March 4, 2013
Mr. Cliff Guffey
President
American Postal Workers
Union, AFL-CIO
1300 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005-4128
Dear Cliff:
Certified Mail Tracking Number:
7012 2920 0000 8276 9553
As information, enclosed is a copy of the second and final Post Implementation Review for
the Panama City, FL Processing and Distribution Facility (P&DF) Area Mail Processing
(AMP).
If you have any questions, please contact Rickey Dean at extension 7 412.
Sincerely,
Patrick M. Devine
Manager
Contract Administration (APWU)
Enclosure
Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating
Facility Name & Type: Panama City P&DF
Street Address: 1336 Sherman Ave
City: Panama City
State: FL 50 Facility ZIP Code: 32401
District: North Florida
Area: Southern
Finance Number: 117260
Current 3D ZIP Code(s): 324
Miles to Gaining Facility: 106
EXFC office: Yes
Plant Manager: Eugene Green
Senior Plant Manager: Arthur A Rosenberg
District Manager: Charles J. Miller
Facility Name & Type: Pensacola P&DC
Street Address: 1400 W Jordan St
City: Pensacola
State: FL 50 Facility ZIP Code: 32501
District: North Florida
Area: Southern
Finance Number: 117410
Current 30 ZIP Code(s): 325
EXFC office: Yes
Plant Manager: Ethel M. King
Senior Plant Manager: Arthur A Rosenberg
District Manager: Charles J. Miller
Approval Date: April28, 2010
Implementation Date: Jul-01-2010
PIR Type: Final PIR
Date Range of Data: Jul-01-2010:
Processing Days per Year: 310
Bargaining Unit Hours per Year: 1,750
EAS Hours per Year: 1,825
Jun-30-2011
Date of HQ memo, DAR Factors/Cost of Borrowing/ May
27, 2009
New Facility Start-up Costs Update
1---1
Date & Time this workbook was last saved:
Area Vice President: Jo Ann Feindt
Vice President Network Operations: David E. Williams
Area AMP Coordinator: Andrew Benefield/Steve Jackson
NAI Contact: Barbara Brewington
02-06-2013 14:02
Approval Signatures
Losing
~meand Type:
Faclifty ZW' Code:
Flrumc• Numb$r:
Cw·rgnt SCF liP C000(s):
Type oi Distribuiion Consolidated: ..:O;:..;r;.;;ig;a;;ina=ti::.:..OO:.;z.... _ _ _ _ _
Gainfng ~ma and Type:
Pensacola P&DC
Faclmy
ZW' Code:FlmaMe
Numb$r:
Cum:~nt SCF ZIP Code{s):
Implementation Date: ..;::0..;..7/:..;;0..;.;1/-:.1.;;.0 _ _ _ _
_
Date Range of Data:
toACKNOWlliDOEMENT OF ACCOUNTA81!.JiY • I ad<~ !ilai I am ~ntilble fot rt!$jli!C!irog al'lll svi'IX)I'Iil'lg WI til~ of
an
~ posilli r<!pOt!ingsystems, ll'ldudi!'!g llna!!CI:lli tepl.ll'l$ lVld triose nill!ltinS lo OOfl'IP!iance with conltacltng. com!)lll:ment, or simil!lr el'l'or!s involvlnglhe in~ end expendJ~ of
rUI'Id~;;, as well a~;; !Ill s)I'Sfem$ to service to rn;r eu!ltome!'S. LOSli'fG El!Cli.ITY:
Senior Plant
Mtimager:
Arthur A
Ro$enbeig
jl,{fUQff~
Area Vice Pnasfctem:
Jo Ann Feino't
David E. Willlams
Comme~:---2
Executive Summary
Last Saved February 6, 2013 Date Range of Data
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:
SavjngslCosts
Staffing
Service
Function 1 Workhour Savings Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings
(less Maint/Trans) PCES/EAS Workhour Savings
Transportation Savings Maintenance Savings Space Savings
Total Annual Savings
Total One-Time Costs
Total First Year Savings
Craft Position Loss PCES/EAS Position Loss
First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 0/N)
First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 2 Day)
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
3
Final PIR vs Pre AMP Final PIR vs Approved
$0
$0
53
Losing Current Qtr Gaining Current Qtr
95,39% 95,87%
93.72% 93,62%
82.00% 90,38%
89.4%
86.7%
PIR Type: Final PIR
Jul-01-2010 - Jun-30-2011from Workhour Costs - Combined
from Other Curr vs Prop from Other Curr vs Prop from Transportation HCR
and Transpottation PVS
from Maintenance
from Space Evaluation and Other Costs
from Space Evaluation and Other Costs
from Staffing-Graff
from Staf/ing-PCES!EAS
from Service Perfonnance & CSM
from Service Perfonnance & CSM
from Service Perfonnance & CSM
from Service Perfonnance & CSM
from Service Perfonnance & CSM
Calculati'm Beftmmces
Combined Losing and Gaining Facility Data: PreAMP Proposed Final PIR
Function 1 Workhour Costs
$16,416,818
$16,192,384
$14,219,205
Non-Processing Craft Workhour Costs$713,059
$712,394
$527,493
(less Maintenance & Transportation)
PCESIEAS Workhour Costs
$2,439,162
$2,375,900
$2,226,845
Transportation Costs
$4,291,392
$4,141,937
$4,552,322
Maintenance Costs
$8,119,714
$7,982,834
$8,584,126
Space Savings
$0
$0
$0
Total Annual Cost
$31,980,144
$31,405,449
$30,109,991
Total One-Time Costs
$0
$0
$0
Total First Year
$31,980,144
$31,405,449
$30,109,991
Staffing
Craft Position Total On-Rolls
306
298
274
PCESIEAS Position Total On-Rolls
27
27
25
Final PIR vs Proposed
Final PIR vs Pre-AMP (Approved) AMP Approved AMP
Function 1 Workhour Savings
$2,197,612
$1,973,178
$224,434
Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings
$185,566
$184,901
$665
(less Maint/Trans)
PCES/EAS Workhour Savings
$212,317
$149,055
$63,262
Transportation Savings
($260,930)
($410,385)
$149,455
Maintenance Savings
($464,412)
($601 ,292)
$136,880
Space Savings
$0
$0
$0
Total Annual Savings
$1,870,153
$1,295,458
$574,695
Total One-Time Costs
$0
$0
$0
Total First Year Savings
$1,870,153
$1,295,458
$574,695
Staffing
Craft Position Loss
32
24
8
PCES/EAS Position Loss
2
2
PIR Executive Summary
Summary Narrative
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
Losing Facility Name and Type: Panama City P&DF
Current SCF ZIP Code(s):
324
Type of Distribution Consolidated:
Originating
Gaining Facility Name and Type: Pensacola P&DC
Current SCF ZIP Code(s):
325
5
Background:
The Southern Area, with the assistance of the North Florida District, has completed the Final Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the Area Mail Processing (AMP) proposal that
consolidated originating mail from the Panama City P&DF to the Pensacola P&DC. The transfer of originating mail from the Panama City P&DF to the Pensacola P&DC was completed on July 1, 2010. The data for the pre-AMP period was FY 2009 and included all operations for the Panama City P&DF and the Pensacola P&DC. The data for the Final PIR was July 1, 2010 thru June 30, 2011.
Financial Summary:
Total Annual Savings Total First Year Savings
Final PIR Vs Pre-AMP $1,870,153 $1,870,153
Final PIR Vs Proposed $1,295,458 $1,295,458
The Final PIR savings is above the proposed annual savings of $574,695 with the majority of savings attributed to position reductions across all crafts. Transportation was realigned to maintain the overnight service commitments between 324 Panama City and 325 Pensacola P&DC.
There were operational savings that contributed to the increased Function 1 savings. Local efficiency initiatives in SPBS and LCTS operations at the Pensacola P&DC and Automation operations at both facilities led to large savings. Also Panama City P&DF and Pensacola P&DC consolidated flat processing at the Pensacola P&DC in a work-hour saving initiative resulting in the removal of a UFSM 1000 at the Panama City P&DF.
6
Customer Service Considerations:
The EXFC overnight, 2-day and 3-day mail service performance is shown below for the Panama City P&DF and the Pensacola P&DC.
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF District: North Florida
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC District: North Florida
Transportation Changes:
The approved AMP projected an annual Transportation savings of $149,455. The Final PIR shows an increased cost of $410,385. The largest contributing factor was the increased costs of HCR 328SE (Part A), where the annual rate went from the proposed $2,669,161 to $3,035,162. This was due to changes on HCR 328SE (Part A) on trips serving other facilities other than Pensacola and Panama City. Also all HCR's had an increase in the Annual Cost/Mile due to fuel increases.
7
Staffing Impacts:
The approved AMP proposal identified a reduction of 8 craft employees and 1 EAS employee due to the consolidation of originating operations into the Pensacola P&DC. Complement data for the Final PIR shows that complement has been reduced by 32 craft employees and 2 EAS employees through attrition and transfers. Local Initiatives involving staffing and scheduling impacts and the recent retirement incentive in Fall 2009 have contributed to the larger than expected complement reduction.
Maintenance Impacts:
The approved AMP projected an annual Maintenance savings of $136,880 with the consolidation of originating operations into the Pensacola P&DC including the retirement in place of 2 AFCSs with the associated support equipment. The Final PIR is showing an increase of $464,412. The cost is the direct result of filling vacant authorized Maintenance Mechanic positions at the Pensacola P&DC under LDC 37 unrelated to the AMP. At the time of the AMP study, Pensacola was 11 positions under their authorized staffing.
Space Impacts and One-Time Facility Costs:
The approved AMP projected no one-time cost associated with the AMP. No one-time costs were identified at the time of the Final PIR.
Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
PIR Type: Implementation Date: Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
District: North Florida
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC District: North Florida
(15) Notes: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
*Customer Satisfaction Measurement (CSM) became Customer Experience Measurement (CEM) in 2010 Data reflects most recently completed quarter available in CEM. 01 Overall Satisfaction (Overall Experience)
Q4a Satisfaction with Receiving (Experience with receiving) Q8a Satisfaction with Sending (Experience with sending)
Q12a Satisfaction with most frequently visited PO (Experience with most frequently visited PO) Q16a Satisfaction with most recent contact with USPS (Experience with most recent contact with USPS) Q 19 Likely to recommend the USPS
Final PIR 07/01/10
r -
-
co~inecil=-a~ilities_____ ]
Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating
Workhour Costs - Combined Facilities
Last Saved_ February 6, 2013
PIR Type': , ,,., r"'
*l');b~P-iQ'";:;;i~~,::;~,:;;;:;r&,7f;':i,;;p,,.,
Date Range of Data: ~~~ to ~n..J0-2011 _ _ _
(2nNOTES:========================================================================================================================================================
:~-iM$~)~('11
Workhour Costs - Losing Facility Last Saved: February 6, 2013 Losing Facility: ..!:_anam~. City P&DF
PIR Type": IH!~l rfl'\
~oata in PIR columns is annualized for First
Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: ~1-2010 to Jun-30-2011
i'-';;.,.~:~t~y--14
Workhour Costs • Gaining Facility last Saved: February 6, 2013
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC
PIR Type*: :.,:~,::~,: ~.:, __ , .. ___ ,_ --- .. -"~~"' •-· r:·:::;-"'"''
Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: ~~ to Jun-30-~20'-'1c.1 _ _ _
{27)NOTES: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___
-18
r--- ---
---Other Workhour-llliove
Analysis
I
20
22
I
Distribution to Other PIR Worksheet Tabs
- - ]
23
10,721 $494,5 $ -4,445 -29.31°; 2,240 $94,74 $( 464 26.14° $17,2071 168,801 $7,186,18 $ 6,776 4.18° $350,994 42,878 $2,226,84 $ -4,875 ·10.21° -$149,0551 1,304 $32,94 $ -66 -4.85u -$".210: 225,944 $10,035,26 $ -2,147 -0.94° $34,245 -2_14. -094'Y 34.24 24
Staffing -Craft
Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type: Final PIRCraft Positions
Data Extraction Date: 07/16/11
Craft Positions
Data Extraction Date: 07/16/11
~---~---~
I (23) I (24) I
!
Final PIR vs Pre AMP!
Final PIR vs Proposed!
Total Craft Position Loss:
l _____
J2 _____
j ____
~~----J
(Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary)
Staffing - PCES/EAS
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Data Extraction Date: 7/16/2011
PCES/EAS Positions
26
Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type: Final PIR
Finance# _1_17_2_60 _ _ _ _ _
27
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Finance# _1-'1'-74'-1'-'0 _ _ _ _ _ _
Data Extraction Date: 7/1612011
PCES/EAS Positions
{20) Level r-·-·-·-·-·---~---r---,!
Total PCES/EAS, (371 , (381 ,!
Position Loss! 2 ! 2 !~---J---'---1
(Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary)Transportation-
PVS
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
Final PIR
PIR Type: _ _ _;_ _ _ _ _ _ ···· Date Range of Data: Jul-01-2010 --to-- Jun-30-2011
---Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Finance Number: _1 ... 1 ... 7 ... 26.:...0.:__ ______ _ Finance Number: _1_1_7_4_1 O _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(4)
I
(5) Variance Variance Final PIR vs Final PIR vs(7) (8) (9)
I
(10) Variance Variance Final PIR vs Final PIR vs PIR(11) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-PVS Savings: $17,207 (12) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-PVS Savings: $17,207
(This number added to the Executive Summary (This number added to the Executive Summary)
(13) N o t e s :
-28
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating
Data of HCR Data File:
07/01/11
·-· (4)
Final PIR
29
Transportation - HCR
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
(6) (7)
Final PIR Annual Cost
PIR Type:
Final PIR
CT for Outbound Dock:
(10)
Final PIR
Change Analysis Final PIR vs
30
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC
Type of Distribution Consolidated:
Originating
Date of HCR Data File: 07/01/11
(1)
Route#
(:S) (4)
Final PIR
Transportation - HCR
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
CET for Inbound Dock: CET for Cancellations:
(6) (7)
Proposed
I
Final PIR Annual Annual Cost CostPIR Type:
Originating
CETforOGP: CT for Outbound Dock:
(9)
-(10)
Final PIR Annual Cost/Mile
32
Summary HCR Losing & Gaining
(13)
1
(14)Losing Gaining
(13) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-HeR Savings:
(from losing and gaining facilities)
Final PIR vs Pre AMP
$214,684
(14) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-HeR Savings:
(from losing and gaining facilities)
(15) Final PIR vs Pre
AMP HCR
PVS
~----~---~-(15) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation (PVS & HeR): $260,930
(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)
Final PIR vs Proposed $461.966 $393,178 Final PIR vs Proposed $4Hl,385
Data Extraction Date: 01/11/11
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
INDUSTRIAL VEHICLE
(10) Notes:
AFCSs deactivated in place.
':!':!
(2)
0
MPE Inventory
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Jul-01-2010 -to-- Jun-30-2011
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC
(3) Final PIR 0 0 0 Costs $0 (8) Final PIR Relocation Costs $0 (9) Variance in Costs
$0
I
so
Space Evaluation and Other Costs
34
Maintenance
Last Saved February 6, 2013
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
Grand Total
(13)
(2) (3) (4) (5)
I~
Variance VarianceProposed Final PIR Final PIR to Final PIR to Costs Costs PreAMP Proposed
940,331 $ 962,544 (59,555) $ 22,213 452,332 $ 425,122 $ (27,210) II I LDC 37 939,674 $ 806,613 210,743 $ 172,081 36,122 $ 9,380 ;$: 2,579,202 $ 2,375,740 '$' 366,939
(11) Final PIR vs Pre AMP ·Maintenance Savings: (12) Final PIR vs Proposed- Maintenance Savings:
PIR Type*:_F_in_a_I_P_IR _ _ _ _ _ _
Date Range of Data: Jul-01-2010 : Jun-30-2011
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC
---(7) (8) (9) (10)
Variance Variance
Workhour ActiviW Proposed Final PIR Final PIR to Final PIR to
Costs Costs PreAMP Pre Proposed
Mail Processing
2,020,370 $ 2,151,172 130,803 $ 130,803
Buildino Eouioment $ "'I''!I';~J~:\ $ 1,020,689 $ 1,564,087 ''$ 543,3$7 $ 543,397
Grand Total
$464,412 $601,292 838,424 $ 739,958 276,057 $ 296,043 '.$, 19,986 $ 100,453 $ 59,188 $l $ 4,255,992 $ 4,810,448 t$ 554,456 $ 1,030,998 199,340 $ 0 0 5,841,446 753,79€ $(These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary)
(These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary)
•oata in P!R columns is annualized for Ftrst PlR
19,986
554,456
199,340
753,700
(1)
Distribution Changes
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
Losing Facility : Panama City P&DF
PIR Type:
Final PIR
Type of Distribution Consolidated:
Originating
Date Range of Data:
Jul-01-2010--to--
Jun-30-2011 Place a "X" next to the DMM labeling list(s) revisedas result of the approved AMP. Identify the date of the Postal Bulletin that contained DMM labeling list revisions.
DMM L001 DMM L011 DMM L002 X DMM L201 DMM L003 DMM L601 DMM L004 DMM L602 DMM LOOS DMM L603 DMM L006 DMM L604 DMM L007 DMM L605 DMM L008 DMM L606 DMM L009 DMM L607 DMM L010 DMM L801
(2)
August 26, 2010
Postal Bulletin 22292
Was the Service Standard Directory updated for the approved AMP?
(3)
Yes. July 1, 2010
(4)
Drop Shipments for Destination Entry Discounts
FAST Appointment Summary Report
NASS
Facility Name Total No-Show Late Arrival Open
Month Losing I Gaining Facility Code Schd Count % Count % Count %
May '11 Losing Facility 324 Panama City P&DF 185 31 16.76% 36 19.46% 0 0.00% June'11 Losing Facility 324 Panama City P&DF 191 38 19.90% 33 17.28% 0 0.00% May '11 Gaining Facility 325 Pensacola P&DC 307 57 18.57% 55 17.92% 0 0.00% June '11 Gaining Facility 325 Pensacola P&DC 293 51 17.41% 52 17.75% 0 0.00%
Count 154 153 246 238 Closed % 83.24% 80.10% 80.13% 81.23%
(SJNotes: ______________________________________________________________________________
-==================
Unschd Count 0 0 5 7 35Customer Service Issues
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
5-Digit ZIP Code: 32401
Data Extraction Date:
-:OC::7::-:/1:':::6':-:/1;-;1---1. Collection Points
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 !'"'' ~"
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
% Carriers returning before 5 p.m.
Last Saved: February 6, 2013
5. Retail Unit Inside Losing Facility (Window Service Times) 6. Business (Bulk) Mail Acceptance Hours
1. Can customers obtain a local postmark in accordance with applicable policies in the Postal Operations Manual? Yes
8. Notes:
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC
9. What postmark is printed on collection mail?
F~E: -f'~.i1S;~~vc::.(') L..~\, f•/~-.. .tr,,',;r:~. p
36
Space Evaluation and Other Costs
Last Saved February 6, 2013
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1. Affected Facility
2. One-Time Costs
Enter any one-time costs: _ _ ..;::;SO::..,. _ _ $0 $0
(These numbers shown below under One-Time Costs section.) 3. Savings Information
Space Savings ($): _ _ ..;$;,;;0 _ _ _
4. Did you utilize the acquired space as planned? Explain.
5. Notes:
Employee Relocation Costs
Mail Processing Equipment Relocation Costs
(from MPE Inventory)
Facility Costs
(from above)
Total One-Time Costs
Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0
(These numbers earned forward to the Executive Summary)
$0
$0
$0 $0
PIR costs carried forward to Executive Summary)
Range of Report
Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC FY 2010
37
