U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

41–457 PDF 2008

S. Hrg. 110–438 

THE STATE OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 

ONE YEAR AFTER REFORM 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT 

INFORMATION, FEDERAL SERVICES, AND 

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MARCH 5, 2008 

Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, 

FEDERAL SERVICES, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

JOHN KILVINGTON, Staff Director 

KATY FRENCH, Minority Staff Director 

MONISHA SMITH, Chief Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 1 

Senator Akaka .................................................................................................. 3 

WITNESSES 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2008 

Hon. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. 

Postal Service ....................................................................................................... 4 

Hon. Dan G. Blair, Chairman, Postal Regulatory Commission ........................... 7 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Blair, Hon. Dan G.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 40 

Potter, Hon. John E.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27 

APPENDIX 

Questions and Responses submitted for the Record from: 

Mr. Potter .......................................................................................................... 45 

Mr. Blair ............................................................................................................ 50 

(1) 

THE STATE OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 

ONE YEAR AFTER REFORM 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, FEDERAL SERVICES, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:38 p.m., in Room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper, 

Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Carper and Akaka. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Senator CARPER. The Subcommittee will come to order please. I 

want to welcome our guests. It is nice to see both of you. We thank 

you for making time on your schedules to be here with us today 

for this oversight hearing. 

I am delighted to be here with my friend, Senator Akaka, and 

I am going to make an opening statement and yield to him for one, 

and then I do not think Senator Coburn is going to be able to join 

us. Others of our group may wander in and out and we welcome 

them if they do. But we are delighted that you are here. We look 

forward to an informative hearing. 

My thanks, as well, for all the work that both of you and the 

folks that you represent, that you lead are doing, in moving swiftly 

to implement the postal reform which we worked on and negotiated. I see some people in the audience who worked here with us 

to try to make it the law of the land. 

Now, we always said if we ever get it enacted, we are going to 

make sure that we have appropriate oversight hearings to see how 

we are doing, what is working well and what is not. So this is part 

of the process. 

This is, I think, an interesting time in a lot of ways for us in this 

country but an interesting time for those of us who have had and 

continue to have an interest in postal issues. The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) has been the law of the land 

for more than a year now and we are starting to see some results 

and some benefits, I think, as well. 

The Postal Service is set to change prices this spring using the 

streamlined cap based rate system called for in the Act. It is my 

hope that the Postal Service can use this new rate system in the 

2 

coming years to offer customers some level of predictability and to 

be more competitive in the advertising and the mailing markets in 

which they compete. 

We also have a new set of service standards, as we know, for 

most postal products that I hope will make the Postal Service more 

relevant and more valuable to their customers now than has maybe 

been the case in other days. Customers have a lot of communications options. We want to make sure that this is a valued one for 

them. 

These developments, coupled with what appears to be an even 

stronger effort underway under the rate cap system to control 

costs, should have us celebrating, I think. But these are difficult 

times for the Postal Service as they are for many in our country, 

not only families but businesses too. 

During the last fiscal year, the Postal Service reported losses of about $5 billion and, as we know, this was largely due to a onetime accounting charge related to several provisions in the Postal 

Reform Bill related to the disposition of the Postal Service’s pension payments, as I recall. 

However, this year, if everything remains unchanged, and we 

know they are not going to remain unchanged, but if they were to 

remain unchanged and we were going on autopilot, something that 

the Postal Service is not doing, the Postal Service could suffer 

losses, approaching $2 billion. 

I know that planned cost cutting and also the revenue that would 

be earned from the May price increase will bring in, will bring that 

number down. But the projected losses can tell us a lot about the 

current state of our economy. They can also, unfortunately, probably tell us a lot about the Postal Service’s customer base. 

The slow down in the housing and the credit markets has hurt 

some pretty big Postal Service customers and that has hurt them 

badly. I hope that some of that lost business will start coming back 

in the months ahead but we can never know if some of the mail 

volume that has been lost due to the economic downturn might 

never come back. We hope that it will but we do not know. 

As General Potter will point out, a lot of businesses that have 

counted on the Postal Service to communicate with customers are 

now encouraging their customers to move online, in some cases 

incentivizing them to move online. 

It seems that postal customers who would rather not pay postage 

now have more options available to them, maybe even more than 

they had during the last major economic downturn that occurred 

when I first arrived in the Senate just a little more than 7 years 

ago. 

So it is important that the Postal Service make full use of the 

tools available to it through postal reform. I have been pleased 

with what I have seen so far but there is plenty of work ahead for 

all of us. 

We look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about some 

of the challenges and some of the opportunities that are out there. 

We also would like to hear how Congress can work with the Postal 

Service and with the Postal Regulatory Commission to weather the 

current storm and maybe find a few new ways for revenue and 

cost-cutting opportunities. 

3 

Senator Akaka, welcome. We are glad you are here. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to 

thank you for holding this hearing, and I want to also extend my 

warmest aloha and welcome to Postmaster General Potter and also 

Mr. Blair. 

Right now is an exciting time in the postal community. Over the 

past year both the Postal Service and Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) have been working tirelessly to implement provisions 

that we passed in the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act 

now a little over a year ago. 

Perhaps the most apparent change has been the first rate filing 

under the new inflation cap. This process, I am sure Mr. Blair and 

General Potter will agree, has greatly streamlined the rate increase 

process ensuring predictable increases that we hope will not cause 

undue rate shock. 

I want to commend Mr. Blair and the PRC for issuing the new 

rate regulations in such a timely fashion, ensuring the Postal Service could quickly take advantage of the new flexibilities. Importantly this new system provides more flexibility for the Postal Service and a check by the PRC on new rate increases, the first of 

which was recently submitted. 

Now more than ever there is the need to look to the future and 

watch the economic winds to ensure that increases under the cap 

are fair and that there is enough unused rate authority banked up 

for future needs should they arise. 

The Postal Service’s latest financial information showed that 

even by using virtually all of its rate authority, it barely broke 

even. This further emphasizes the need to allow room for unanticipated future needs. As the economy slows and the mail use declines, the Postal Service needs to look at both revenues as well as 

expenses to balance the bottom line. 

I know that the Postal Service is already taking a hard look at 

expenses and implemented important reforms to save money. I applaud these efforts and encourage you to keep finding new opportunities for savings. 

That being said, I also want to emphasize the importance of continuing to foster a dedicated Federal workforce at the Postal Service to ensure the highest quality of workers and confidence for the 

public. 

Recently the Postal Service created a set of modern service 

standards which I hope will more accurately reflect the flow of the 

mail giving more transparency for postal customers. 

Now that the Postal Service has developed these standards, they 

should serve as a baseline for a constantly evolving effort to find 

opportunities for increased efficiencies. In many ways, the fruits of 

our labors in creating this postal reform are just beginning to show. 

There is still much work ahead but I am confident that under the 

leadership of General Potter and Mr. Blair we will continue to foster a stronger, more transparent Postal Service with a dedication 

of universal service to the American people. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

4 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Potter appears in the Appendix on page 27. 

Senator CARPER. You bet, Senator Akaka. Again thank you so 

much for being part of this today. 

Our witnesses are ones that are very familiar to this Subcommittee. I am not going to take a lot of time to introduce them 

but I would like to say a few things. 

Jack Potter is the Postmaster General, the chief executive officer 

of the U.S. Postal Service. He has served in his current positions 

since June 2001, arriving just after I got here so our terms have 

sort of coincided. He did not have to run for election but I think 

if he had he would have won. Before 2001, General Potter has 

served in a number of top leadership positions at the Postal Service. He first started with the Postal Service as a clerk, is that 

right? 

Mr. POTTER. That is right. 

Senator CARPER. In your native New York. Where in New York? 

Mr. POTTER. The Bronx. 

Senator CARPER. In the Bronx. In 1978 at the age of 12. [Laughter.] 

Is that a typo? Well, he was at least 12, maybe a bit older. 

Dan Blair is the first chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission. And our State, Delaware was the first State to ratify the Constitution and for one whole week Delaware was the whole United 

States of America, and our State motto is ‘‘It is good to be first’’ 

so you, my friend, are in that tradition. 

But the first chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission. He 

was named chairman in December 2006 just after being confirmed 

as a member of the old Postal Rate Commission. Prior to joining 

the Commission, Mr. Blair served as Deputy Director of the Office 

of Personnel Management. Before joining the Executive Branch in 

2001, Mr. Blair worked for 17 years on Capitol Hill including some 

time for this Committee’s former chairman, Senator Fred Thompson from Tennessee, and Mr. Blair just returns from leave where, 

on the campaign trail, he was the campaign manager for the presidential campaign of Fred Thompson, and let me welcome you back 

to your day job. [Laughter.] 

We welcome you both. Your full written statements will be made 

part of the record. Both of you have roughly 5 minutes but we are 

not going to run the clock on this. So if you need a little more time, 

just go ahead and take it, and we hope to have the opportunity to 

ask you some questions. 

Again, General, I like to call him General. General Potter, take 

it away and then we will kick it over to Mr. Blair. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOHN E. POTTER,1 POSTMASTER 

GENERAL AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, U.S. POSTAL 

SERVICE 

Mr. POTTER. Good afternoon, Chairman Carper, and my good 

friend, Senator Akaka. 

I am pleased to report today on the Postal Service’s first year of 

operation under the Postal Act of 2006. 

The new law created needed pricing flexibilities that will benefit 

the Nation by keeping mail a welcome, efficient, and cost-effective 

5 

way to link every household and every business in America. But 

with a growing network that reaches 148 million homes and businesses every day, we are extremely sensitive to fluctuations in the 

economy and to changes in consumer preferences for hard copy or 

electronic communication. The new law, for all its benefits, does 

not exempt the Postal Service from these facts. Compounding the 

diversion of some mail to the internet, we have been hard hit by 

today’s underperforming economy. The financial, credit, and housing sectors are key drivers of our business. The recessionary trend 

in these industries is reflected in declines in mail volume and revenue. 

By the end of the first quarter, mail volume was down 3 percent 

from a year earlier. First-Class Mail fell by almost one billion 

pieces and Standard Mail by some 750 million pieces. Less volume 

means higher overhead costs per piece of mail handled. Revenue was $525 million below plan in the first quarter and net income fell short by $183 million. We see no improvement this 

quarter. Facing this extremely difficult situation, the men and 

women of the U.S. Postal Service stepped up. They brought down 

spending, narrowing the revenue gap created by the sudden steep 

volume decline. 

Faced with a possible $2 billion budget shortfall this year, we are 

looking to grow revenue through aggressive pricing and sales and 

cutting additional costs on top of what we had already planned to 

reduce our cost by but not at the cost of service. 

Despite quarter one’s financial challenges, our people delivered 

the strongest service in our history. On-time overnight delivery of 

First-Class Mail reached 96 percent: The first time we have ever 

done that in quarter one of a fiscal year. Two-day mail rose to a 

record 93 percent on-time, and 3-day mail matched our all-time 

high. So when you think about it, we have a lot going for us. 

For the third year in a row, we have been rated the most trusted 

government agency. Customer satisfaction is at an extremely 

strong 92 percent. Our brand is strong and our business is well positioned to rebound with the economy. But we cannot simply wait 

for the recovery or to cost-cut our way out in this situation we are 

in thinking that prosperity is just going to happen. We must also 

pursue an aggressive revenue growth strategy. 

On May 12, we are adjusting prices for our market dominant 

products, First-Class Mail, Standard Mail, periodicals and package 

services, using the law’s new simplified pricing regulations which 

call for annual price changes. This can produce some $735 million 

in additional revenue this year alone. To close the remaining budget gap, (and we think that there is going to be, obviously, some 

cost-cutting) we need to focus on growing beyond, above and beyond what the rate change would bring us. 

So we are pursuing growth through an innovative price structure 

for our competitive products or shipping services. We will make 

these products—our package products—more attractive through incentives and enhanced features. The new prices will be announced 

shortly for a May 12 implementation. 

Senators our people are ready. They understand the challenge 

and they are ready to use every new tool that the new law provides 

in order to be successful. 

6 

I am particularly gratified by the support of our unions. With 

their help, our employees are out talking up and selling our products. They are making sure customers understand the value of the 

mail and how it can work to help them in their personal lives and 

help their businesses. 

When we look at the new law, a lot has happened over the past 

year, and it is not just the Postal Service alone that has been active. Other agencies and the entire mailing community have made 

major contributions to the progress that has been made to implement the new law. 

There have been many subjects covered and my long testimony 

details some of them. But I would like to just list some of the 

things that have happened. 

We have changed the worker’s compensation procedures called 

for in the new law. We put in new purchasing regulations. Data 

handling policies have been changed for legal activities. Our employee safety program has stepped up and we have issued the reports required. We are planning for international customs, the ones 

that were requested. We put that work behind us. We have done 

and made the changes necessary. We have put together a new classification schedule for mail. We have had assessments and appeals 

for non-profit mailings over the course of this year. Diversity management and purchasing contract reports have been given to the 

Congress. 

We have looked at, and with the Treasury, accounting for market 

dominant and competitive products and a report was issued to the 

Postal Regulatory Commission. The Postal Service and the mailing 

industry have stepped up on recycling, and we have issued a report 

on that. 

We have submitted our first annual compliance report and we 

are looking forward to the PRC’s response on that. We are working 

with them to make sure it is even better the next time around. 

We are working feverishly to come into compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley. The Federal Trade Commission’s findings are out and 

they show that the Postal Service is at a competitive disadvantage 

because of the burdens of being part of the government. 

The development of modern service standards as you referred to, 

Senator Carper, have been done and we really are happy that we 

got so much input from the mailing community as well as the PRC. 

And we are in the process now of working through and will meet 

the schedule to put new service measurement systems in place, 

again working with the PRC and, as we referred to earlier in my 

testimony, we are implementing the new pricing regulations. 

I want to thank Chairman Dan Blair and the entire Postal Regulatory Commission for their efforts to move as quickly as they did 

to issue the new pricing regulations. The fact that they were so far 

ahead of schedule really was very instrumental in terms of us 

being able to put together a plan for this fiscal year so that we can 

strive to break even this year. All these important tasks require 

community cooperation and I am grateful for everyone’s assistance. 

We are also changing how we speak about our business, to make 

it clearer for customers. We are not talking about rates anymore. 

We are talking about prices. It is not negotiated service agreements 

7 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Blair appears in the Appendix on page 40. 

because when you go to a customer, they do not know what that 

is. But they do understand contract pricing. 

Market dominant products—that does not mean anything in the 

real world so we are calling that mail, mailing services. And competitive products, people do not know what a competitive product 

is but they know that shipping services are packages, and so when 

we talk in the marketplace, that is the language we use. 

We are entering a period of profound change, and through the 

new postal law, you have provided us with a new ability to navigate the change. I am grateful for your continuing support of a 

sound and financially independent Postal Service that can serve 

our Nation long into the future. 

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to make some remarks 

and I will be happy to answer any questions that you might have. 

Senator CARPER. Fair enough. Thanks so much, General Potter. 

Mr. Blair, you are recognized, again for 5 minutes or so. If you 

take a little bit longer, that is OK. I do not know if there is anyone 

here you want to introduce but if there is, feel free. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAN G. BLAIR,1 CHAIRMAN, POSTAL 

REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you, Chairman Carper. I appreciate that. Senator Akaka, thank you for your kind words. They are most appreciated. 

Thank you for this opportunity to appear today with an update 

on the activities of the Postal Regulatory Commission. I am pleased 

to be here with Postmaster General Potter and greatly appreciate 

his kind words for the work of the Commission this past year. 

My written testimony gives a complete agenda of our activities, 

and I am pleased to summarize my statement. I ask that my written testimony be submitted for the record as well. 

Senator CARPER. It will be unless Senator Akaka objects. Do you? 

Senator AKAKA. No. 

Senator CARPER. No objection for a change. All right. That is 

good. 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you, sir. This has been a very busy year for 

us at the Commission. Standing up the regulatory framework 8 

months ahead of schedule, consulting with the Postal Service on 

the development of modern service standards, completing one last 

final rate case under the old regulatory regime topped the list of 

those activities. 

It was a fulfilling year, but we cannot rest on our accomplishments since this upcoming year presents us with equal, if not 

greater, challenges. Our agenda this year includes further consultation on service standard goals and performance measurement systems. 

Last week, I had the chance before the House Subcommittee, to 

compliment the Postmaster General and his team at the USPS, 

headed up by Deputy Postmaster General Pat Donahoe, for their 

work with us on the development of the service standards and our 

continuing consultation. I would like to do that again. 

8 

The PRC’s efforts in this area added value, and I am pleased 

that many of our suggestions over the past few months were incorporated in the final service standards. 

Our monthly meetings have proved to be an excellent conduit for 

consultations and communication in other issue areas as well. This 

open and ongoing dialogue helps make our system work better, and 

I look forward to continuing the practice. 

Currently we are undertaking two new PAEA reviews. First we 

are reviewing the data provided by the Postal Service as part of its 

annual compliance report, and we are reviewing the rate adjustment filing under the new regulatory framework submitted by the 

Postal Service on February 11. 

While we are in the mid-stages of an evolving process, I am hopeful that this less litigious environment, brought about by the 

PAEA, continues to produce a better exchange of information between the Commission and the Service. With the experience we 

have gained in the review of the first annual data submission by 

the Service, the Commission will shortly propose rules to tighten 

up the process. The first annual report has identified areas for data 

collection, special studies and cost models that need updating. 

We are also working on the Universal Service Obligations Study 

which was mandated by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. We plan to solicit views from the Postal Service, other 

Federal agencies, the postal community, and the general public on 

their expectations of universal postal service. 

Given the scope of the study, we are supporting our Commission 

work through a competitively awarded contract with George Mason 

University’s School of Public Policy. We expect to engage in broad 

public outreach as well as conduct several field hearings to gauge 

the mailing public’s needs and perceptions. We plan a very comprehensive and well documented report. 

As I mentioned in my written statement, we believe our congressionally mandated report will have the benefit of the findings and 

recommendations of the separate report being prepared by the 

Postal Service through the National Academies of Science, and I 

want to thank Postmaster General Potter for his assistance in this 

area. 

I am also pleased to report that the Commission has formally released its first strategic and operational plan, detailing the agency’s vision and goals over the next 5 years. The plan outlines the 

strategies and activities that the Commission will use to help ensure transparency and accountability of the Postal Service and to 

foster a vital and efficient universal mail system. By emphasizing 

the operational work that must be accomplished over the next 5 

years, the Commission can evaluate its progress and performance 

on the strategic goals outlined in the plan. 

To conclude, Mr. Chairman, those are several of our front-burner 

issues. An additional priority is to see the successful confirmation 

of a new commissioner to fill our one vacancy. We have pending the 

notices of rate adjustment under the new rules as well as Commission action on the Postal Service’s compliance data. Therefore, a 

full complement of commissioners to take action on these two new 

important aspects of Commission authority would be very beneficial. 

9 

I am pleased to report that last week President Bush nominated 

Nanci Langley, sitting in back of me, to fill this seat. Many of you 

may know Ms. Langley from her long-time work for Senator Akaka 

on this Subcommittee. She is currently the Commission’s Director 

of Public Affairs and Government Relations. I hope the Committee 

can take swift action in forwarding her nomination to the full Senate. 

My written testimony goes into further detail, and I am pleased 

to answer any of your questions. Thank you. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. When 

Nanci Langley worked for Senator Akaka, I oftentimes would observe her lips moving when he spoke, and I just noticed that she 

has your back. I could just barely see her lips move when you 

spoke, too. That is a trait that served her well when she was here 

in the Senate and now for the Commission. 

And if you watch carefully, you will probably see John 

Kilvington, his lips move when I speak too. [Laughter.] 

I want to go back, at least to start off, to our Postmaster General. You mentioned some measures of performance and they were 

not financial in nature but they dealt with, I think, 1-day mail, 2- 

day mail. Just go over those again. I thought those were impressive. 

Mr. POTTER. Those numbers were from our first quarter which 

runs from October 1 to December 31. Generally it is a somewhat 

difficult delivery time for us because we have holiday volumes as 

well as we start to get the effects of winter weather, and so we are 

very proud of the fact that, in the first quarter, our First-Class 

overnight service performance reached an all-time high of 96 percent for that quarter. It is the first time we have ever done it. 

Our 2-day service was at 93 percent, and that again is a record 

performance at any time, and 3-day we matched our all-time high 

of 88 percent in that quarter. 

So, we look at the opportunity to or the challenge of, cutting 

costs and we do not do that independent of service. We do not and 

try not to, as best we can, risk service. So our efforts, I think, prove 

well. 

We saved over $350 million off of our plan in the first quarter, 

but we did it with an eye toward getting the mail out and being 

more efficient at moving the mail and moving it correctly the first 

time. 

So as your quality improves, your handlings go down and your 

service goes up so we are very proud of the results and Pat 

Donahoe and his entire crew, the Deputy Postmaster General COO, 

and all the people in the field, deserve a lot of credit for what they 

were able to do. 

Senator CARPER. My congratulations to all of you. 

You mentioned the legislation called for some changes in worker’s comp. Would you just talk about how that is being implemented? How that is going? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, it is a matter of a small change in terms of 

a waiting period for worker’s comp when somebody was injured and 

so it was a matter of just a quick change in our procedures and 

that has been accomplished. Now there is a 3-day waiting period 

before you can begin receiving worker’s comp and we implemented 

10 

that within a couple of months of the new law being signed into 

law by the President. 

Senator CARPER. How is that being received? How is it working? 

Mr. POTTER. For the most part I have not heard anything about 

it. I know when it was put in place, there were people who were 

concerned about it. But it really has not surfaced as an issue since 

it has been implemented. 

Senator CARPER. In your testimony you mentioned the word ‘‘recycling.’’ And my ears picked it up immediately. Senator Olympia 

Snowe and I are the co-chairs of the recycling caucus in the U.S. 

Senate. Most of you probably did not know there is a recycling caucus but there is, and Olympia and I are the co-chairs. 

But you said that the Postal Service is doing a better job on recycling. Just give us a little bit more information on that. 

Mr. POTTER. Well, from a number of fronts. First of all, we obviously have waste inside the Postal Service and we have made it a 

goal of ours to increase the amount of mail and paper that we recycle and other wastes that the Postal Service recycles. 

Senator CARPER. So you admit that you are recycling mail, is 

that it? 

Mr. POTTER. Mail that is undeliverable as addressed we recycle. 

Senator CARPER. That will be the lead in all the news stories. 

Postmaster General admits to recycling mail. 

Mr. POTTER. Well, we do. If it is undeliverable as addressed, we 

would rather put it into a recycling program than to put it into a 

landfill. 

Senator CARPER. I understand. 

Mr. POTTER. We also have people who come into our lobbies, P.O. 

boxes, and receive mail, and we provided them an opportunity to 

read it and recycle it right there as opposed to putting it into waste 

baskets for them and they use them for whatever and we recycle 

the paper that is put into those recycling bins now. 

We also recycle a lot of industrial materials that we use, batteries, oils, and other things that we try to find the best home for. 

Another area that we are very proud of is our new boxes for Priority and Express Mail. We reduced the numbers and types of 

boxes we had and we work with an organization called Cradle to 

Cradle and got their certification to make those boxes environmentally friendly and to make sure that they did not do damage 

to the environment should they wind up in a landfill. 

We would prefer that people recycle them but it was a great exercise because we learned. That when you deal with something as 

simple as a cardboard box with a little printing on it, it was amazing to see how many suppliers we had to go to in order to get that 

box to be as environmentally friendly as we could. It was not just 

the provider of ink. It was the supplier to our ink supplier. It was 

the paper suppliers. The chemicals that are used in paper, and so 

we have come a long way. We are learning quite a bit. We are 

doing our part to try and keep the environment friendly and reduce 

any harm that we might bring to the environment. 

Senator CARPER. Good. Let me stay on that theme for just a moment. I will ask one more question and then hand it over to Senator Akaka. 

11 

With respect to the issue of the greening of the Postal Service, 

would you talk to us a little bit about what you see ahead in terms 

of the vehicles, the kinds of vehicles that you acquire, purchase, 

lease, and how you might do something that is positive with respect to our environment? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, today we have the largest alternate fuel vehicle fleet of any organization in America. But we have been somewhat constrained by the law in terms of what types of vehicles we 

could purchase that would satisfy the environmental requirements 

for Federal agencies. 

Since the last time we had a hearing, and I am grateful to the 

Senate, a law has been passed that has increased the flexibility 

that the Postal Service has in terms of future buys of engines for 

our vehicles, whether it is replacement engines or for new vehicles 

that will meet the Federal requirements. 

So we are anxious to begin to study the use of hybrids vehicles 

for our trucks and our lighter weight vehicles and we are in the 

process of looking at all sorts of different energy sources. 

In fact, we hosted at one of our vehicle maintenance facilities 

right here in the Washington DC area, the President, Secretary of 

Energy, and we had our trucks along side of FedEx, UPS, and DHL 

vehicles because everyone in the delivery business is looking to the 

future and looking to try and make the changes that will help the 

environment going forward. 

So I appreciate the new law that was passed and the flexibility 

that the Postal Service has been given when it comes to future vehicle purchases. 

Senator CARPER. I am glad you are taking advantage of that 

flexibility and look forward to hearing more of what is to come. 

Senator Akaka. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

General Potter, I want to commend you and the Postal Service 

for the gains you have made in the past year. It has been done 

with the help of everybody in the Postal Service and I am glad to 

hear your testimony this morning about how you have come along. 

As you know, the Postal Service must begin Sarbanes-Oxley style 

financial reporting by fiscal year 2010 which is about in 2 years. 

I have been a strong advocate of increased transparency in financial accounting, and I sort of felt tickled when you mentioned the 

words ‘‘competitive product’’ as making it more transparent to the 

public so that they understand what you are trying to do there. 

How far along is the Postal Service in implementing both the policy and technical changes in order to prepare for the SarbanesOxley reporting? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, the most obvious thing to people who look at 

our financial results is the fact that we are now in compliance with 

SEC-like reporting on a quarterly basis. In addition to that, we 

have made extensive efforts internally to make sure that we are 

putting in place the types of controls that are necessary to meet the 

requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We are working closely 

with our auditor, Ernst and Young, and we brought Deloitte and 

Touche in as our consultant that is looking at, again, both of those 

well known audit or accounting firms are helping us with the implementation. 

12 

So, Senator, I would say we are well along. It is, as you are probably aware, a very exhaustive effort. The Board of Governors of the 

Postal Service have really stepped up and have taken the lead to 

make sure that we are in compliance and they are very aware of 

their role, and it is a much more difficult task for a board under 

Sarbanes-Oxley than they had previously done. 

So I am really grateful for the work that they have done and so 

everybody is involved and are working hard to make sure that we 

put into place the type of controls that will create the kind of surety that I need to have in order to sign those documents every 

quarter, that they are sound and that our reports are accurate and 

the goal of transparency is one that we embrace. 

Senator AKAKA. Mr. Blair, as you stated in your testimony, the 

Postal Reform Bill requires that by December of this year, the PRC 

issue a report on the current state of the Postal Service’s universal 

service obligation and recommend necessary reforms. 

This issue is especially important to rural and isolated areas 

such as Hawaii who depend on universal service. 

Has the PRC made progress on this report and what outside 

stakeholders do you plan to work with in conducting your assessment and developing recommendations? 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you, Senator Akaka, for the question. I am 

happy to answer that. 

We have made progress on this. Early this year we have entered 

into an agreement with George Mason University, School of Public 

Policy to help conduct this report. 

We plan on gaging the opinion of a broad range of stakeholders, 

seeking their input. Other plans on the Commission’s agenda include possible field hearings in order to go outside the Beltway. We 

have established a good precedent with that. 

Last year we had field hearings on the development of our new 

regulatory system and service standards so we would like to build 

upon that past progress. Hopefully field hearings will aid the Commission as it decides what our recommendations will be. 

The law also requires us to consult with the Postal Service on 

this. At our last monthly meeting, it was raised. I know our staffs 

have been meeting on this, and I want to again thank General Potter for his cooperation. 

It is important that we receive the best information available before we move forward and make any recommendations to the Congress. I know the Postal Service has engaged the National Academies of Science, a very prestigious body, to look into some of the 

similar issues. To Mr. Potter’s credit, he has granted us the ability 

to have the benefit of that report before we make our recommendations. 

I see it as a very broad ranging and a full-bodied report. I look 

forward to engaging stakeholders. We are still in the formulative 

plan of how we are engaging in outreach. For instance, on my 

agenda tomorrow is to talk about the field hearings and potential 

locations. 

We may be holding some other kind of stakeholder input as well, 

on our contract, or will be gauging public opinion on that. We have 

a 360-degree front on this in reaching out to as many possible peoVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:00 Jul 22, 2008 Jkt 041457 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\41457.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
13 

ple in order to really generate good public opinion so we can make 

some thoughtful, substantive recommendations to the Congress. 

Senator AKAKA. You mentioned that you will be using contractors. What role would these contractors have? 

Mr. BLAIR. These contractors will be playing an advisory role, 

and I appreciate that question too because we have heard that 

some people view this as a one contractor study. This is the Commission study and the Commission will be making these recommendations. We will be looking at the in-put that the contractor 

provides. We have an excellent project manager from George 

Mason. Her name is Dr. Christine Pommerening, and she is going 

to be tapping into many of the most formative minds in the postal 

field in the country. But the recommendations and the input that 

they provide to us will help us. But at the end of the day, these 

will be the Commission’s recommendations. So I appreciate your allowing me to put that on the record as well. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you. Thank very much. 

General Potter, currently about a dozen States are looking at legislation to create so-called do-not-mail registries requiring that the 

Postal Service do not deliver certain kinds of commercial mail to 

residents. 

Does the Postal Service believe that States have the authority to 

implement rules affecting the mail and would you challenge any 

such rules? 

Mr. POTTER. Senator, we are analyzing that very question, and 

I do not have a definitive answer for you on whether or not States 

have that authority. But I will tell you that we are working hard 

to inform people about the role that mail plans in the economy, 

both as an employer of millions of Americans as well as a generator 

of sales and fortunately so far no legislation at the State level has 

passed and I think once people look at the issue in its entirety the 

case against that type of legislation is pretty compelling, and so 

particularly given the state of current economy, I would hesitate to 

recommend anything that could hurt any State’s economy. 

Senator AKAKA. Yes. Well, I understand in closing there are 11 

States looking into this, and Hawaii is, I think, one of them. But 

I just wanted your thoughts on that. Thank you very much, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Senator Akaka. 

As you know, Mr. Blair, there have been some questions for 

awhile about the fairness of the work sharing discounts that the 

Postal Service offers to mailers who do some of the processing of 

their mail themselves before turning it over to the Postal Service. 

One or two of the postal unions have argued that a number of 

these discounts are excessive and actually hurt the Postal Service 

rather than making it more efficient. 

There is a provision in the Postal Reform Bill that seeks to ensure that work sharing discounts make more sense. What role do 

you plan to have the Postal Regulatory Commission take in examining discounts to ensure that they are appropriate and fair? 

Mr. BLAIR. Our new rules are cognizant of that special provision 

within the PAEA. What we are requiring is that a notice of rate 

adjustment, such as that recently filed by the Postal Service, inVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:00 Jul 22, 2008 Jkt 041457 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\41457.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
14 

clude a schedule of workshare discounts and also a separate justification of any discounts that exceed the avoided cost. 

The legislation specifically prohibits, except for some exceptions, 

workshare discounts that would exceed the cost that the USPS 

could avoid in doing the work itself. 

Last week we asked the Postal Service to respond to an information request to explain several workshare discounts that appeared 

to exceed the 100 percent pass-through level. The Postal Service responded to that request last night. We are examining that but we 

are very aware of that provision and intend to follow it to meet the 

intent of the legislation. 

Senator CARPER. When you look at the postal reform legislation 

that we worked on and enacted over a year ago and you look at 

the provisions that are proving to be positive and especially beneficial, what might be several of those? And you alluded to this at 

least in part in your responses. 

If you had to do it over again or if we had to do it over again, 

1 year into this experiment, 1 year into this test drive, what would 

you suggest we maybe would have done differently? 

Mr. Blair, why don’t you go ahead and take it and then we will 

ask the Postmaster General to respond? So a little of each, what 

things are especially positive in the legislation, and if we had to do 

it over again, what would you suggest we do differently? 

Mr. BLAIR. I think the legislation fundamentally shifted the focus 

of the relationship between the Postal Service and the regulator. 

Before it was almost adversarial and the new legislation removed 

the excessive, lengthy litigation that took place during the rate 

case. I think that is a positive aspect. It allowed for a more modern 

rate making procedure to be implemented, and it also required continuing dialog between the regulator and the regulated entity. 

I think that is vitally important. I think that over the course of 

the past year that has worked very well and I am very pleased 

with that. 

I think we saw with the last rate case all the flaws and blemishes that that system brought with it. Congress was very wise in 

passing the legislation when it did. 

Moreover, I know the community backed us up when we said we 

wanted to get these regulations out sooner rather than later. The 

Postal Service was a partner in this procedure, which worked incredibly well too. 

Regarding what changes might take place in the future, we are 

only a year into this, and I want to see how well the legislation 

works. The Commission probably had at least three dozen action 

items that it had to accomplish. Some had timeframes. Some did 

not. We have been focusing primarily on the ones with timeframes. 

But one of the timeframes is that we have to come up with several studies over the course of the next few years. One is the universal service obligation. One is a 5-year review. One is a 10-year 

review. 

I think we will be in a better position to answer your question 

in a year or two or three. But so far the system is working, and 

I think it is working better than most people expected. 

Maybe that is from a biased view point. It is hard for me to separate myself from the Commission, and the two view points tend to 

15 

be one and the same. But from my perspective, it is working better 

than I had hoped or had expected. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. General Potter, what do you think 

is working especially well and a couple of items that you want to 

flag for us to follow for the future? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, I think there are a couple elements of the law 

that helped us immediately and that is obviously the pricing flexibility that we have in terms of, first of all, the frequency of adjustments and the speed to make adjustments so we are able to change 

our mailing services prices on an annual basis. 

I think the rate cap is going to be helpful because it will keep 

people in the mail and it is going to create a dynamic ??? that 

forces the Postal Service to step up to efficiency as well as give people predictability about their rates going forward. 

So as you said earlier, people have choices about whether or not 

they are going to use the mail as their channel or electronic or 

some other means to send messages and advertisements. So the 

fact, there is predictability going forward, I think it is very valuable. 

In terms of what I think going forward would be helpful to the 

Postal Service, I think that, if anything, there is not enough flexibility in the law. When I look at the list of products that are on 

the market dominant side of the aisle, I think there are probably 

too many, and things, for example, like—— 

Senator CARPER. When you say market dominant, does that 

mean shipping services? 

Mr. POTTER. No. Market dominant is mail but it goes beyond 

mail. It has things like P.O. boxes, money orders, basically anything other than Priority, Express Mail, or international mail, 

largely our package businesses, is put on the market dominant side 

of law, and so there are things there that I think need to be reevaluated. There are some package services that are on the market 

dominant side of the law that really should be on the competitive 

side and allow us to compete. 

I think that there are a lot of restrictions around what we can 

sell and not sell, and when I look around the world and look at 

other posts, they have the same challenges that we do when it 

comes to diversion of hard copy product to electronic medium. 

And they look at their assets and have been able to get from 

their governments the flexibility to use those assets to generate 

revenue to support the universal service obligation that Mr. Blair 

just spoke about that he is doing a study on. 

So when you look at the posts around the world, many of them 

are using their retail outlets as banks. They do not necessarily own 

the bank but they provide banking transactions for banks in their 

countries or in some cases they own the bank. 

That type of flexibility is something, I think, that we need to explore because we do have these assets. We are very restricted today 

in terms of what we can do with those assets. I believe going forward that in order to continue to provide access to mail through 

those brick and mortar structures that we have, we have to figure 

out how to generate revenue, other revenue in that location, whether that is services that we provide, and our clerks provide, or leasVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:00 Jul 22, 2008 Jkt 041457 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\41457.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
16 

ing out the space so that it generates revenue to contribute to the 

maintenance of an access point for America. 

Senator CARPER. I am going to yield to Senator Akaka. When we 

come back, I want to explore with you some of the things that the 

Postal Service is doing in this first year since the enactment of the 

legislation, and as our economy has slowed, what you are doing to 

try to shore up revenues and also what you are doing to take costs 

out of the system. 

Senator Akaka. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank very much, Mr. Chairman. 

General Potter, as you well know, the Postal Service offers a 

wide variety of products and services to businesses and individuals 

that often are competitive with your private sector counterparts 

such as UPS and FedEx. 

Here on the Hill, we receive press releases and briefings regarding these services. The Postal Service’s competitors spend billions 

on marketing and advertising their services. I am concerned that 

the Postal Service may not be marketing as aggressively as the 

competition. 

What kind of commitment does the Postal Service have to building its so-called brand and what can be done to better promote its 

competitive products? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, that is a great question, and I can talk for 

probably 20 minutes about what we are planning to do. 

First, let me say that we do advertise. We spend just under $100 

million a year on advertizing. We have not been as aggressive on 

advertising our competitive products because until we had the new 

regulations that my good friend, Mr. Blair, put in place, we did not 

really have pricing flexibility, and in the marketplace when you 

cannot go out to people who mail any kind of significant volume 

with an offer, an ability to negotiate, you are really hamstrung. 

So our efforts in the past couple of years have really focused on 

consumers and offering them access and small businesses access to 

the Postal Service. So we have, now consumers and small businesses have the opportunity to go online to pay for postage. Our 

carriers go by their door everyday. In the course of their rounds, 

they can tell us that they have a package to be picked up and so 

we offer that pickup service as they go by those deliveries. 

So the notion of getting online, paying for packages and providing pickup is something that really has helped our business 

grow. 

We also built with Priority Mail: We created a flat rate box and 

again using the pricing freedoms that we have had, we just created 

a larger flat rate box, and it was largely as a result of inquiries 

from military families because it became very popular to use that 

box to send, I guess, messages, goods, reminders of home to our 

troops, and so we created a larger flat rate box that we would not 

have been able to go to market with as quickly as we did if it were 

not for the new law. 

In fact, I just came from the House where we had an effort that 

was put on by the House caucus that is a part of the America Supports You program, and the Department of Defense has this America Supports You where we demonstrated that we have a new box 

17 

that is co-branded and we provide a discount to military families. 

So they have $2 off on that box that is going overseas. 

So we are making strides. I just described in my testimony that 

we are going to change rates in May for our competitive or package 

products. At that time, we are going to go out and we are going 

to offer different prices, a different price for retail than if you go 

online and buy services. 

We are going to, for the first time ever, offer volume discounts 

for our Express Mail, Priority Mail, and our ground packages. At 

that point, we are going to launch a major campaign because, 

again, we will have the flexibility to do it. We are working with the 

Postal Regulatory Commission and staff, as Mr. Blair said, in a cooperative way. 

We are now exploring how we can do contracts with businesses 

so we will have published prices that we are going to get the Board 

of Governor’s approval on so I am not at liberty to say what they 

are. But once we have their approval, we intend to file that with 

the Commission such that we will be able to raise those rates in 

May and we will have a full campaign on that. 

We are probably very unusual in that we are positioned to have 

a campaign like no other in the sense that people do advertising 

to move awareness of products and services up. Well, we have 

800,000 people who work for us. So our first campaign is to make 

them aware of our products. 

I am really proud of the efforts that our unions are putting forth. 

We have met with them. They agree that they are going to have 

to encourage their people to make sure that customers who come 

into our lobbies are informed about our products, that the carriers 

on the streets are there making people aware of the products and 

services that we have, and the new pricing schedules that we are 

going to put in place. We are going to have an all-out blitz too. We 

are going to hit a button and 700,000 of our best customers are 

going to get information on this. We are going to use every channel 

that we have. 

We have nine million Americans that walk into our lobbies everyday. We will have lobby posters. The bottom line is with the 

new flexibility we have and when we first have an opportunity to 

use it, that is when we are going to go out in a very structured 

way, using all of our resources with the help of all of our employees 

to let America know that the Postal Service has great products to 

offer. They have good prices, competitive prices, and so that will be 

kind of the launch of our effort to grow the package business. 

Again you want to sell it when you have something to offer. You 

do not sell it in advance of that. So again you will see a very coordinated effort to go after this. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you. I am glad you are moving on that. 

Mr. Blair, last year before this Committee I asked you about 

PRC’s involvement in creating modern service standards for the 

Postal Service. The Reform Act required the Postal Service develop 

these standards in consultation with the PRC. 

Now that these standards have been issued, what is the PRC’s 

assessment of the overall process and the level of consultation? 

Mr. BLAIR. Senator, I think the process worked relatively well. 

It brought our two sides to the table to discuss a wide variety and 

18 

a wide range of issues. We did not always agree. They did not always accept our proposals. But at the end of the day, I believe that 

our input produced results and a better product in terms of the 

standards. 

We argued hard for greater granularity in their reporting, that 

it be done by district and that it be done by quarter. Our proposals 

were the final work product that the Postal Service put out. 

I think the consultations produced a good product and we are 

continuing those consultations. The law also requires that we consult on the development of goals to meet those standards because 

without goals the standards themselves become de facto goals. We 

are in that process. 

We also have to consult with them on the rationalization of their 

network, and we look forward to discussing that with them at the 

upcoming consultations as well. 

We are also in the process of reviewing a proposal by the Postal 

Service on the measurement system that is going to be used. The 

law granted the Commission the authority to allow the Postal Service to use an internal measurement system. We thought it was in 

the best interest of the Postal Service and the mailing community, 

and we are reviewing a proposal that they have put forth based on 

the intelligent mail barcode at this time. 

So I think overall the consultations have been a positive influence on both organizations. It has led to greater dialog between the 

regulator and the regulated entity. While there may be tension 

from time to time between the two bodies, I think that is intended 

by the statute and I think that is healthy. I certainly do not think 

an adversarial relationship is good, and I am proud to say that I 

do not think we have one. I think that these consultations have 

morphed into something bigger and it is a good way of communicating between the two bodies. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much for that. I have one more 

question. 

General Potter, the Postal Service offers a wide variety of extra 

services for different classes of mail such as registered mail and delivery conformation. 

However, there are over half a dozen forms depending on the 

specific services you want. For example, if you want to send registered mail with a return receipt, you have to fill out two separate 

forms. Some of the competitors offer similar services in a much 

easier manner by using a single form. 

Are there any efforts underway to make the various mail services 

more user friendly in order to keep up with your competitors? 

Mr. POTTER. Yes, Senator, there are. The intelligent mail barcode 

that Mr. Blair just spoke of is our effort to put one barcode on our 

mail that would have all the information embedded in it that today 

are covered in multiple barcodes and multiple requests. 

So this barcode will identify the sender, and the destination. It 

will identify any special service that is requested along with that 

letter or package that will be put into the mail. 

So, yes, we are working on it and we know we have an opportunity to improve and we have people that have been tasked to do 

that, and there is a lot of communication between the Postal Service and its customer base, and looking to make sure that, as we do 

19 

this, we recognize that major changes will not only occur within the 

Postal Service’s system but in customer systems as well. 

So we are trying to figure out how to make this transition to an 

environment you describe in a way that works for all. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you so much for your responses. I really 

appreciate what you are doing and am happy to hear those responses. Thank you very much. 

Senator CARPER. Senator Akaka, thank you very much for being 

a part of putting the legislation together and for making sure we 

are appropriately exercising our oversight. 

I indicated before Senator Akaka began his questions that I want 

to come back and just revisit a couple of issues. This will be brief. 

But, General Potter, you just talked to us about some of the 

things that you are doing collectively at the Postal Service, given 

dropping revenues, some things that you are doing to avoid a $2 

billion operating deficit this year. 

I know one of those is going for the one-cent increase in FirstClass postage which kicks in in May. I think you said that is worth 

maybe $700 million in this fiscal year? 

Mr. POTTER. Yes, it is. So we are making a price adjustment in 

May that will be conformed to the rate cap obligations. 

Senator CARPER. Do you do any modeling, I presume in your projections, to figure out what kind of drop-off, if we raise prices, usually there is some drop-off in demand. Any idea? I realize it is 

what, 2 or 2.5 percent? It is not all that much. Is there any correlation there? 

Mr. POTTER. Yes. Because it is at the rate of inflation, we do not 

expect the type of drop-off that we saw last year when we had 

rates that rose above the rate of inflation. 

So it is kind of a nominal thing. There will be some drop-off but 

elasticities will not kick in since it is just at or even now running 

slightly below the rate of inflation because inflation has continued 

to move along and we used a January look-back. So we expect a 

slight drop-off but not much. 

In addition to that, I described some of the things that we are 

going to do and the effort that we are going to make to increase 

the amount of packages that we have in the system and make sure 

that people understand the value of not only the package services 

that the Postal Service provides as well as the value of hard copy 

versus other choices that they have in the marketplace. 

We are looking to try to figure out to make it easier to use, to 

Senator Akaka’s point, not only to use our forms and get around 

forms and simplify them but also to make access to the mail easier. 

So oftentimes people who are trying to do small advertising campaigns find that the process of dealing with the Postal Service and 

suppliers, whether that is printer or a list provider, is complicated. 

So we are looking to try and find solutions that will work for those 

folks as well. 

And as we said earlier, our projection for volume is down. So the 

first thing you do when you have projection of volume below 

planned is you go back and you adjust the plan’s use of resources. 

So as volume diminishes, your need for work hours to process that 

mail diminishes as well. 

20 

We are also in the process of mapping all of our operations. So 

looking at the entire value chain throughout our entire system each 

time something is handled and any time it is handled, we are asking the question of ourselves now is what is the value added by 

that touch. 

So as an example, one of the things that we have historically 

done is as mail is brought into our plants, we weigh it. And we now 

have enough mail that the bulk of our mail moves from the dock— 

it used to move to a scale and then right onto a machine that 

counted the mail. 

It continues to move onto machines that count the mail, and so 

we are now eliminating weighing of mail. It may sound like something trivial but in the Postal Service, given our size, our scale, 

scope, it is $100 million worth of costs that can be eliminated. So 

those kinds of things that we are taking a good, hard look at to determine whether or not they add value. 

And in addition to that, we have a program that looks at productivity and measures productivity across the country, establishes 

goals for people that are consistent with the top quartile of the 

country. 

If one section of the country can get a high level of productivity 

at one plant, we would like everyone to replicate that and we provide training materials to folks and establish goals. 

So it is a continuous improvement-like program and it is paying 

big dividends for us. So to make a long story short, we are looking 

at making a price adjustment. We are looking at selling our products and doing it a little more aggressively than we have in the 

past and we are looking at all our costs to determine, first of all, 

are there things that we do today that just are not adding value, 

and second, the things that we do do can we do it better and incent 

people to do it and train folks to do it? 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Blair, anything you want to add or take 

away from that list for us from your own perspective? I realize this 

is not part of your responsibilities but—— 

Mr. BLAIR. Well, not at this point. 

Senator CARPER. OK. Fair enough. 

General Potter, one of the things that was very important to the 

postal customers that we met with when we were crafting our postal reform legislation was predictability and that was especially important for business mailers. They wanted to have a much better 

sense of when prices would go up and by how much. 

And you have spoken to this indirectly at least. How you think 

our new approach, your new approach, to pricing is better? Do you 

believe it is better than it was in the past with respect to predictability for businesses? And what kind of feedback are you hearing? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, I believe it certainly is better and I think that 

the fact that they now know that we are going to make price adjustments every May. Those price adjustments are capped at the 

rate of inflation for mailing services. I think that helps them in 

terms of their own budgeting. 

It also helps with investments. There are a lot of folks who had 

some concerns about where the mail, where the Postal Service was 

going in terms of prices, long-term and were afraid of increases 

much above the rate of inflation. 

21 

And so the fact that they now can look forward and pretty much 

predict that they are going to get annual adjustments at or about 

the rate of inflation enables them, with some surety, to look at 

what returns they might have on investments that they make in 

equipment or investments that they might make in longer term 

game plans around advertising or channel use, in terms of developing relationships with customers. 

So the bottom line is I think it has helped businesses and that 

is the feedback I have been getting. 

Senator CARPER. But after the most recent postal pricing changes 

went into effect, we heard, and I guess you did too, some complaints from certain groups of mailers such as low circulation magazines and some of the catalogs about the fairness of the new 

prices. Many believe that the final prices worked out after months 

of negotiation and testimony before the Postal Regulatory Commission may have gone a little too far at least in their minds. I understand that the new prices even had a negative impact or may have 

had a negative impact on volume at the end of the day. 

What, if anything, Mr. Potter, are you all doing in the planned 

May pricing changes or in future moves, to address the issues mailers had with the last set of changes? 

Mr. POTTER. Let me address specifically the two concerns that 

you mentioned. One was the catalog mailers, and so our pricing, 

the prices that we set forth and are being evaluated now by the 

PRC are lower for catalogs and that is a reflection of our concern 

about hitting them once again. So their rates are below the rate of 

inflation, the ones that we have proposed. 

When it comes to magazines and periodicals, we basically did an 

across-the-board rate change. We have proposed an across-theboard change. That reflects the fact that there was great complexity in the periodical rate change the last year. 

As you know, we had to delay the implementation because there 

was quite a bit of programming that needed to take place because 

of the changes that were made ultimately in the rates. So, we basically did an across-the-board rate change again and in deference to 

the community, so as not to burden them once again with complexity. 

We are and do take into account, the different industries and 

where they are going. I believe that the new law gives us flexibility 

that will enable us to respond to the needs of the industry and the 

opportunity to incent different mailers to mail. 

So I think we are just beginning to scratch the surface on what 

we can do under the new law on the mailing side of the house and 

we are cognizant of the concerns that were raised with the last rate 

change and we think our proposed rates reflect and are sensitive 

to those needs. 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Blair, do you want to add anything to that 

please? 

Mr. BLAIR. What I wanted to say was, especially under the old 

system, anytime you had an increase in rates, a decrease in volume 

was naturally expected. The economic slowdown compounded that 

situation that you referred to. 

The decision in the last rate case was based on 2005 data which 

was based upon data that was produced months, if not years, earVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:00 Jul 22, 2008 Jkt 041457 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\41457.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
22 

lier. Maybe more rosy economic scenarios were envisioned. However, it came out in 2006, and I think the rate increase, compounded with an economic slowdown, hit some mailers particularly 

hard. 

Regarding the catalogs and flat rates recommendations, it was a 

zero-sum game. Had catalog rates not gone up, which was an attempt to address an allocation of institutional burden between 

mailers within the same class, it would have caused letter rates to 

go up. 

It was that bubble. If you pushed it down here, it went up there. 

We have seen it in the comments before the Commission on this 

new rate adjustment, that some do not think that flat rates again 

should have gone up further in order to redress that issue. 

I think we are out of that paradigm in these rate adjustment 

cases. But it goes to show you that old habits die hard. I think the 

new system ensures that rates, at the class level, will not exceed 

the inflationary cap and that there will be predictability and stability in rates and that mailers will have a better sense of what 

those rate increases will be. I think what the Postmaster General 

just said about increases every May that is going to be worked into 

mailers business assumptions. I think that we will know now as to 

what those rate increases will likely be. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. I would like to ask each of you a 

question or two regarding negotiated service agreements and we 

will just start off, Mr. Blair, with you. 

You will recall that another provision in the Postal Reform Bill 

that we adopted codifies the Postal Service’s authority to enter into 

negotiated service agreements with individual mailers. 

The Postal Service has entered into these kinds of agreements in 

the past, I believe, with varying degrees of success. None of the 

agreements, though, to my knowledge, have been a complete failure 

but I do not think that there have been a lot of them that have 

brought in substantial amounts of volume and revenue either. If I 

stand to be corrected, feel free to correct me. 

Mr. Blair, first of all, what is your understanding of the Postal 

Service’s authority to enter into negotiated service agreements, and 

then to follow up, what is your assessment of the Postal Service’s 

ability to negotiate quality agreements that can have a real impact 

on volume and a real impact on revenue and on the overall efficiency of the Postal Service? 

Mr. BLAIR. I think the new rules grant them a tremendous 

amount of new flexibility that was not there before. The legislation 

codified negotiated service agreements. It said that it either has to 

improve the net financial status of the Postal Service or improve 

operational efficiencies and cause no undue market harm from 

market dominant products. 

And in the competitive areas, you have to cover attributable 

costs. I think that gives the Postal Service tremendous flexibility 

in that area. 

I agree that the agreements have not been as successful as parties had hoped. I think that codifying this in statute bolsters the 

Postal Service’s negotiating position because parties know what the 

Postal Service has to do in order to comply with the law. 

23 

We would expect more NSAs to be coming down the pike. We 

have had some preliminary discussions about what they want to do 

in the competitive arena. We are heartened by that. 

We want to make sure that the agreements comport with the 

law. I think that you would want us to do no less. But I think that 

this is a new era, and I think we have to look at things a little bit 

differently. We certainly want to do that. We want to see them succeed. 

But we are mindful of our statutory duties. It is a balancing act, 

and we want to make sure that we walk that fine line. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. Just to close out on this particular 

topic, General Potter, what lessons have you and your team 

learned from some of your experiences with negotiated service 

agreements in the past, including, I guess, the recent experience 

with Bank of America where the quality of the data that you were 

using was called into question? 

Mr. POTTER. Well, the one thing that I have learned is negotiated 

service agreements go back to the law. The market dominant or 

mail side of the house are extremely difficult. 

In a sense it is somewhat of a zero sum game, and I think under 

the old law, the litmus test for it was much more difficult because 

of the fact that you had everybody looking over each other’s shoulder. 

The fact of the matter is I am very enthused about the types of 

discussions that we are having today. When it comes to competitive 

products, I think we have a real opportunity to grow the business 

and we have had some very constructive dialog with the PRC and 

I am anxious to move ahead with it. 

On the market dominant side of the house, we are a little more 

tenuous in terms of how we might do that. We are anxious to get 

ahead. We have further discussions planned with the Postal Regulatory Commission. We have began having dialog with our customer base. 

But under the old rules, it was very easy to throw a stone. I 

think we are going to have to change the mind set of folks to say, 

gee, it might make sense to charge somebody a lesser price if it is 

a matter of retaining business that makes some contribution to the 

bottom line. 

It might make sense to incent people to go into new markets to 

advertise. These are concepts that are foreign to our old way of 

doing business and are things that we are going to have to explore 

and do it in a very deliberate way in order to reassure the community that there are sound reasons to move ahead. 

That being said, I agreed with what Mr. Blair said, the new law, 

the litmus test, or the hurdle that you have to get over under the 

new law is quite lower than it was under the old law, and the process—thanks to the new regulations that they would have put out 

for rates in general and what we anticipate they will do with negotiated service agreements—will be much more expeditious and will 

provide the type of flexibility that I think the law intends. 

So I am very anxious about what we are going to do on the competitive side. We are going to call it contracts. Again, I said that 

early on, we are going to try to use that language so folks that we 

are dealing with understand it, and on the market dominant side, 

24 

we are working hard to find a path and to communicate so that everybody understands what we do and how we do it. And the understanding is it is going to make of the whole better and not necessarily meet the requirements of the old law. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Just one more time for my edification, 

just tell us again the new lingo for market dominant, for competitive. 

Mr. POTTER. OK. Mail, or Market dominant products—FirstClass Mail, periodicals, Standard Mail—it is now called mailing 

services. 

Competitive products—Express Mail, Priority Mail, international 

packages—we are now calling that shipping services. 

We are not going to use the word ‘‘rate’’ anymore. We are going 

to use the word ‘‘price.’’ We are going to move away from the term 

‘‘discount,’’ and we are going to talk about incentives for people to 

mail. 

Those are the types of language that we want people to start 

thinking of us as. You are asking us and have told us that you 

want us to compete, to operate like a business and so we are going 

to move to talk like a business. 

Senator CARPER. That is probably a good place to end this hearing on. I am glad to hear you are talking the talk. 

When I was governor of Delaware—I will close with this 

thought—I was governor of Delaware. About the mid 1990s we decided to launch welfare reform, and we decided to launch welfare 

reform as a country, and as it turned out, we ended up launching 

welfare reform where we limited the amount of time that people 

would be eligible for welfare benefits. Tried to offer them things 

that would make work pay more than welfare. 

And just by dumb luck, we launched welfare reform in the middle of the longest running economic expansion in history of the 

country. Enormous job creation was occurring, and it was not that 

welfare reform was easy but it was a whole lot easier than it would 

have been otherwise. 

It occurs to me that we have launched postal reform at the beginning here of an economic downturn and slow down when it makes 

a different transition all the more challenging. 

I am encouraged that, at this point in time, one year into this, 

you and the folks you lead are taking the right spirit into a brave 

new world, and I applaud that. I am encouraged by it. 

I realize we just have a year under our belts, a year under your 

belts, and we are going through a learning process and I am 

pleased to hear that some of the things we thought might work are 

for the most part working. Maybe some little better than expected 

and there are some other problems that may have emerged or some 

areas to keep an eye on or ones that we just need to watch a bit 

more. 

But that is pretty much what I had to say. 

Anybody else have a closing word? Mr. Blair, you looked like you 

might have something else you want to add. 

Mr. BLAIR. I would much rather be having this discussion today 

than a similar discussion where we are facing a very contentious 

old cost of service rate case under the old rules had postal reform 

not passed. 

25 

So is it the best environment to implement a reform agenda? 

Maybe not, but I think it is better than not doing it at all, and so 

maybe you were prescient in forecasting that this was going to happen and that foresight is going to benefit the system as a whole. 

Senator CARPER. I wish I were that smart. In any event we appreciate your being here. We appreciate the spirit that you bring 

to these challenges, and we look forward again to continuing this 

dialog both in a forum like this and in less structured forums as 

well. 

Our thanks on behalf of the Subcommittee to each of you and to 

your respective teams, to your colleagues. Thank you for testifying 

today and really for your commitment to making postal reform a 

success. 

The hearing record will remain open for, I think, 2 weeks for the 

submission of additional statements and some additional questions. 

To the extent that you receive those, I would just ask that you respond to them promptly if you will. 

And with that it is 4 o’clock. It is time for us to go vote so this 

has worked out very well. 

Thank you so much. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(27) 

A P P E N D I X 


41457.001
28 


41457.002
29 


41457.003
30 


41457.004
31 


41457.005
32 


41457.006
33 


41457.007
34 


41457.008
35 


41457.009
36 


41457.010
37 


41457.011
38 


41457.012
39 


41457.013
40 


41457.014
41 


41457.015
42 


41457.016
43 


41457.017
44 


41457.018
45 


41457.019
46 


41457.020
47 


41457.021
48 


41457.022
49 


41457.023
50 


41457.024
51 


41457.025
52 


41457.026
53 

Æ 


41457.027