCTSILCUS $ $ $() LIPS LIPS $ $ $ MLOCR-ISS MLOCR-ISS $ $ $ MPBCS-OSS MPBCS-OSS $ $ $() TABBER TABBER $ $ $ POWERED POWERED INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL 1 1 $ $ VEHICLE VEHICLE LCREM LCREM (1) Notes: 6 Totals $55,148 $5,65 ($49,543)1 - ~.e:::: ""::,. Carried to Space Evaluation and Other Costs PIR MPE Inventory

41 Maintenance Last Saved December31, 213 PIR Type*:_1_st_P_I_R Date Range of Data: Apr : Sep losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC LDC 36 Workhour Activity Mail Processing $ Eauioment ''d PreAMP Costs 766,26 $ (2) (3) (4) (5) Variance 1st Variance 1st Proposed 1st PIR PIR to Pre PIR to Costs Costs AMP Proposed $ 387,449 $ $ 387,449 Workhour Activity (6) PreAMP Costs (7) Proposed Costs (8) 1st PIR Costs (9) Variance 1st PIR to Pre AMP LDC 36 Mail Processing$ 5,111;en $ 5,111,677 $ 5,717,44 $ $ 1 Equipment (1) Variance 1st PIR to Pre Proposed 65,763 LDC 37 Building Equipment $ 141,465 $ 58,1 $ 72,471 $ $ 14,47 LDC37 Building Equipment$ 1,336,94 $ 1,416,14 $ 1,331,631 $ LDC 38 Building Services $ (Custodial Cleamng) 385,274 $ 296,661 $ 262,965 $ $ Building Services $ 2,179,665 $ 2,272,518 $ 2,284,579 $ (Custodial Cleaning) $ LDC 39 Maintenance Operations $ Suooort 76,338 $ $ $ $ Maintenance Operations $ Suooort 727,538 $ 727,538 $ 626,765 $ 28,71 $ $ $ $ 78,133 $ 78,133 $ 17,594 $ 29.4$1 29,461 $ 1,397,811 $ 354,661 $ 722,885 $ 368,223 $ 9,66,6 $ 1,68,8 $ 634,55 $ 462,2 Parts and Supplies Parts and Supplies 189,643 $ 2,861 $ 6,12 $ 39,259 Maintenance Stockroom $ 2,:33:l,e1a $ 2,333,618 $ 2,558,41 $ 1 and Supplies , ,792 $ $ $ () $ Q Adjustments $ $ 2,367 $ $ $ Grand Total $ 375,522 $ 783,5 $ 47,482 Grand Total $ $ 12,139,991 $ 12,626,418 $ $ 486,427 (11) 1st PJR vs Pre AMP- Maintenance Savings: (12) 1st PIR vs Proposed- Maintenance Savings: $54,398 $893,99 (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (13) -nata in P!R columns is annualized for First PJR rev 1!8128 PIR Maintenance

42 Distribution Changes Last Saved: December 31, 213 Losing Facility : Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR PIR Type: 1st PIR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Orig & Dest Date Range of Data: Apr to-- Sep Place a "X" next to the DMM labeling list(s) revised as result of the approved AMP. Identify the date of the Postal Bulletin that contained DMM labeling list revisions. (1) DMM L1 DMM L11 (2) DMM L2 DMM L21 DMM L3 X DMM L61 Was the Service Standard Directory updated for the approved AMP? X DMM L4 DMM L62 (3) DMM L5 DMM L63 DMM L6 DMM L64 DMM L7 DMM L65 DMM L8 DMM L66 DMM L9 DMM L67 ' DMM L1 DMM L81 (4) Drop Shipments for Destination Entry Discounts FAST Appointment Summary Report NASS Facility Name Month Losing I Gaining Facility Code Aug '13 losing Facility 388 Jonesboro Total No-Show Late Arrival O~en Schd Count % Count % Count % N/A Closed Count % Unschd I Count I Sept '13 losing Facility 388 Jonesboro N/A Aug '13 Gaining Facility 38 Memphis % %.% % 8 Sept '13 Gaining Facility 38 Memphis % %.% % ' (5)Notes: ========================================= rev 1!8128 PIR Distribution Changes

43 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR 5-Digit ZIP Code: 7241 Data Extraction Date: -;;:';;9/-;::2::-:4/~1-= Customer Service Issues Last Saved December 31, Digit ZIP Code: Digit ZIP Code: 725 PreAMP PIR PreAMP PIR 1. Collection Points Mon.-Fri. Sat. Mon. -Fri. Sat. Mon.-Fri. Sat. Mon. -Fri. Number picked up before 1 p.m Number picked up between 1-5 p.m Number picked up after 5 p.m Total Number of Collection Points 199 1a PreAMP 3-Digit ZIP Code: PIR Sal. Mon.-Fri. Sat. Mon. Fri. Sat Digit ZIP Code: P~AMP PIR Mon. -'Fri. Sat. Mon. -Fri. Sat.... : -o._!l>:"..... ; 2. How many collection boxes are currently designated for "local delivery"? [-~ 3. How many "local delivery" boxes were removed as a result of AMP? [-~ 4. Delivery Performance Report 1st PIR Ouarter/FY Percent % Carriers returning after 17 I _9% % Retail Unit Inside Losing Facility (Window Service Times) 6. Business (Bulk) Mail Acceptance Hours Monda I Tuesda I Wednesda y Thursda y Frida y Saturda y Start 1\1/A 1\1/A NIA NIA NIA N!A PreAMP Proposed- 1st PIR End Start End Start N/A N/A NIA N/A 1\1/A NIA N/A NIA NIA N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A NIA 1\1/A N/A NIA N/A End N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A Monda y Tuesda y Wednesda y Thursda y Frida y Saturda y PreAMP Proposed 1st PIR S1art End Start End Start End 9: 17: Closed Closed : 17: Closed Closed 9 17 l):oo 17: Closed Closed 9: 17 l);oo 1?: Closed Closed : 17: Closed Closed 9 17 Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed 7. Can customers obtain a local postmark in accordance with applicable policies in the Postal Operations Manual? Yes 8. Notes: Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC 9. What postmark is printed on collection mail? ~- I rev 11912lJ!)$ PIR Customer Service Issues

44 Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Space Evaluation and Other Costs Last Saved: December 31,213 Date: 1. Affected Facility 2. One-Time Costs 3. Savings Information Enter any one-time costs:.::;$:;,.. Space Savings ($): $;.;. $186,723 $186,723 (These numbers shown below under One-T1me Costs sect<on ) $ $ (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) 4. Did you utilize the acquired space as planned? Explain. 5. Notes: Employee Relocation Costs $15, $1, Mail Processing Equipment Relocation Costs (from MPE Inventory) $55,148 ($49,543) Facility Costs (from above) Total One-Time Costs $ $7,148 $186,723 $22,328 $132,18 P!R costs carried forward to Executive Summary) Losing Facility: Jonesboro AR CSMPC I Northeast AR Pre-AMP: FY 211 Range of Report Gaining Facility: Memphis TN P&DC PIR: FY 213 PIR Space Evaluation and Other Costs