® Mailers Technical Advisory Committee Washington, DC Jim Cochrane, VP Product Visibility Jim...
-
Upload
hugo-chase -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of ® Mailers Technical Advisory Committee Washington, DC Jim Cochrane, VP Product Visibility Jim...
®
Mailers Technical Advisory Committee Washington, DC
Jim Cochrane, VP Product VisibilityJim Wilson, Mgr Address Management
May 25, 2011
®
Q3 is showing significant migration to IMb FS Mailer Certification has been suspended Expanding Test Environment for Mailers (TEM)
process Commercial service scores continue to trend
upward
Operational Metrics Summary
2
®
3
FY11 (October 2010 - May 2011) IMb Full Service
®FY11-YTD
Full-Service Production Trends
Full-Service Customer Sites Approved For Production 48
Full-Service Postage Statements Finalized 363,206
Total Piece Volume for Full-Service 29,311,564
Note: Total Piece Volume for Full-Service includes Bound Printed MatterOct 1, 2010 – May 13, 2011
4
®FY11 (October 2010 - May 2011)
Full-Service IMb
5
®FY11 (October 2010 - April 2011)
First-Class Mail
ProcessCategory
IMb Full ServiceVolume
Total Commercial
Volume
PercentIMb
Full Service
Letters & Cards
12,700,504 26,644,141 47.67%
Flats 26,440 392,586 6.73%
Total 12,726,943 27,036,727 47.07%
6
Note: Volume (000s) FY10 percentage IMb 28%
®FY11 (October 2010 - April 2011)
Periodicals
ProcessCategory
IMb Full ServiceVolume
Total Commercial
Volume
PercentIMb
Full Service
Letters 361 44,961 0.80%
Flats 2,022,787 4,149,867 48.74%
Total 2,023,147 4,194,828 48.23%
7
Note: Volume (000s) FY10 percentage IMb 29%
®
ProcessCategory
IMb Full ServiceVolume
Total Commercial
Volume
PercentIMb
Full Service
Letters 9,576,663 33,779,435 28.35%
Flats 4,984,810 14,484,469 34.41%
Total 14,561,473 48,263,904 30.17%
8
Note: Volume (000s)
FY10 percentage IMb 18%
FY11 (October 2010 - April 2011)Standard Mail
®FY11 (October 2010 - April 2011)
Summary by Mail Class
Mail ClassIMb Full Service
Volume
Total Commercial
Volume
PercentIMb
Full Service
First-Class 12,726,943 27,036,727 47.07%
Periodicals 2,023,147 4,194,828 48.23%
Standard Mail
14,561,473 48,263,904 30.17%
Total 29,311,564 79,495,459 36.87%
9
Note: Volume (000s)
®
Full Service Volume has seen a 74% Growth From Q2-FY10 to Q2-FY11
Quarterly Volume Migration:POSTNET to IMb
10
®Intelligent Mail vs.
Full Service Volume Growth
Q2 FY 11 is showing increase in IMb adoption from POSTNET bar code
11
®Intelligent Mail vs.
Full Service Volume Growth - Weekly
Last 9 Weeks of data shows increase in IMb adoption from POSTNET bar code
12
®
National Composite First-Class Presort Overnight Two-Day Three-Day
Certified Mailers Districts
Pieces Measured
% On-
Time Pieces
Measured
% On-Time
Pieces Measured
% On-
Time
QTR 2 100 65 139M 91.80% 206M 84.80% 316M 89.40%
QTR 1 13 12 29M 84.40% 61M 88.80% 114M 85.80%
% Increase over Qtr 1 669.23% 441.67% 379.86% 8.77% 239.74% -4.50% 176.60% 4.20%
PQ2 Service Performance Measurement
SPM Metrics
13
® FC Commercial Mail Volumes
14
® Standard Commercial Mail Volumes
15
®
?
Commercial Mail Measurement Yield
16
® Issues Moving Forward
Irregularities Barcode (pallet, tray, piece)
● Uniqueness ● Content/Construct quality
eDocumentation ● Nesting● Intelligent Mail Range (IMR) vs.
Piece Detail Record (PDR)● Piece Barcode (PBC) – IDEAlliance (smaller record)
FAST appointment procedures Scanning consistency Redirects
17
®
6-digit Mailer ID Format
Field No.
Field Description
Field Size
Character Position
Logical Values
Allowable Values
1 Application Identifier 2 1-2 Numeric “99” (Only) 2 Type Indicator 1 3 Alpha “M” (Only) 3 Destination Facility
NASS Code 5 4-8 Alphanumeric USPS-assigned ID (1)
4 Mailer ID 6 9-14 Numeric USPS-assigned ID with the leading digit ranging from “0” through “8”
5 Serial Number 12 15-26 Alphanumeric Mailer-defined (2)
Intelligent Mail® Container Barcode
®
Benefits Increased visibility of containers within the
USPS network More consistent Start-the-Clock scans Enhanced handling efficiency Supports tray-to-container nesting
Establishing MTAC workgroups on tray and container barcodes
Intelligent Mail® Container Barcode
®
National CAT/CETs have been identified for operational scenarios, established service standards, involving induction method, mail class, and preparation
National CAT/CET
First-Class Standard Periodicals BPMNon-Co-Located 1500 1500 TBD 1500Co-Located 1800 1500 TBD 1500
No Separation 1900
Working 2000Presort 2100Presort
Assigned2200
Hub - STC 2400Hub - THS 0200P
Origin
BMEU
Mailer and USPS
Transported1500 TBD 1500
Drop-ShipDestination
Mail Class
NDC, ADC, SCF, DDU
N/A 1600 TBD 1600
20
® CET Matrix
Type
No Bundle Sort Needed
5-Digit / Scheme Container
Bundle Sort Needed
3-Digit and Up Container
NonFSS 1700 1600
FSS 1100 0800
Critical Entry Time (CET)Periodicals
21
®
Proposal for Resolving
Periodical Issue with
Full Service ACS
22
® Issue
Inconsistent USPS performance in providing Full Service ACS notices to Periodical mailers● Disparity between scanning performance for
Change-of-Address and Nixie notices● Diminished value from Full Service adoption
Cost impacts to mailer where Traditional ACS notice provided instead of Full Service ACS● $ 0.26 per notice versus free
23
®
IMb defaced preventing scanning in CFS
CFS scanning efficiency and efforts● Scanner effectiveness● More “clicks than beeps”
Poor barcode quality on mail piece prevents scanning
Root Cause Assumptions
24
®
Increase scanning efficiency for Nixie notices to match COA scanning results
Reduce volumes and cost of Traditional ACS notices provided to mailer
Create appropriate incentive for continuous quality improvement in mailer IMb quality
Target Goals
25
®
Comparative analysis of MERLIN results to scanning results to analyze scanner effectiveness
Full Service IMb / Traditional ACS cross-reference data analysis to evaluate geographical performance
CFS software update to drive scanning improvements
Evaluated potential to use mail processing scan performance to determine ability to read IMb
Lean Six Sigma effort to review end-to-end process and identify opportunities for improvement
Efforts to Date
26
® Current Periodical Scanning (Feb – Apr)
Title Count Pct of Titles % using IMb90% 61 9.0% 15.6%80% 112 16.5% 28.7%70% 69 10.1% 17.7%60% 65 9.6% 16.7%50% 30 4.4% 7.7%
Below 50% 53 7.8% 13.6%Equal 0% 290 42.6%
680 100% 100%
Actual COA Scan Performance
27
®
Establish best CFS scanning performance of COAs for each magazine title in each Area and use as the baseline expected across the Area● Combine Average and Median scores for each
Area to determine baseline value to adjust all COA and Nixie charges
● Retain Area’s score when higher than combined Average or Median score
● Recalculate monthly using past 90-day results
Proposal to Resolve Issue
28
®
Impact to Low Scan Rate TitleAll Area Average 3.34%All Area Median 3.58%
Higher Avg/Median 3.58%
Area Actual Scan Rate Adj Scan Rate
2.27% 3.58% CAPITAL METRO4.35% 4.35% EASTERN4.16% 4.16% GREAT LAKES3.05% 3.58% NORTHEAST2.39% 3.58% PACIFIC3.34% 3.58% SOUTHWEST3.82% 3.82% WESTERN
Total Charges (Original)
Total Charges (Recalculated) Savings
19,561.10$ 18,976.88$ 584.22$
Impact to Average Scan Rate Title
29
® Impact to Average Scan Rate Title
All Area Average 82.70%All Area Median 82.82%
Higher Avg/Median 82.82%
Area Actual Scan Rate Adj Scan Rate
76.88% 82.82% CAPITAL METRO90.85% 90.85% EASTERN92.71% 92.71% GREAT LAKES82.30% 82.82% NORTHEAST86.55% 86.55% PACIFIC66.82% 82.82% SOUTHWEST82.82% 82.82% WESTERN
Total Charges (Original)
Total Charges (Recalculated) Savings
15,374.84$ 6,678.10$ 8,696.74$ 30
®
All Area Average 96.78%All Area Median 96.19%
Higher Avg/Median 96.78%
Area Actual Scan Rate Adj Scan Rate
94.59% 96.78% CAPITAL METRO100.00% 100.00% EASTERN100.00% 100.00% GREAT LAKES93.94% 96.78% NORTHEAST94.40% 96.78% PACIFIC96.19% 96.78% SOUTHWEST98.37% 98.37% WESTERN
Total Charges (Original)
Total Charges (Recalculated) Savings
1,400.36$ 87.36$ 1,313.00$
Impact to Average Scan Rate Title
31
® Adjusted COA Scan Percentages
Title Count Pct of Titles % using IMb90% 219 32.2% 56.2%80% 75 11.0% 19.2%70% 39 5.7% 10.0%60% 18 2.6% 4.6%50% 12 1.8% 3.1%
Below 50% 27 4.0% 6.9%Equal 0% 290 42.6%
680 100% 100%
Adusted COA Scan Performance
32
®
Treat any percentage above 90% at 100% to align with IMb readability requirements
Defer adoption of proposal to July 24th or later to allow mailers to review process
Provide report showing impact by title
Mailer Feedback
33
®
Address Quality Update
34
®
Overview
Federal Register Status
● MLNA / Move Update
SuiteLink & CASS Cycle N
ZIP Code Realignments
RIBBS Status
Address Quality Update
35
®
Federal Register published September 2010
Comments received from mailing industry reviewed and evaluated in preparation of Proposed Final Rule that will be published June 2011
Establish 1-year grace period from date of Final Rule publication
Define Guide to Move Update as resource for mailers to use to understand Move Update
Mailing industry will have an opportunity to provide comments to Proposed Final Rule
Final Rule scheduled to be published August 2011
Address Correction / Move Update Changes
Federal Register Proposed Rule
36
®
CASS Cycle N and SuiteLink
CASS & SuiteLink® Update
94 CASS products/platforms certified for Cycle N – 44 % complete
33 MASS products/platforms certified for Cycle N – 50% complete
SuiteLink printing requirement relaxed
● Suite number printing is optional on mailpiece
● DMM Advisory will be published informing new policy
SuiteLink database contains 21 million records
37
®
DSMART Statistics
Fiscal YearBusiness Delivery Points
w/ Business Names
% Complete
Avg. Monthly Default Volume
2009 2,565,196 1,653,169 64.40% 111,441,285
2010 2,598,362 1,893,486 72.90% 108,996,982
2011 YTD 2,642,269 1,983,910 75.10% 109,725,828
CASS & SuiteLink® Update
38
®
SuiteLink Statistics
FiscalYear
CandidateRecords
RecordsMatched
MatchRate
2007 486,635,644 12,906,405 2.65%
2008 2,583,525,310 103,016,280 3.99%
2009 3,250,109,421 160,676,448 4.94%
2010 5,352,228,944 288,570,848 5.39%
CASS & SuiteLink® Update
39
®
TRUE
SuiteLink® Requirements
RUNNING IN A NON-CASS CERTIFIED MODE
Return ZIP+4 & DPVValues from CASS CertifiedAddress Matching Engine;
NO CASS 3553 form generated
DPV Values from CASS CertifiedAddress Matching Engine;
NO ZIP+4 Return CASS 3553 formThese pieces are to be mailed at
non-automation rates
SuiteLinkactivated?
CASS resultsindicate candidate for SuiteLink
Processing (Hirise/StreetDefault Match)?
A Default Matchis in SuiteLink’s 9-Digit Table of
Candidate Records
ValidBusiness/Name
field defined & populated(assumes it’s populated with Name
Info that’ll appear onmailpiece)?
Match foundin SuiteLink?
UserElected to use SuiteLink
Updates *4
Records submitted forCASS Processing
Perform ZIP+4 & DPV lookupFrom CASS Certified Address Matching Engine
Call SuiteLink with EMDP ofDefault Address & Parsed Business/Name
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSEPerform CASS lookup with
secondary info from SuiteLink FALSE
Return ZIP+4 & DPV Values from CASS CertifiedAddress Matching Engine; Return CASS 3553 form
Piece qualifies for inclusion in mailing submitted for automation rate discounts
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
40
®
New CASS Schedule Alignment
CASS Schedule Update
Activities Summer (Major)
Announce CASS changes at Partners in Tomorrow (PIT) Meeting
February 15, 2012
Finalize CASS Requirements – receive feedback from PIT, post PIT minutes and finalized requirements
April 1, 2012
CASS Design and Development – begins with CASS Stage I file being posted
Begins: May 31, 2012Ends: June 10, 2013
CASS Testing / Certification – begins with CASS Stage II file being posted and submission of CASS tests
Begins: July 31, 2012Ends: June 24, 2013
Deploy June 24, 2013
41
®
May 14/15 June AIS Products Build
June 1 Customers Notified if Impacted by ZIP Code Change
June 4 USPS Sort Plans Updated
July 1 External Customers Begin Using New ZIP Codes
2011 ZIP Code Realignments
• 4 new delivery area ZIP Codes being activated• 6 ZIP Code boundary realignments• 58,480 total number of deliveries impacted
SCHEDULE
ZIP Code Realignment
42
®
Approved ZIP Code Changes – June 2011
ZIP Code Alignment
New ZIP Codes: Triboro 11211 to 11249 11,455 deliveries impacted Dallas 75034 to 75033 13,795 deliveries impacted Alaska 99654 to 99623 3,303 deliveries impacted
Boundary Realignments: Appalachian 24740 to 24739 14,053 deliveries impacted Seattle 98055 to 98031 311 deliveries impacted Seattle 98058 to 98031 341 deliveries impacted Seattle 98011 to 98034 3,349 deliveries impacted3 Digit Realignments: Northern Florida 32073 to 32244 296 deliveries impacted Colorado/Wyoming 81008 to 80817 814 deliveries impacted Salt Lake City 84084 to 84129 2,246 deliveries impacted Salt Lake City 84118 to 84129 9,089 deliveries impacted Salt Lake City 84119 to 84129 1,432 deliveries impacted
43
®
Migration to Electronic Product Fulfillment (EPF)● NCOALink Daily Delete - complete● ACS – complete● FFMUN – offered 5/18 ● AEC – Pilot testing began 5/20● CASS
EPF accounts offered 5/6Stage II files targeted for 5/31Manufacturers report completed 5/20
CD-ROM Current for all products but FFMUN Required for data submitted to USPS
RIBBS Status
RIBBS
44
®
MITS / RITS application is now “viewable” only
New issues, calendar updates will require completion of a template through [email protected]● Complete template for adding an issue or calendar
updates● Highlighted areas require completion
Passwords ● New requirements (8 characters minimum, must
contain upper and lowercase, numbers, and special characters)
Contact [email protected] to obtain new password or change password
MITS
MITS Status
45
® MITS Templates
Calendar Updates Add an Issue46
®
Questions?