December 31, 213 Mr. Mark Dimondstein President American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO 13 L Street, NW Washington, DC 25-4128 Certified Mail Tracking Number: 713 19 2 4435 5716 Dear Mark: As information, enclosed is a copy of the second and final Post Implementation Review (PIR) for the Washington, Pennsylvania 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 7412. Sincerely, /A!JJ;,/_ Patrick M. Devine Manager Contract Administration (APWU) Enclosures (CA213-11 3)
REDACTED Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Facility Name & Type: Washington CSMPC Street Address: 153 Jefferson Ave City: Washington State: PA 5 Facility ZIP Code: 1531 District: Western Pennsylvania Area: Eastern Finance Number: 41894 Current 3D ZIP Code(s): 153 Miles to Gaining Facility: 3.7 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: vacant Senior Plant Manager: Monica Nevins (A) District Manager: Robert Cintron Facility Name & Type: Pittsburgh P&DC Street Address: 11 California Ave City: Pittsburgh State: PA 5 Facility ZIP Code: 1529 District: Western Pennsylvania Area: Eastern Finance Number: 41669 Current 3D ZIP Code(s): 15-154 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: Monica Nevins (A) Senior Plant Manager: Monica Nevins (A) District Manager: Robert Cintron 3~ Background Information Approval Date: February 18,212 Implementation Date: Oct-1-212 PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Processing Days per Year: 31 Bargaining Unit Hours per Year: 1,745 EAS Hours per Year: 1,822 Oct-1-212: Sep-3-213 Date of HQ memo, DAR Factors/Cost of Borrowing/ June 16, 211 New Facility Start-up Costs Update 1---------------1 Date & Time this workbook was last saved: 12-5-213 1:49 4, Other Informotlon Area Vice President: Vice President, Network Operations: Area AMP Coordinator: NAI Contact: Joshua D. Colin David E. Williams Bob Roseberry Barbara Brewington PIR Data Entry Page
2 2
Executive Summary Last Saved December 5. 213 Date Range of Data PIR Type: Final PIR Oct-1-212 - Sep-3-213 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: State: Savings/Costs Final PIR vs Pre AMP Final 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 Work hour 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 ($7,52) $38,22 from Space Evaluation and Other Costs Total First Year Savings Staffing Craft Position Loss PCESIEAS Position Loss from Staffing-Graff from Staffing-PCES!EAS Service Losing Current Qtr Gaining Current Qtr First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC /N) 96.14% 96.58% from Service Performance & CSM First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 2 Day) 98.7% 97.18% from Service Performance & CSM First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 3 Day) Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Residential at PFC level Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Small Business at PFC level 96.2% 96.8% from Setvice Performance & CSM from Service Performance & CSM from Service Performance & CSM 3 PIR Executive Summary
Calculation B.efereoces Combined Losing and Gaining Facility Data: PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Function 1 Workhour Costs $65,82,823 $64,796,834 $64,47 4, 712 Non-Processing Craft Workhour Costs (less Maintenance & Transportation) $6,546,668 $6,546,668 $6,386,12 PCESIEAS Workhour Costs $8,728,495 $8,631,666 $8,557,991 Transportation Costs $7,761,258 $7,869,31 $7,283,613 Maintenance Costs $18,541,867 $18,487,38 $18,549,798 Space Savings $ $ Total Annual Cost $16,331,57 $15,252,235 Total One-Time Costs $ $45,74 $7,52 Total First Year Costs $16,661,111 $16,377,247 $15,259,755 Staffing Craft Position Total On-Rolls 1,263 1,256 1 '136 PCESIEAS Position Total On-Rolls 84 83 7 Final PIR vs Pre-AMP Final PIR vs Proposed {Approved) AMP Approved AMP Function 1 Workhour Savings $68,11 $322,121 $285,989 $16,549 $16,549 $ Non-Processing Craft Work hour Savings (less MaintfTrans) PCESIEAS Workhour Savings $17,54 $73,675 $96,829 Transportation Savings $477,644 $585,417 17,773) Maintenance Savings $54,56 Space Savings $ $ $ Total Annual Savings $1,48,876 $1,79,272 $329,65 Total One-Time Costs $38,22 Total First Year Savings $1,41,356 $1,117,492 $283,865 Staffing Craft Position Loss 127 12 7 PCESIEAS Position Loss 14 13 1 4 PIR Executive Summary
Summary Narrative Last Saved: December 5, 213 Losing Facility Name and Type: Washington CSMPC Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 153 Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Gaining Facility Name and Type: Pittsburgh P&DC Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 15-154 Background: The Western Pennsylvania District, with the assistance of the Eastern Area, has completed the Final Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the Area Mail Processing (AMP) project that consolidated destinating mail from the Washington PA CSMPC 153 (Washington) into the Pittsburgh PA P&DC (Pittsburgh). The data for the Pre-AMP period was July 1, 21 through June 3, 211 and included all destinating operations for Washington and Pittsburgh. The transfer of destinating mail was completed July 14, 212. The data for the PIR is October 1, 212 through September 3, 213. Financial Summary: Combined Losing and Gaining Facility Data: Function 1 Workhour Costs PCES/EAS Workhour Costs Transportation Costs Maintenance Costs Space Savings Total Annual Cost Total One-Time Costs Total First Year Costs Pre AMP $65,82,823 $6,546,668 $8,728,495 $7,761,258 $18,541,867 $ $16,661,111 Proposed Final PIR $64,796,834 $64,474,712 $6,546,668 $6,386,12 $8,631,666 $8,557,991 $7,869,31 $7,283,613 $18,487,38 $18,549,798 $45,74 $7,52 $16,377,247 $15,259,755 Total Annual Savings Total One-Time Costs Total First Year Savings PIR vs. Pre-AMP $1,48,876 ($7,52) $1,41,356 PIR vs. Pro12osed $1,79,272 $38,22 $1,117,492 The final PIR identifies a first year savings of $1,41,356, higher than the proposed first year savings of $283,865 for the AMP. These savings were affected by other concurrent activities. Greensburg PA AMP, implemented July 28, 212, with projected impacts to Pittsburgh's cost of $2,182,943. New Castle PA AMP, implemented August 11, 212, with projected impacts to Pittsburgh's cost of $5,621,7. Relocation of the parcel and bundle sorting operation from the Pittsburgh P&DC to the Pittsburgh L&DC which resulted in a 3,748 hour transfer, equating to a savings of $2,521,372 not related to the AMP. PVS savings of $551,594 at Pittsburgh which are not related to the AMP Adjusting for the various activities and initiatives, which total $4,73,984, the adjusted first year savings is $6,132,341. PIR Summary Narrative 5
Customer Service Considerations: The EXFC overnight, 2-day and 3-day mail service performance is shown in the workbook for Washington and Pittsburgh. The Washington overnight fell for Quarter 1 and Quarter 3 over SQL Y but was higher for Quarter 2 and Quarter 4, 213. Washington 2 and 3 day has been higher over SPL Y for each quarter. Pittsburgh's service has remained relatively constant. Transportation Changes: A zero based analysis of PVS operations was performed in Pittsburgh in May 213. There are currently vacant motor vehicle positions at Pittsburgh resulting in PVS savings of $551,61 which is unrelated to the AMP. Overall HCR transportation is running according to proposed. Staffing Impacts: The approved AMP proposed a reduction of 18 craft employees in Washington and an increase of 11 craft employees in Pittsburgh, resulting in a net decrease of 7. The AMP proposed a reduction of 1 EAS employee in Washington and added no EAS to Pittsburgh. Complement data at the end of the second PIR shows that the Washington and Pittsburgh combined realized a reduction of 127 craft employees and 15 EAS. The craft employee reduction is impacted by the clerk retirement incentive, especially in the Pittsburgh P&DC. Pittsburgh management staffing is currently below the authorized complement. Management and Craft Staffing Impacts 1 Craft= All Mail Processing Management to Craft Ratio Pre AMP First PIR Management MDOs+SDOs to MDOs+SDOs to to Craft 2 SDOs to Craft 1 Craft 1 SDOs to Craft 1 Craft 1 Ratios (1 :25 target) (1 :22 target) (1 :25 target) (1 :22 target) Washington 1:28 1:21 N/A N/A Pittsburqh 1:32 1:27 1:28 1:25 1 All 6
Maintenance Impacts: Maintenance is just over proposed however when the other AMPs into Pittsburgh are taken into account, the costs are according to plan. Pittsburgh has 1 less employees than during the AMP period. The addition of maintenance staffing may impact the final PIR costs. Equipment Relocation and One-Time Facility Costs: There was a projected one time cost of $45,74 for equipment relocation. Only $7,52 is being reported for equipment relocation which was for parts related to the equipment move for this AMP. The labor costs for the equipment moves are included in the maintenance workhours and the transfer of equipment between facilities was done via existing postal transportation. PIR Summary Narrative 7
N~- Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement Last Saved: December 5, 213 Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC District: Western Pennsylvania PIR Type: Final PIR Implementation Date: 1/1/12 Before AMP After AMP Fiscal Quarter overni91lt Percentage 1 212 96,89% 2 212 96.27% 3 212 98,32% 4 212 94,59% 1 213 93.41% 2 213 97,79% 3 213 95,39% 4 213 96,14% : 2oay Percentage soay Percentage 89.45% 84,73% 95,7% 95,29% 92.48% 92,79% 9,77% 95,83% 96,19% 94,31% 97,3% 95,56% 95,3% 94,78% 98,7% 96.2% Gaining Facility:.::.P,.;,it;.;;ts;.;;b:..::u;,;.;rg;z;h:::-:-P.::.&;.::D...;:C:,---,-------- District: Western Pennsylvania After AMP (15) Notes: Customer Satisfaction Measurement (CSM) became Customer Experience Measurement 21, Data reflects most recently completed quarter available in CEM, Overall Satisfaction (Overall Experience) Satisfaction with Receiving (Experience with receiving) Satisfaction with Sending (Experience with sending) Satisfaction with most frequently visited PO (Experience with most frequently visited PO) 55,89% Satisfaction with most recent contact with USPS (Experience with most recent contact witt ;::.:..;: ::=,;,::.::.;,;:: ;8:..4:.., 7:..5:.:'/..::.o _...Jlikely to recommend the USPS 8 PIR Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement
r-- Combined Facilities I Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities last Saved December 5. 213 42 " 43 44 Function 4 L$37 43 i G-NIA PIR Type": ~;~.:,~ ~~~ "" 1"""'"" ;., "'""""h.;.-.;,~ t,:;;:r,,:;;pir Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 to Sep-~._:-_2~~13 P!R Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities
PIR Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities
P!R Workhour Costs Combined Facilities
(27)NOTES'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ f*w1/412$ 12 PIR Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities
losing Facility: Wash~.~ton C:.~MPC ~~------ --------~ Workhour Costs - Losing Facility last Saved. December 5, 213 PIR Type ; ~~~cc~: ====;dtoif,;;rt Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Date Range of Data: -~~:~~12 to Sep.W~~~~3 P!R Workhour Costs Losing
14 PIR Woli<hour Costs~ Losing
----~ -- Gaining Facility: ~~tt~~~~---.. ----- -----.. ---~-----~----- Workhour Costs. Gaining Facility Last Saved December 5, 213 PIR Type"': ~:1!.~ 1 ~ ~~, _-::_~::~:.,:::.. ~-:;~n.n Type of Distribution Consolidated: gestinating Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 to ~~p~~-21_3 PIR Workhour Costs- Gaining
P!R Workhour Costs- Gaining
P!R Workhour Costs -Gaining
(27)NOTES'------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 PlR Workhour Costs- Gaining
I Other Workhour Move Analysis I PJR Other Workhour Costs
2 PIR Other Workhour Costs
PIR Other Workhour Costs
22 PI R Other Workhour Costs
23 PI R Other Workhour Costs
"Other Craft" Ops(less Ops gomg to 'Trans-PVS' 18,862 $7,224,87-11,55 341,324 $15.486,34 1,'714 173,31 $8,728.49-1,671 5,529 $13,33 5,529 $13,3-558 855,877 $37.986,38 851,9 $37,853,1 ~5,34 24 Pl R Other Work hour Costs
Staffing - Craft Last Saved: December 5, 213 PIR Type: Final PIR Data Extraction Date: 9/24/13 Craft Positions Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Finance #: 41894 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6 (7) (8) (9) Non-Career On-Rolls Part Time On-Rolls Full Time On-Rolls Total On-Rolls... PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Function 1 - Clerk Function 4 -Clerk 1 1 6 19 14 26 13 15 Function 1 - Mail Handler Function 4 - Mail Handler 1 1 7 3 8 4 4 Function 3A -Vehicle Service Function 38 - Maintenance 2 1 2 2 4 3 3 Functions 67-69- Lmtd/Rehab!WC 1. 1 1 Other Functions I Ol o I 42 4 44 44 4 Total I 3 21 7 1 71 59 83 65 62..._ l Variances Total On-Rolls (1) (11) Change 1st PIR vs 1st PIR vs Analysis Pre AMP Proposed Positions {2i) (3) Percent 25% -4.6% Gaining Facility: Pittsburgh P&DC Finance#: 41669 (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (2) Craft Positions Non-Career On-Rolls Part Time On-Rolls Full Time On-Rolls Total On-Rolls PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Final PIR PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Function 1 -Clerk 63 76 < 449 363 ' 512 52 439 Function 1 - Mail Handler 39 72 2 345 3 386 388 372 Function 3A -Vehicle Service 14 11 78 7... 92 92 81 Function 38 - Maintenance 11 186 165 186 187 176 Functions 67-69- Lmtd/Rehab!WC 2 3 2 2 3 Other Functions I Ol o I 2 3 2 2 3 Total 116 11 I 2.. 1,62 94 1,18 1 '191 1,74..._ ~ l Variances Total On-Rolls r-----~)----i-----(;)----1 Change 1 Final PIR vs Pre AMP l Final PIR vs Proposed l Analysis (21) (22) Final PIR vs Final PIR vs Pre AMP Proposed TotaiCraftPositionloss:! 127! 12! Positions (16) (if) L-----------~------------j (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summaty) Percent -9.% -9.8% rev4/5/1 25 PIR Staffing - Craft
Staffing- PCES/EAS Last Saved: December 5, 213 PIR Type: Final PIR Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Data Extraction Date 1/2/213 Finance # _4:..:1:;_8:;_9:..4:.. _ PCES/EAS Positions Authorized Staffing On-Rolls (1) (2) (3) (4) Line Position Title Level PreAMP Final P!R 1 POSTMASTER EAS-22 j 1 2 SUPV CUSTOMER SERVICES EAS-17 3 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 ',' 14 15 16 17 18 19 c.-,' 2 21 22 ',,' 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 6 Totals 4 4 (5) (6) (7) PreAMP Proposed Final P!R 1 1 1 3 2 2 ' ',' I._, 4 -: 3 3 ~ Variances Total On Rolls (15) (16) Change Final PIR vs Final PIR vs Analysis Pre AMP Proposed 26 Positions (1) Percent -25.%.% PIR Staffing- P ES/EAS
Gaining Facility: Pittsburgh P&DC Data Extraction Date: 1121213 Finance# -'4-'16.;..6:...;_9 PCES/EAS Positions Authorized Staffing On-Rolls (19) (2) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) Line Position Title P«AMP Final PIR PreAMP Proposed Fina! PIR 1 SR PLANT MANAGER (1) 1 1 1 2 MGR IN-PLANT SUPPORT 1 1 1 1 ~ ~NCE(LEAD) I EAS-25 1 1 1 1 1 BUTION OPERATIONS I EAS-25 1 1 1 TION OPERATIONS EAS-24 2 2 2 6 MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS-23 3 3 3 3 3 7 MGR TRANSPORTATION/NETWORKS EAS-23 1 1 1 1 1 8 MGR DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS EAS-22 3 1 3 3 2 9 OPERATIONS INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER (FI EAS-22 2 2 2 2 1 OPERATIONS INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER (FI EAS-21 1 3 11 MGR MAINT ENGINEERING SUPPORT EAS-2 1 1 1 1 1 12 MGR MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS SUPPT EAS-2 1 1 1 1 1 13 SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS-2 1 2 1 1 1 14 imaintenance ENGINEERING SPECIALIST EAS-19 1 1 1 1 1 15 MGR FIELD MAINT OPRNS (LEAD) EAS-19 1 1 1 1 1 16 MGR PVS OPERATIONS EAS-19 1 1 17 NETWORKS SPECIALIST EAS-18 1 1 1 1 18 OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS-18 3 3 3 3 19 OPERATIONS SUPPORT SPECIALIST EAS-17 5 5 4 4 3 2 SUPV DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS EAS-17 36 34 35 35 28 SUPV MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS EAS-17 12 14 12 12 9 SUPV MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS SUPPOR EAS-17 1 It=! 1 1 SUPV TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS EAS-17 5 4 4 4 NETWORKS SPECIALIST EAS-16 1 1 25 SECRETARY (FLD) EAS-12 1 1 1 ~ 26 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT (FLD) EAS-12 1 1 27 PLANT MANAGER (MAJOR) PCES-1. I 1 28 LEAD SR MGR DISTRIBUTION OPERATION EAS-26 1 29 OPERATIONS INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER (FI EAS-23 1 m MGR DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS EAS-2 1 ~TWORK SPECIALIST EAS-17 2 33 I.. _: 34 1--. 35 36.-... I 37._ 38 39 --- 4 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5 51 52..: 53 54 55 56-57 :_ 58... 59. 6. Totals 82 Bu ~u_ "' ~! ~ Variances Total On~Rolls (33) (34) Change Analysis Final PIR vs PreAMP Final PIR vs Proposed 27 r*-*_*_*_*_*_*_*-*-r*_*_*_*_*_*_*,_*_*_*_*_*_*-* 1371 138 Total PCES/EAS' ' ) ' j j Position Lossj 14 j 13 j ~*-*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*~*_*_*_*_*_*_*_j_*_*_*_* *_~ (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary) Positions (13) (13) Percent -16.3% -16.3% PIR Staffing- PCES/EAS
Transportation - PVS Last Saved: December 5, 213 PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 -- to -- Sep-3-2 13 Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Finance Number: -'4'-'-1-'-8.:..9.:..4.: Gaining Facility: Pittsburgh P&DC Finance Number: _4_1..;..6.:..6.:..9'-------- (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1) Variance Variance Variance Variance PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Final PIR vs Final PIR vs PreAMP Proposed PIR Final PIR vs Final PIR vs Pre AMP Prooosed Pre AMP Pronosed PVS Owned Equipment PVS Owned Equipment Seven Ton Trucks Seven Ton Trucks Eleven Ton Trucks Eleven Ton Trucks. Single Axle Tractors I Single Axle Tractors Tandem Axle Tractors _j Tandem Axle Tractors. Spotters Spotters PVS Transportation PVS Transportation Number of Schedules Number of Schedules Total Annual Mileage Total Annual Mileage Total Mileage Costs $ $ $ $ $ Total Mileage Costs $ $ $ $ PVS Leases PVS Leases Total Vehicles Leased Total Vehicles Leased Total Lease Costs $ $ $ $ $ Total Lease Costs $ $ $ $ $ PVS Workhour Costs PVS Workhour Costs LOG 31 (617, 679, 764) $ $ $ LOG 31 (617, 679, 764) $415,288 $415,288 $338,419 (~868 {57EL868) LOG 34 (765, 766) $ $ $ LOG 34 (765, 766) $6,89,587 $6,89,587 $6,334,861. {$4;i4 72[\ ($474728) Total Workhour Costs $ $ $ $ $ Total Workhour Costs $7,224,875 $7,224,875 $6,673,28 ($551,594 {5551?94)]... (11) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-PVS Savings: ($551,594) (12) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-PVS Savings: ($55L594) (This number added to the Executive Summary (This number added to the Executive Summary) (13) Notes:------------------------------------------------ rev 1/8128 28 PIR Transportation - PVS
Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Transportation - HCR Last Saved: December 5, 213 PIR Type: Final PIR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Data of HCR Data File: 1/1/13 (4) Final PIR (7) Final PIR Annual Cost CT for Outbound Dock: (8) (9) Final PIR 29 PIR Transportation HCR- Losing
Change Analysis Final PIR vs 3 PIR Transportation HCR- Losing
Transportation - HCR Last Saved: December 5, 213 Gaining Facility: _P_it:.:.:ts:...b..:..u...::rg:_h_P_&_D_c PIR Type: Destinating Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Date of HCR Data File: CET for Inbound Dock: CET for Cancellations: CETfor OGP: CT for Outbound Dock: ------ (3) (4) (5) (6) (9) (1) Route# PreAMP Final PIR Proposed Annual Cost Final PIR Annual Cost Final PIR Annual Cost/Mile PIR Transportation HCR- Gaining
Losing Gaining Summary HCR Losing & Gaining (13) 1 (14) Final PIR vs Final PIR vs Pre AMP $73,95 $ (13) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) $73,95 (14) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) Total Transportation HCR PVS (15) Final PIR vs Pre AMP (16) Final PIR vs (15) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation (PVS & HeR): (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary) (16) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation (PVS & HeR): (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary) 32 PIR Transportation HCR- Gaining
MPE Inventory Last Saved: December 5, 213 Data Extraction Date: 4/13/13 PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 --to-- Sep-3-213 Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Gaining Facility: Pittsburgh P&DC (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Proposed Final PIR PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Relocation Relocation Variance in Costs Equipment... Equipment Costs Costs AFCS AFCS... 8 8 $ $ $ AFCS2 AFCS2 9 $ $ $ AFSM-ALL AFSM-ALL 4... 4 4 $ $ ~ APPS APPS $ $ $... ClOSS ClOSS 2 2 3 $ $ so CSBCS (l CSBCS $ $ $ DBCS < 4 DBCS 35 39 47 $38,24 $7,52 {$37~ DBCS-OSS.. DBCS-OSS. $ $ so DIOSS DIOSS 6 6 7 $ $ $ FSS.>. FSS $ $ so. SBPS SBPS 1 1 $ $ $() UFSM UFSM $ $ $ FC I MICRO MARK...... FC I MICRO MARK $ $ $ ROBOT GANTRY ROBOT GANTRY $ $ so HSTS I HSUS < HSTS I HSUS 1 1 2 $ $ $... LCTS I LCUS LCTS I LCUS 1... 1 1 $ $ $o LIPS LIPS... $ $ $() MPBCS-OSS MPBCS-OSS $ $ so TABBER TABBER $ $ $ POWERED >... POWERED INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL 42 42 42 $ $ VEHICLE VEHICLE LCREM LCREM 1 1 1 $ $ so (1) Notes:.......... 4... Totals 11.. 1 15 116 $38,24 $7,52 ($3,72)1 Additional equipment at Pittsbur lh due to concurrent AMPs. Four DBCS HCS moved from Washin 1ton to Pittsbur lh. Pittsbur 1 Equipment moves made via local maintenance personnel and posta I vehicles. - ;,...L" "-:::,. Carried to Space Evaluation and Other Costs '!'l PIR MPE Inventory
Maintenance Last Saved: December 5, 213 PIR _F_in...:a--1'-P'-IR-'------- Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 : Sep-3-213 Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Gaining Facility: P&DC ----~--------------------------------- Workhour Aotiviqt c::- Mail Processing $ l '-"'-~ Equipment E Building Equipment$.-- LDC 38 Building Services $ (Custodial Cleaning) LDC 39 Maintenance Operations $ Suooort $ (1) PreAMP ~ 35,525 $ $ --- 197,469 $ -- $ - 841 $ --- 233;835 (2) Proposed Costs $ = $ 148,12 $ = $ = $ --- 148,12 $ $ $ 198,483 $ $ $ 198,483 $ (4) Variance Final PIR to PreAMP 1,13 $ $ $ $ (5) Variance Final PIR to Proposed 5,381 5,381 LDC 36 I LDC 38 I LDC 39 I LDC 93 Workhour Aotiviqt Building Equipment $ Building Services $ (Custodial Cleanmg).._... nance Operations $ SU(!(!Ort Main~en~~ce $ (6) (7) (8) Pre AM P... I Proposed Final PIR Costs. Costs Costs $ 7,334,33 $ 8,645,365 $ 2,546,938 $ 2,546,938 $ 2,326,688 $ 4,9,984 $ 4,9,984 $ 3,575,797 $ $ 1,245,88 $ 77,449 $ 162,556 $ 164,569 $ 122,645 $ -- $ 15,31,7 $ 15,44,944 $ (9) Variance Final PIR to Pre AMP 1,358,213 $ (1) Variance Final PIR to Pre Proposed Parts and Supplies Parts and Supplies Maintenance Stockroom $ and Supplies 118,365 $ 1,349 $ 99,165 $ Maintenance Stockroom $ 2,937,157 $ 2,937,157 $ 2,811,26 $ Adjustments $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Grand Total $ 352,2 248,451 297,648 $ 49,197 Grand Total $ 18,189,667 18,238,857 18,252,15 $ 62,483 (11) Final PIR vs Pre AMP- Maintenance Savings: (12) Final PIR vs Proposed- Maintenance Savings: $7,93 $62,49 (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (13) Data in PIR columns 1s annualized tor Fnst PIR rev 1/8/2$ 34 PIR Maintenance
Distribution Changes Last Saved: December 5, 213 Losing Facility : Washington CSMPC PIR Type: Final PIR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Destinating Date Range of Data: Oct-1-212 --to-- Sep-3-213 (1) Place a "X" next to the DMM labeling list(s) revised as result of the approved AMP. X DMM L1 DMM L2 DMM L11 DMM L21 Identify the date of the Postal Bulletin that contained DMM labeling list revisions. ( 2 l PB 22339, Jun 14-212 X DMM L3 DMM L4 DMM L5 DMM L6 DMM L7 DMM L8 DMM L9 DMM L1 DMM L61 DMM L62 DMM L63 DMM L64 DMM L65 DMM L66 DMM L67 DMM L81 Was the Service Standard Directory updated for the approved AMP? ( 3 l Yes (4) Drop Shipments for Destination Entry Discounts FAST Appointment Summary Report NASS Total No-Show Late Arrival Open Facility Name Month Losing I Gaining Facility Code Schd Count % Count % Count % Aug '13 Losing Facility N/A Washington CSMPC N/A Closed Unschd I Count % Count Sept '13 Losing Facility N/A Washington CSMPC N/A Aug '13 Gaining Facility 15 Pittsburgh P&DC 681 19 27.9% 232 347%.% Sept '13 Gaining Facility 15 Pittsburgh P&DC 668 26 3.84% 238 35.63%.% 491 462 72.1% 12 69.16% 9 - ------- (5) Notes: Washington dropped at Pittsburgh rev 1/8/28 35 PIR Distribution Changes
Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC 5-Digit ZIP Code: 1531 Data Extraction Date: -:1-=-::1-=2o-:/1-=3------ Customer Service Issues Last Saved December 5, 213 3-Digit ZIP Code: 153 3-Digit ZIP Code: PreAMP PIR PreAMP.... 1. Collection Points Mon. -Fri. Sat. Mon.-Fri. Sat. Mon.-Fri. sat. Mon.-Fri. Number picked up before 1 p.m. 5 152 63 151 Number picked up between 1-5 p.m. 213 72 19 71 Number picked up after 5 p.m. 7 1 7 1 Total Number of Collection Points 27 225 26 223 3-Digit ZIP Code: PIR PreAMP PIR Sat. Mon. -Fri. Sat. Mon. -Fri. Sat -- 3-Digit ZIP Code: PreAMP PIR Mon.-Fri. Sat. Mon.- Fri. Sat. 2. How many collection boxes are currently designated for "local delivery"? I o ~ 3. How many "local delivery" boxes were removed as a result of AMP? 4. Delivery Performance Report PreAMP Final PIR Quarter/FY Percent Ouarter/FY Percent % Carriers returning before 5 p.m. 1 212 97,5% 1 213 95.7% 2 212 99.3% 2 213 95.4% 3.212 99.1% 3 213 89_4% 4 212 96.% 4 213 81.6% 5. Retail Unit Inside Losing Facility (Window Service Times) 6. Business (Bulk) Mail Acceptance Hours Monda y Tuesda y Wednesda y Thursda y Frida y Saturda Y, preamp Sta.rt End 7:3 19: 7:3 < 19:.7:3 19: 7:3.. 19: 7:3 19: 7:3 16: Proposed Start End 7 3 19 7 3 19: 7:3 19: 7:3 19: 7:3 19: 9: 16: Final PIR Start End 7.3 19 73 19 73 19: 7 3 19: 73 19 9 16 Monda y Tuesda y Wednesda y Thursda y Frida y Saturda y PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Start End Start End Start End 9:3 16: 9:3 18 11 18 9:3 : 18:QO 9:3 18: 11 18 9:3..... 1.8: 9:3 18: 11 18 9:3 18: 9:3 18: 11 18 9:3 18: 9:3 18: 11 18 ctosed closed closed closed closed ctosed 7. Can customers obtain a local postmark in accordance with applicable policies in the Postal Operations Manual? Yes 8. Notes: Gaining Facility:.:..P..:..itt:.:.:s:.::b:.::u.:..;rge.:.h:..:P...:&:::D=-C-=---------------- 9. What postmark is printed on collection mail? 1.... ~ittsburg~ 152 I Date& Time 36 rev 119128 PIR Customer Service Issues
Space Evaluation and Other Costs Last Saved: December 5, 213 Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Date: -----'-1-"'/.;;.3-'-'1/-'1 "-3 1 Affected Facility 2. One-Time Costs 3. Savings Information Enter any one-time costs: S::;7"',5::;:;:..._ Space Savings ($):..;s;,:o $ ;$7,5j (These numbers shown below under One-Time Costs section.) $ $ (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) 4. Did you utilize the acquired space as planned? Explain. Equipment has been removed from Washington as proposed. FSO still rev'tewing space. 5. Notes: Employee Relocation Costs Mail Processing Equipment Relocation Costs (from MPE Inventory) $38,24 Facility Costs (from above) $7,5 Total One-Time Costs $45,74 ($38 22) carried forward to Executive Summary) Losing Facility: Washington CSMPC Dec-12-213 Range of Report Gaining Facility: Pittsburgh P&DC PIR: FY 213 YTD (1) (2) (31 (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1) Product PreAMP AJ:t;qclated REC preamp CO$t per 1,ooa Final PIR Associated REC Final PIR Cost per 1,!mages Product Pie AMP Associated REC Final PIR Associated REC Final PIR Cost per 1, Images N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A NtA rev 1!9126 37 PIR Space Evaluation and Other Costs