[Senate Hearing 107-284]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-284
FINANCIAL SECURITY OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
NOVEMBER 8, 2001--WASHINGTON, DC
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
senate
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
77-771 WASHINGTON : 2002
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
TOM HARKIN, Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
HARRY REID, Nevada MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CONRAD BURNS, Montana
PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
JACK REED, Rhode Island MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
Terry Sauvain, Staff Director
Charles Kieffer, Deputy Staff Director
Steven J. Cortese, Minority Staff Director
Lisa Sutherland, Minority Deputy Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Chairman
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
JACK REED, Rhode Island MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia TED STEVENS, Alaska
(ex officio) (ex officio)
Professional Staff
Chip Walgren
Nicole Rutberg
Pat Raymond (Minority)
Lula Edwards (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statement of John E. Potter, Postmaster General/CEO, United
States Postal Service.......................................... 1
Opening statement of Senator Byron L. Dorgan..................... 1
Postmaster General's opening statement........................... 7
Prepared statement of John E. Potter............................. 10
Mail sanitization technology..................................... 12
Financial consequences of terrorists attacks..................... 26
(iii)
FINANCIAL SECURITY OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
----------
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2001
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Treasury
and General Government,
Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Byron L. Dorgan (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Dorgan, Mikulski, Reed, Byrd, Campbell,
DeWine, and Stevens.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
STATEMENT OF JOHN E. POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL/CEO
ACCOMPANIED BY:
RICHARD STRASSER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
THOMAS DAY, VICE PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING
ROBERT RIDER, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF GOVERNORS
opening statement of senator byron l. dorgan
Senator Dorgan. The hearing will come to order.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony from John
Potter, the Postmaster General, on the unanticipated financial
needs now facing the Postal Service as a result of the
September 11 terrorist attacks and also the incidence of
anthrax exposure resulting from transmittal through the postal
system.
The Postal Service is one of the few Government
organizations which touches nearly every person on a daily
basis in the United States, and it helps knit this Nation
together through the concept of universal service. It is
imperative, it seems to me, the Postal Service remain a viable
and a robust institution.
Tragically, the Postal Service has become yet another front
in this country's new war against terrorism. The men and women
who daily wear the postal uniform and make their appointed
rounds are on the front lines of this battle, and as in any
battle, there are casualties. The Postal Service has lost two
of its D.C. area employees to anthrax, while others are
hospitalized and thousands are on antibiotics as a
precautionary measure.
Mr. Postmaster General, one morning I was reading the
newspaper here in Washington, D.C., and was reading about the
postal workers who had lost their lives. I recall both stories
were of wonderful public servants, one of whom had worked the
night shift for 15 years and had not used one day of sick leave
in 15 years. I think it is important for our country to
understand the dedication of the men and women who work in the
Postal Service. Our hearts go out to you and all the men and
women in the Postal Service for this loss. We want to work with
you to respond to these threats.
This new threat to our homeland has the potential to reach
into every household and to undermine our collective belief in
the security of our mail. This threat must be defeated and the
national confidence restored.
Now, just as the airlines and others were unable to budget
for the closure of the Nation's airports following the
September 11 attacks, the Postal Service could not possibly
have planned for the destruction of the major facility in New
York City, much less a bioterrorist tainting of the mail.
There is a legitimate need for a Federal Government
contribution to assist the Postal Service as it addresses this
crisis. As one who firmly believes in the mission of the Postal
Service, I will support that effort.
Since the Postal Service was created in 1970, the Federal
Government's direct appropriation of funds has been reduced
significantly. In fact, the last time Congress provided a
specific appropriation to offset the Postal Service's deficits
was in 1976 and 1977. Currently, we in Congress only
appropriate funds to cover the loss of revenue associated with
the cost of certain free mailings for the blind and overseas
voting.
A direct appropriation to the Postal Service would be
extremely unusual, but these are unusual times. And if the
Congress and the Federal Government are to make any payment to
the Postal Service, we need to be careful and clear on the
exact items we will be paying for and the associated costs of
those items.
The question for us--in my judgment, is not whether but how
and how much, and we will explore those issues today.
I want to make an additional point before I call on my
colleagues. This issue in many ways is at the top of the list
with respect to homeland security. Every mail recipient in this
country is nervous and concerned about the fact that terrorists
have used the mail as an instrument of violence against the
American people. So this is about homeland security.
We have a question here about funding. I know, Mr.
Postmaster General, you are going to give us recommendations
today about funding needs. You know from reading the newspaper
in the last couple of days there have been discussions between
the White House and Congress about what kind of resources are
available, threats about vetoing appropriations bills with any
additional money attached to them. We have appropriated $40
billion for the purpose of responding to threats of terrorism
and for the purpose of helping rebuild New York and responding
to the terrible calamity of September 11.
Some of that money, a substantial amount, is dedicated to
New York. A substantial amount is an amount the President has
some discretion to use. My understanding is that the amount
that is as of yet uncommitted is largely reserved for the
Pentagon or military needs. So I think all of us have to try to
think through, with especially what has happened in recent days
about the threats of vetoes of additional funding needs, we
need to think through what are the needs, what are our
priorities, and how do we find the resources to deal with the
priorities. Is it something that is optional for us to deal
with? Can we just today say, well, whatever the consequences of
the mail, whatever the condition of the mail, whatever someone
tries to do to deal with the mail in a manner that the
terrorists did with respect to anthrax, let it happen and we
will wait to see what the consequences are? The answer to that
clearly is no. That would be unthinkable and unforgivable.
Every family in this country is affected by the threat of
terrorists using the mail as an instrument of terror and of
violence. And so we must, it seems to me, take the steps
necessary to do what we can to respond to these issues, and
that is the purpose of this hearing today.
Mr. Postmaster General, we welcome you today, and we want
you to make the case that you feel you must make on behalf of
the Postal Service as you address this current crisis. And,
again, let me say as I conclude, our hearts go out to the
families of those who have been affected by the anthrax crisis.
We want to say how much we admire the men and women who work in
the Postal Service, and we want to do what we can to protect
them and protect the American people.
Let me call on my ranking member, Senator Campbell?
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr.
Postmaster. I want like to add my condolences to that of the
chairman, too, for the postal workers. Almost everywhere out in
ranch country where we both live, we know our postmasters, we
know our postal workers. They are our friends and our
neighbors. We know the people who deliver the mail and the
letters to our houses every day, and it is not like just some
unseen face that you see in the newspaper. For us, there is a
real family involved when we hear postal workers that have
unfortunately contracted anthrax and are under the threat of
further attacks.
So thank you for being here, and in light of that, I want
to tell you that I am very interested in finding out more about
the additional requirements that you are going to need. I think
we can all appreciate the situation you find yourself in. It is
new to everybody. Obviously, there are no game plans; there are
no previous rules that we can fall back on. But one thing we
are learning very fast is that terrorism has a very hefty price
tag, and it seems to be changing literally day to day.
I don't know what the bottom line is going to be. As the
chairman mentioned, we have appropriated $40 billion. I don't
know, it might end up being the first installment because these
things are going up. But certainly we have to do our best to
work together to ensure the future vitality of the Postal
Service, and I look forward to doing that. I know we will
probably never get back to the day when the postman's worst
fear was an angry dog when he was walking down the street, but
clearly we can do better.
I know that you are under some duress from the postal
workers themselves, who feel that they were not contacted early
enough about the mail that was delivered to Senator Daschle's
office and the media's office, too. I understand there are some
lawsuits going on with that. I just hope we can get through all
this and we recognize that we have a long way to go in this war
against terrorism. It is going to be something like we have
never faced before.
But thank you for being here. Thank you for your testimony.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Campbell, thank you very much.
Next I will call on Senator Mikulski.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I
want to thank you for holding this very timely hearing today.
And I want to welcome the Postmaster General, Mr. Potter.
Mr. Potter, I would like to again express my deepest
condolences to the families of the two Maryland postal workers
who died because of anthrax. Mr. Morris and Mr. Curseen were
residents of my State. By all accounts, they were good
neighbors and great guys. And our heart goes out to those
families.
Our heart also goes out to the thousands of people who work
at Brentwood facility. I was over at D.C. General, walked the
halls to see how they were being treated as they lined up to be
able to get their Cipro. And our strength and our support also
goes to them and the people in Linthicum and throughout all of
the postal facilities in our Nation.
I really want to compliment the Nation's postal workers for
staying on the job. We see them out there every day. The post
offices are open. The mail is being delivered. I see them with
their leather bags out in our communities. And I just really
want to congratulate them for their steadfastness, their
loyalty, their bravery, and really their patriotism, because
they are showing confidence in the way our country is working.
But I believe that we need to be able to thank them not
only with words but with deeds. And I believe we, as the United
States Congress, need to move heaven, earth, and our budget to
make sure that we ensure worker safety and mail safety; that
the postal workers themselves and all who use the post office
know that their highest elected officials are on their side.
And I think we need to listen to you today on what it is that
we need to do to help you make sure that the workers are safe,
that the mail is safe, and all who come to those facilities are
helped.
At the same time, we know that the postal workers
themselves are under incredible pressure, and I know you have a
great reputation for listening to your workers, and I thank you
for that. But I think we have to agree that the postal workers
themselves have a right to be heard, they have a right to know
what is going on, and they have a right to be protected. This
is what homeland security is all about.
I look forward to working with you on this because the
events of last month were deeply troubling. On October 15th,
there was the Daschle letter. This Capitol Hill campus
responded quickly. I know that you tried to respond quickly to
the Brentwood situation. But, alas and alack, you didn't get
the information or the agency support that you needed. I am
deeply troubled by that.
But now we have to look ahead to the future about the
reopening of other facilities, the reopening of Brentwood. Just
as we worry about the Hart Building, you worry about these
other facilities. And I want to be sure that Brentwood gets
exactly what we are getting from the Hart Building. So we want
to work with you and we want to marshal the resources of the
United States Government to be sure that when our facilities
are open and yours are, that they are as fit for duty as the
people who will bravely walk into those doors.
God bless you and God bless the Postal Service, and I look
forward to working with you and being on your side.
Mr. Potter. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Dorgan. I am going to recognize members in order of
appearance. Senator Reed?
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
welcome, Mr. Potter. I want to join my colleagues in expressing
my sympathy for the postal workers who have died, their
families and their coworkers. This unprecedented attack upon
America using anthrax through the mail has put tremendous
stress on the postal service, and it has in an unbelievable way
made anthrax an occupational hazard for postal workers.
But there are other occupational hazards that they face
every day in buildings throughout this country, and I would
hope that when you present to us your plans for the Postal
Service they are not simply in terms of responding to this
crisis, but also in terms of responding to all the occupational
hazards that postal workers face each and every day.
I think one legacy for the sacrifice made by these two
postal workers would be not only that we respond to this crisis
but also that we provide a better working environment for all
their coworkers. And we want to work with you to do that.
Thank you, Mr. Potter.
Mr. Potter. Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Senator DeWine?
Senator DeWine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Postmaster Potter, let me also join my colleagues in
expressing to you and the Postal Service, and specifically to
the families of Mr. Morris and Mr. Curseen, our deepest
sympathy for their deaths. This is a great tragedy. It is a
great tragedy that has affected this entire country.
Members of the Postal Service are our friends, they are our
neighbors, they are literally the fabric of our communities, as
Ben has indicated. So, we feel very deeply about this.
I think we have an obligation, as, of course, you do, to
try to do whatever we can to make the changes that we can to
ensure the safety of our postal workers and the sanctity and
safety of our mail.
When it comes time for my questioning, I am going to be
asking you about the contract that you have entered into with
Titan, what your ideas are in regard to the sanitation of the
mail, whether or not--what testing has actually been done that
would indicate that the procedure that Titan is doing and will
be doing in the future really has been tested and that we know
that it will, in fact, work. So, that is where I will be going
with my questions. I look forward to having the opportunity to
talk with you in a few minutes.
Mr. Potter. Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Finally, we are joined by the chairman of
the full Appropriations Committee of the Senate, Senator Robert
Byrd.
Senator Byrd. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the
other members of the subcommittee.
The Continental Congress first met on September 5, 1774,
and the next year, in the Second Continental Congress, in 1775,
the Continental Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin Postmaster
General. And so the Articles of Confederation, which became
effective in 1781, mentioned the United States of America for
the first time. It included those words. That was our first
Constitution, the Articles of Confederation. And the United
States of America, that splendid verbiage appeared for the
first time in the first Constitution.
At that time, of course, the confederation was a weak
confederation. It was a confederation of colonies that were
scattered along the Eastern seaboard. And the new postal system
that Congress created helped to bind our infant Nation together
by supporting the growth of commerce and the free flow of ideas
and free flow of information.
Anthrax today threatens to rip that bond apart. I am
concerned that the fear of bioterrorism--and I share it with
every other American, and I particularly have concerns for the
people, the postal workers, and I share the concerns of my
colleagues here who have spoken and who have been very close to
this situation since it began, such as the Senator from
Maryland, Senator Mikulski.
So I am concerned about that fear that grips this Nation.
It is an atmosphere of fear. And I am fearful that it will send
our economy into--hopefully not a free fall, but it is
conceivable that that could happen.
I hope that in the weeks ahead, Mr. Postmaster General, we
can work together to ensure that the free flow of ideas and
information is not disrupted further by the threat of an unseen
microbe. We must work to protect postal employees and the
millions of American citizens who want nothing more than a
letter or a package to arrive in their mailbox.
We are coming upon the holidays of Thanksgiving and
Christmas and New Year's, and it would be a time when people
will be receiving and will be hoping to receive packages and
mail from loved ones and from friends across the Nation and
from throughout the world. And we must do everything that we
possibly can to make those packages and that mail safe, and
most of all to give our people renewed confidence that their
government is acting to secure them, the people.
And so remembering that a postal system existed in the
Confederation of States before the United States existed when
its birth was brought forward in 1787 with the writing of the
U.S. Constitution, the current Constitution, that is a
memorable history. And I salute you for the work you are doing.
We simply cannot allow terrorists to destroy or further impede
the mission of this important institution, the institution that
you head.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Byrd, thank you very much.
We are also joined by the ranking member of the full
committee, former chairman of the committee, Senator Stevens.
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you very much. I am sorry to
be a little late. I just left the Library of Congress where we
are dealing with the veterans history project, Mr. Postmaster
General, and I apologize for not having been properly briefed.
They said, well, we mailed this to you almost a month ago.
It is somewhere stuck in the mail.
On the Constitution, I am not one to follow Senator Byrd in
regard to the history of it, but it does provide that the
Congress has the duty to provide post offices and post roads.
We set up the United States Postal Service as a semi-government
function. The ratepayers really support it now rather than
taxpayers, but there is still a taxpayer obligation and a
congressional obligation. I am pleased to be here to listen to
your statement because I think you have a terrible problem on
your hands right now.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Stevens, thank you very much.
Postmaster General John Potter is accompanied by Richard
Strasser to our right, who is chief financial officer, and Tom
Day, Vice President of Engineering, to his left. We also have
the Chairman of the Postal Service Board of Governors, Robert
Rider, who is sitting directly behind the Postmaster General.
Mr. Postmaster General, why don't you proceed?
postmaster general's opening statement
Mr. Potter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning to
you and to the members of the committee. I appreciate the
opportunity to meet with you today to discuss the unanticipated
financial burdens that have been placed on the Postal Service
as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11 and the
subsequent use of the mail as a vehicle for bioterrorism.
Today postal employees find themselves on the front lines
of a new war. It is not a role they have sought, but it is one
that they have accepted. They have become quiet heroes simply
by doing their jobs, serving the American public. We mourn the
loss of two courageous members of our postal family. We pray
for the health of seven others who have suffered from this
attack.
I am grateful that the subcommittee acted quickly to
convene this hearing. Your desire to hear from the Postal
Service says a great deal about your collective and individual
interest in protecting this basic and fundamental
communications service provided for the American people by the
Government.
The Postal Service is a critical element of the Nation's
infrastructure. It is the one element of our National
Government that has daily presence in every community in the
Nation, from the smallest town to the largest cities. The
Postal Service is the linchpin of the 9-million-person, $900
billion mailing industry.
The Postal Service is coming off 2 years of negative net
income for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, this despite record
productivity increases during that same period. Expenses rose
faster than our rate of growth as a result of serving an ever-
growing number of delivery points, an additional 1.6 million
new delivery addresses each year, combined with hikes in
employees' salaries, hikes in energy costs, and increases in
health benefit costs.
The fiscal year 2002 plan envisioned more of the same, with
a planned loss of $1.35 billion, despite our having just raised
rates earlier this year.
The potential for a $2.5 billion loss in fiscal year 2003
compelled the Board of Governors of the Postal Service to vote
for a rate case filing with the Postal Rate Commission on
September 10th this year for implementation of new rates in the
fall of next year at the earliest.
Terrorism has exacerbated this bleak financial picture. The
Nation has been subjected to two distinct attacks: the
September 11 terror attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks
using the mail. Both were intended to kill and frighten
Americans. The Postal Service has been the victim of both
attacks.
Clearly, many Americans were concerned about what lay ahead
in the future and the threat of anthrax in their mail. These
concerns were reflected in significant losses in volume and
revenue in September and October.
These months mark the start of the holiday mailing season,
our busiest and most important time of the year. During this
season, we generate a financial surplus which carries us
through lower volume and revenue periods in the summer months.
While we are getting our hands around the short-term and
long-term financial impact of the attacks, let me assure you
that they are enormous. The financial impact falls into two
categories: the first are costs directly related to the
September 11 and anthrax attacks; the second category relates
to the business impact of these incidents.
In the category of direct impact of the terror attacks, the
Postal Service has and will incur costs for damage to
facilities and equipment in New York City; disruption of
facility operations and associated mail-handling costs; medical
testing and emergency treatment of employees exposed to
anthrax; protective equipment for our employees; environmental
testing and, where necessary, decontamination of postal
facilities; communication and education of employees and
customers; implementation of new security procedures; detection
technology; cleaning and filtration systems; and equipment to
sanitize the mail.
The most significant of these expenses will be the purchase
of equipment to sanitize mail and the costs associated with
integrating this equipment into current operating systems.
Three criteria have been established for selection of the
appropriate technology for use nationally.
First, the technology must be capable of eliminating
biochemical materials in the mail.
Second, the technology must be compatible with postal
operations. It should enable us to treat the mail and maintain
current service levels.
Finally, it should be the least costly, most effective
technology when considering both initial purchase cost and
ongoing operating cost.
A risk assessment is underway to determine the location and
the amount of equipment to be purchased. With the assistance of
Dr. John Marburger, Director of the President's Office of
Science and Technology, we have been able to assemble experts
from various Federal agencies, as well as research facilities
throughout the United States. They have helped us to identify
the available technologies that are compatible with our needs.
Over the coming months, we will be evaluating and testing
these options. In the interim, we will use readily available
technology and lease private sector facilities where there is
existing effective equipment.
President Bush has made $175 million available to the
Postal Service from monies authorized by Congress for homeland
security. We are using these monies to defray costs in the
short run, including the initial purchase of sanitizing
equipment.
Based on current information, we estimate our entire cost
for terrorism and dealing with homeland security to be $3 to $4
billion. We will refine these estimates as we aggressively
pursue our review of the technology and the modifications we
have to make to our systems.
We are working on the premise that the leaders of the
Nation want to ensure that all of the Nation's mail system is
protected from this kind of terrorist threat in the future. We
are proceeding with our plans and actions on this basis. While
we need some funding soon to make this happen, just as
important is the commitment to meet this challenge with full
funding.
As I have noted, direct costs of responding to these terror
attacks is only one of two types of financial consequences we
are facing. The second is the large and negative impact on our
business. This is reflected in significant declines in mail
volumes and revenue that are related to and impacted by the
terrorist attacks.
During September and October, mail volume was more than 2
billion pieces less than last year. Even with postage rates 6
percent higher, total revenues were below last year and $634
million below what had been anticipated. Operationally, we have
trimmed our cost by more than $200 million beyond reductions we
had already planned.
The bottom line for September and October put us $418
million below where we should have been, which means we are
already facing a $1.8 billion deficit this fiscal year versus
the $1.35 billion we had forecast last summer.
With concerns about the mail system driving individuals and
businesses to consider alternatives, we believe this could
affect our bottom line by $2 billion this fiscal year. However,
it will take us a number of months to assess the full impact on
the Postal Service.
Mr. Chairman, the financial impacts I have described are
the consequence of terror attacks on the Nation. They should be
considered costs of homeland security. Despite the leadership
and support from our customers, our employees, our unions, our
management associations, Health and Human Services Secretary
Thompson, and Governor Ridge, the Postal Service requires
financial help if we are to rebuild faith in the integrity of
what is in the mail and maintain the level of service we have
provided over the years.
From those small businesses who depend on the daily mail,
to citizens who save money by receiving prescriptions by mail,
to local newspapers and churches who rely on the local Post
Office to deliver, Postal customers should not be burdened by
extra costs of terrorism through the price of postage. This
could quickly threaten the foundation of a universal Postal
system serving all Americans.
We are doing everything that we can to reduce our expenses
by streamlining operations and our administrative costs. We are
also moving forward to do everything we can to keep the mail
safe. Both are imperative if we are to continue to maintain the
levels of trust and confidence necessary to protect the
viability of our national Postal system. We will deliver on
this expectation. We will do everything possible to protect the
lives and safety of employees and customers, and we will keep
the mail moving. This is vital to the Nation, to our economy
and to the men and women who work in the entire mailing
industry that represents 9 million jobs and fuels 8 percent of
the country's gross domestic product.
prepared statement
We will need your help, and I look forward to working with
the committee.
Thank you very much, and we will be pleased to answer any
questions you may have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of John E. Potter
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. I
appreciate the opportunity to meet with you today to discuss the
unanticipated financial burdens that have been placed on the Postal
Service as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11 and the
subsequent use of the mail as a vehicle for bio-terrorism.
Mr. Chairman, with me today are Richard Strasser, the Postal
Service's Chief Financial Officer and Thomas Day, Vice President of
Engineering. I would also like to recognize Robert Rider, the Chairman
of the Postal Service's Board of Governors.
Today, Postal Service employees find themselves on the front lines
of a new kind of war. It is not a role they have sought, but it is one
they have accepted. They have become quiet heroes simply by doing their
jobs, serving the American public. We mourn the loss of two courageous
members of our postal family. We pray for the health of seven others
who have suffered from this attack.
I am grateful that the subcommittee acted quickly to convene this
hearing. Your desire to hear from the Postal Service says a great deal
about your collective and individual interest in protecting this basic
and fundamental communications service provided for the American people
by the government.
The Postal Service is a critical element of the nation's
infrastructure. It is the one element of our national government that
has a daily presence in every community in the Nation--from the
smallest towns to our largest cities. The Postal Service is the
lynchpin of the 9 million person, $900 billion mailing industry.
The Postal Service is coming off two years of negative net income--
in fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001--this despite record
productivity increases during this same period. Expenses rose faster
than our rate of growth as a result of serving an ever growing number
of delivery points, an additional 1.6 million new delivery addresses
each year, combined with hikes in employee salaries, energy costs and
increases in health benefit costs.
The fiscal year 2002 plan envisioned more of the same with a
planned loss of $1.35 billion despite having just raised rates earlier
this year. The potential for a $2.5 billion loss in fiscal year 2003
compelled the Board of Governors of the Postal Service to vote for a
rate case filing with the Postal Rate Commission on September 10th this
year for implementation of new rates in the fall of next year, at the
earliest.
Terrorism has exacerbated this bleak financial picture. The Nation
has been subjected to two distinct attacks--the September 11 terror
attack and the subsequent anthrax attacks using the mail. Both were
intended to kill and frighten Americans. The Postal Service has been
the victim of both attacks. Clearly, many Americans were concerned
about what lay ahead in the future and the threat of anthrax in their
mail. These concerns were reflected in significant losses in volume and
revenue in September and October. These months mark the start of the
holiday mailing season, our busiest and most important time of the
year.
During this season we generate a financial surplus which carries us
through lower volume and revenue periods in the summer months.
While we are just getting our hands around the short-term and long-
term financial impact of the attacks, let me assure you that they are
enormous.
The financial impact falls into two categories. The first are costs
directly related to the September 11 and anthrax attacks. The second
category relates to the business impact of these incidents.
In the category of direct impact of the terrorist attacks, the
Postal Service has and will incur costs for:
--Damage to facilities and equipment in New York City
--Disruption of facility operations and associated mail handling
costs
--Medical testing and emergency treatment of employees exposed to
anthrax
--Protective equipment for employees
--Environmental testing and where necessary, remediation of postal
facilities
--Communication and education of employees and customers
--Implementation of new security procedures
--Detection technology -Cleaning and filtration systems, and
--Equipment to sanitize mail.
The most significant of these expenses will be the purchase of
equipment to sanitize mail and the costs associated with integrating
this equipment into current operating systems. Three criteria have been
established for selection of the appropriate technology for use
nationally.
First, the technology must be capable of eliminating bio-chemical
materials in the mail. Second, the technology must be compatible with
postal operations. It should enable us to treat the mail and maintain
current service levels. And finally, it should be the least costly,
most effective technology when considering both initial purchase cost
and ongoing operating cost. A risk assessment is underway to determine
the location and amount of equipment to be purchased.
With the assistance of Dr. John Marburger, director of the
President's Office of Science and Technology, we have been able to
assemble experts from various Federal agencies, as well as research
facilities throughout the United States. They have helped us to
identify the available technologies compatible with our needs. Over the
coming months we will be evaluating and testing these options. In the
interim, we will use readily available technology and lease private
sector facilities where there is existing effective equipment.
President Bush has made $175 million available to the Postal
Service from monies authorized by Congress for homeland security. We
are using these monies to defray costs in the short run, including the
initial purchase of sanitizing equipment.
Based on current information, we estimate these costs of dealing
with homeland security to be $3 to $4 billion. We will refine these
estimates as we aggressively pursue our review of the technology and
the modifications we have to make to our systems.
We are working on the premise that the leaders of the Nation want
to ensure that all of the nation's mail system is protected from this
kind of terrorist threat in the future.
We are proceeding with our plans and actions on this basis. While
we need some funding soon to make this happen, just as important is the
commitment to meet this challenge with full funding.
As I have noted, the direct costs of responding to these terror
attacks is only one of two types of financial consequences we are
facing. The second is the large- and negative-impact on our business.
This is reflected in significant declines in mail volume and revenue
that are related to and impacted by the terrorist acts.
During September and October, mail volume was more than 2 billion
pieces less than last year. Even with postage rates 6 percent higher,
total revenues were below last year and $634 million below what had
been anticipated. Operationally, we have trimmed our costs by more than
$200 million beyond reductions we had already planned.
The bottom line for September and October put us $418 million below
where we should have been, which means we are already facing a $1.8
billion deficit this fiscal year versus the $1.35 billion we had
forecast last summer.
With concerns about the mail system driving individuals and
businesses to consider alternatives, we believe this could effect our
bottom line by $2 billion this fiscal year. However, it will take a
number of months to assess the full impact on the Postal Service.
Mr. Chairman, the financial impacts I have described are the
consequences of terror attacks on the Nation. They should be considered
costs of homeland security. Despite the leadership and support from our
customers, employees, unions, management associations, Health and Human
Services' Secretary Thompson, and Governor Ridge, the Postal Service
requires financial help if we are to rebuild faith in the integrity of
what's in the mail and maintain the level of service we have provided
over the years.
From those small businesses who depend on the daily mail to
citizens who save money by receiving prescriptions by mail, to local
newspapers and churches who rely on the local post office to deliver,
postal customers should not be burdened by extra costs of terrorism
through the price of postage.
This could quickly threaten the foundation of a universal postal
system serving all Americans.
We are doing everything to reduce our expenses by streamlining
operations and administrative costs. We are also moving forward to do
everything we can to keep the mail safe. Both are imperative if we are
to continue to maintain the levels of trust and confidence necessary to
protect the viability of our national postal system.
We will deliver on this expectation. We will do everything possible
to protect the lives and safety of our employees and customers. And we
will keep the mail moving. This is vital to the Nation, its economy,
and the men or women who work in the entire mailing industry that
represents 9 million jobs and fuels 8 percent of the country's gross
domestic product.
We need your help, and I look forward to working with the
Committee. Thank you very much. We will be pleased to answer any
questions.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Potter, thank you very much.
About 2 weeks ago I received a call from a county sheriff
in North Dakota. A constituent of mine in North Dakota had
received a letter from me that apparently my office had mailed
just prior to the anthrax letter coming to the Hart Building,
probably October 10th or 12th we had put a letter in the mail
in response to a constituent. The letter found its way to
southeastern North Dakota, and the recipient of the letter then
called the county sheriff to ask if he could check to see if it
was safe to open mail from Senator Dorgan.
People are worried all across the country about mail, not
just mail that comes from Capitol Hill, but mail that comes
from everywhere. We face a circumstance where some sick,
twisted minds have decided to use the U.S. mail system to
deliver terror, and that has changed a lot of things.
Now you have suggested to us some significant consequences
for the postal system. We are obviously going to need much more
detail. I understand you do not have all of the details today,
but I want to ask some questions about that. We need to
understand much more about the timing of the issues you have
raised with respect to funding needs.
My understanding is the President has requested approval
for the release of $175 million from the $10 billion emergency
supplemental funds that are subject to 15-day notification.
Apparently, these funds are for the Postal Service to purchase
initial irradiation and remediation equipment, 4.8 million
respirator masks, 88 million pair of plastic gloves for its
800,000 employees. Also, that money would be used to cover the
medication costs for its employees, as well as a national
communications effort to inform the public about the safety of
the mail.
That $175 million will be available to you soon, I expect,
and I assume, based on your testimony, that will be used
rapidly and is not part of what you are now addressing in your
testimony today; is that correct?
Mail Sanitization Technology
Mr. Potter. That is correct. Yes, we will use that money
rapidly. We have spent a considerable amount of that $175
million already.
Senator Dorgan. Let me address the question of treating the
mail, so that those who receive the mail do not have to worry
that there is some microbe or some spore or bacteria in it that
is harmful to them. Those of us who are refugees from the Hart
Building know that the best people in the country who think
about this have not yet exactly concluded how they would deal
with the spores that exist in the Hart Building.
How confident are you that the technology exists and that
the technology will be decided upon will give you and the
American people an assurance that we have treated this mail in
a manner that makes it safe?
Mr. Potter. Obviously, we will conduct extensive tests of
this equipment to assure that it works. Today we are treating
mail from the Washington, D.C., area in Lima, Ohio, and we have
conducted extensive tests on that mail to make sure that any
bioagents that are in the mail are eliminated. I would like to
turn to Tom Day, who can probably give a lot more detail about
how that is being done.
Mr. Day. Senator, we have worked with Dr. John Marburger,
who has been very gracious in assembling the group of experts
we need to appropriately assess the technology and then make
sure we are using it in the right way and then getting the
appropriate results.
The facility in Ohio has been tested extensively, not just
theoretically as to what should happen, but we've actually run
tests, and it was not just the Postal Service. We have gotten
assistance from the Department of Energy, the EPA, and the Food
and Drug Administration. One particular part of the Department
of Defense that has done extensive research with this is the
Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute. We have relied
greatly upon them as well.
We did extensive testing in Ohio, not only to assure that
it had the right dose, the right level of energy to kill the
anthrax spores, but we also ran biosimulants through an
environment with mail, in with the mail that we are processing,
and we had a 100-percent kill rate. No spores grew at all from
that biosimulant. So we are at the highest possible level of
confidence from a broad group of experts that this technology
indeed works and is very reliable.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Day, when fully implemented, is it your
intention to deal with all of the mail and treat all of the
mail in this country?
Mr. Day. Our concept, as we look at it now, is that we
would capture mail at origin. Our concern is, as we saw with
this threat, mail that you are not sure who sent it. It is
anonymous, to some extent.
There are other processes that we have used for many years
to accept mail in bulk quantity from known mailers. The machine
would be capable of handling that, the technology would, but
our thought is we need to concentrate on the threat. So we
would scope out a system that handles what we believe will be
the threat, but it is capable of doing more if it was needed.
Senator Dorgan. Would the Postal Service be considering
using one technology or multiple technologies?
Mr. Day. We have kept open, very much open, the option on
technology. I think, as has been widely reported, we are using
the electronic beam technology in Ohio. We have another
facility under contract now in New York that has both
electronic beam and X-ray technology. We will use both of
those, and we are also looking at some gaseous treatments.
Again, using Dr. Marburger as a great resource, we are
pulling together the experts. If there are ways to effectively
sanitize mail, we will keep all of those options open.
Senator Dorgan. My understanding is that the use of
chlorine dioxide, once dissipated, leaves a powdery white
substance on whatever it has sanitized; is that the case?
Mr. Day. Senator, I would have to check on that. We have
had some discussion, quite a bit of discussion, actually, about
chlorine dioxide. I was not aware that there would be a white
powdery substance. That is not my understanding, but I could
check into that.
Senator Dorgan. Just a quick question. I will come back and
ask my questions at the end. I have more questions. But some
would say, if you have problems, and you do, how about just
increasing Postal rates? I mean, all of our colleagues will get
questions like that from constituents. What about just
increasing postage rates to cover the costs?
Mr. Potter. Obviously, that was a consideration that we
had, but in light of the fact that we had just raised rates
last year, that we had filed for a rate increase at the end of
September this year, and we understand that it has put a
tremendous burden on the ratepayer. So our concern is that
pushing or adding these costs on to the ratepayers will do some
significant damage to the economy in the short run, given the
pressure that everybody is under, and it may do some serious
damage to the Postal Service in the long run.
So our concern was that we not increase the burden on the
ratepayer such that we make the long-term viability of the
Postal Service something less than it already is.
Senator Dorgan. Is it the case in a new age of technology,
where people use instant messaging and e-mails, that this
anthrax attack, coming at a time when you have already seen
decreased use of the mail and coming at a time with a soft
economy perhaps persuading people to use the mail less, that
there has been permanent damage done to the Postal Service and
that you may not recover, in the long term, the load that you
were accustomed to and that produced the revenue that you were
accustomed to?
Mr. Potter. Well, certainly that is a fear of ours, but
only time will tell. Our hope is that the mail would bounce
back, but certainly there are alternatives to the mail and each
and every American will make those decisions based on their own
needs, and businesses will make decisions regarding that.
We do not want to encourage them to leave the mail, and we
would love for everyone to mail a lot of Christmas cards this
year because now, more than ever, I think we need to stay in
touch with one another. But, certainly, that is a fear that we
have.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Potter, I will ask you specific
questions about the specific amounts of money you mentioned in
your testimony at the conclusion of my colleagues' questions.
Senator Campbell?
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I assume you are
going to do this in rounds.
Senator Dorgan. Yes.
Senator Campbell. Then I will save a few of my questions if
you are going to do a second round.
Since you did talk somewhat about the apparatus for
sanitizing the mail, and I understood you to say that point of
origin is where you are going to try to install these, correct?
Mr. Potter. Yes. Yes, Senator.
Senator Campbell. What is the cost of one of these machines
that I read about in the newspapers that you are using now in
some of the bigger distribution centers?
Mr. Potter. Currently, we do not have sanitizing equipment
in our centers.
Senator Campbell. You do not have any? I thought there was
some being installed.
Mr. Potter. We did procure eight machines at a cost of
about $5 million per machine, but we are not committed to that
technology as the production technology.
Senator Campbell. With 38,000 Post Offices, we probably are
not going to put one in every Post Office.
Mr. Potter. No, we are not, sir.
Senator Campbell. There must be, as you mentioned, avenues
for looking at alternative methods. Is it true that a
microwave, if you leave an envelope with some bio chemical in
it long enough will actually do that too? Of course, that is
after you have touched, but I mean in theory would a microwave
kill those spores and the things that you are worried about?
Mr. Potter. The scientists tell me that that is not the
case.
Senator Campbell. You say that that is not the case.
Senator Mikulski. You mean like microwave at your home?
Senator Campbell. It seems like I heard that or read that.
Senator Mikulski. Yes, I have read that.
Senator Campbell. But that is not true, he is saying.
Mr. Potter. There is another one out saying that you should
iron your mail. But, again, scientists tell me that is not the
case.
Senator Campbell. I cannot even iron my shirts.
The President recently asked all citizens to try to help in
any capacity that they could, and I am sure that the other
people on this dias are getting the same kind of response we
are getting, and that is everybody with a plan or a gizmo wants
to notify the Postal Service how it would fix all of your
problems. I am sure some of them are very well-meaning and some
of them just want to sell gizmos, I guess.
I received got a letter from a man. I read the letter, and
it sounded very good to me. I am not a technical person, but
the apparatus that he developed, he is sure that it is
inexpensive, and easy to use and could be put in all Post
Offices. I noted with interest, though, he said he has written
to you several times and never received an answer. That is not
surprising. The mail is not running very efficiently now.
I want to know if you are looking at all of those different
alternatives, and who is actually doing the testing and the
looking for you?
Mr. Potter. Well, we are looking at all alternatives. Some
are redundant, some are not effective, for example, ultraviolet
light was something that initially we started to take a look
at. When we found out that it only might be effective on
surface spores, as opposed to penetrating an envelope, we
obviously looked in other directions.
Tom Day is coordinating this effort. I think he is one of
the most popular men in America right now in that industry, and
if you would like, I will ask him to comment some more.
Senator Campbell. We are going to build a statue for him.
Mr. Day. I hope not, Senator.
What we have done, in fact, I was just discussing this
morning on how do we set up the process to review this because
we have been swamped, through the mail, and, actually, it is
getting through quite effectively. I have gotten e-mails and
then just telephone calls. We are trying to put all of this
together.
I think there is a lot of well-meaning intent out there.
What has happened is people do not necessarily understand the
application for which we need it. And so there are people with
ideas on how you kill an anthrax spore or any type of
biohazard. They are not at all familiar with the type of
process that we need to incorporate it into. As I have gotten
into discussions with some of these people, as you describe the
environment we need to bring it into to effectively kill
anthrax, they then come to understand the difficulties we face.
So we are sorting through the technology. In fact, what I
went over this morning with my staff is we need to categorize
this, and we owe these people a response. So there are some
that we have quickly determined are not effective technologies.
We will respond to them and let them know it. There are some
that pose some interest, and we need to do further exploration.
We will respond as such. And then, finally, there are ones that
have the appropriate technology, but as Mr. Potter has already
indicated, some of it is redundant, things we already have
pursued.
So we will get those answers back to those people.
Senator Campbell. My own hope is that you will eventually
have some kind of standard procedure. I think one of the
problems we are facing with the airline security now is that in
one airport you go through, they take away your nail clippers,
and then you go through another, and guns have gone through
without any observation. I would hope that people in the small
towns, like where I come from and where Senator Dorgan comes
from, have the same kind of faith in being secure that a person
in the big cities would have when we get this apparatus set up.
Let me just say one thing, Mr. Chairman, before I yield the
floor, and that is, we are going to deal with two issues here.
Obviously, one is going to be loss to revenue which we probably
are not going to cover, as you probably know. I do not know
what you are going to do about that. You may have to have
another raise in the Postal Service rates, and the other one is
going to be security. I know some of us are already in
disagreement with the President about how much more we have to
add to a supplemental.
So I just wanted to tell you, from my standpoint, I am
certainly going to do the best I can to help you, but I have
been around here long enough to know that supplementals are
like flypaper--the longer they hang out there, the more things
seem to stick to them. After a while, you have got all kinds of
things that are sometimes described as pork that are stuck in
those packages, and you end up with just a huge mess to try to
address a much smaller problem. I hope we are going to be able
to get through that in a good fashion without it deteriorating
into a great big mess or, worse yet, into some kind of a
partisan thing.
I read, with interest, Roll Call this morning about how a
veto threat may divide the Hill and some are already seeing it
as a campaign issue. My God, if there was ever a time we ought
to get away from the partisanship and the campaign issues it
ought to be now in trying to protect American people. I just
wanted to say that for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Potter. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Mikulski?
Senator Mikulski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Potter, I think you are the right guy for the right
time. I really am impressed, as I look at your biography and
know that you have come up through the ranks, you have got
graduate degrees from MIT in management, you know this capital
region well, and you have won awards for your labor management
relationships. And if ever there is a time where we need
excellent labor management relationships and a trust by the
workers with the boss, it is really now. So we are pleased that
you are on the job.
Let me go to the issues related to worker safety. Because
if the workers are not safe and the facilities that they work
in are not safe, then the mail is not going to be safe. Let me
go then to the Brentwood issue and also the fact that you have
turned to Dr. Marburger, the President's Science and Technology
Adviser to help you.
Here is my question: First, why did you turn to him and not
EPA? We are using EPA. Did you know who to turn to for the
evaluation of the technology for worker safety, facility
safety, and mail safety?
Mr. Potter. We turned to Governor Ridge for support. As you
know, the Postal Service is quasi-Government, so we do not
have, and have not had, the type of relationships with the rest
of the Federal Government that an agency would have. So we had
to learn how the organization worked.
So we worked through Governor Ridge's office to contact all
of those agencies. We have the Army Corps of Engineers, EPA,
anybody who could help us we reached out to. Dr. Marburger,
because of his position, was a natural person to coordinate
that effort.
Senator Mikulski. So was it Governor Ridge who told you to
go to Dr. Marburger?
Mr. Potter. It was Governor Ridge who suggested that we
bring the right people together. I do not know who in the
organization suggested specifically Dr. Marburger.
Senator Mikulski. Mr. Chairman, this is exactly my point,
and I am a greater admirer of Governor Ridge and what he is
trying to do, but we are all going into different directions.
We are going to EPA, and then EPA is the coordinator of the
coordinators. I understand they have got a trailer at Brentwood
where they are doing this experimentation on what works. So we
are meeting with EPA Administrator Whitman. Then, after they
tell us it was okay to gas the Hart Building, then they alter
their plans and say we should not fumigate, we should go to
another procedure.
I am not faulting EPA, what I am faulting for is the mess
we have on our hands about who do we turn to and who is in
charge of giving us the best information on decontamination.
And right now I am looking for the best information on the
decontamination for Brentwood, as we look for it here.
Now I have no idea why we are not turning to Dr. Marburger
or why you did not use it this way. But you went one track; we
went another track. I am pleased that--I am not being
critical--I am pleased that Dr. Marburger is doing that for
you, but that is my whole point. There is nobody in charge.
There is no clarity. There is no consistency. There is no
uniformity as we look to decontaminate any facility. So we are
kind of bumping into each other with that.
I look forward to hearing how you are going to
decontaminate Brentwood. I think one of the most important
parts of your testimony is to say that you want to assess the
use of beam irradiation and other techniques on how to deal
with this, but I do not want workers to go into Brentwood, any
more than I want to go into the Hart Building, until we really
know that the facilities are safe not only from anthrax, but
the consequences of decontamination. I know you are worried
about that too.
So how do you feel that it is going? Mr. Day has talked
about the process, but who is in charge of the process? Is it
Dr. Marburger? Is he doing the evaluation of the technologies
or did he kind of put a group together and you are on your own?
Mr. Potter. They are working very closely with us on the
testing. We are using Government facilities to evaluate these
tests. I will let Tom talk, but before I do----
Senator Mikulski. But who is in charge?
Mr. Day. Senator, what Dr. Marburger does, and it is a
unique position, the Office of Science and Technology Policy,
he has the ability to pull together the appropriate experts.
Now, depending upon the technology, you find there are
different groups of experts. So, as we have sought to use
irradiation to decontaminate mail, there is a set of experts
that we pulled together. We are also looking at chlorine
dioxide not only for building contamination, but the mail.
Ultimately, what it comes down to, Dr. Marburger pulls
people together, he has advice and tries to craft policy, but
it does come down to the Agency, as he gets them connected with
the appropriate experts, to make----
Senator Mikulski. Is he in charge of the evaluation of
these different technologies?
Mr. Day. I do not know that you can say that ``in charge''
is the right terminology. He is pulling people together to try
to find the right group of experts to----
Senator Mikulski. This is a new name, I know, to this--it
is not a new name about Dr. Marburger. His office is in my
appropriations, and we admire him.
They are telling him I have one minute left, but can you
see where I am heading with this?
Mr. Day. Senator, I see where you are going, and I want to
give full credit to Dr. Marburger for the efforts he has made
over the last couple of weeks. What we have done in polling the
appropriate experts, and understand that it is experts that
have done different types of research, and you are trying to
blend it together to face an entirely new situation, we have
erred on the side of caution to be absolutely sure that what we
say we are doing actually will be done. When we say we sanitize
the mail, we are sure, and it is safe for people to handle. So
we are erring on the side of caution, and collectively, as a
group of experts, and with the Agency, in this case the Postal
Service's knowledge of the operation to say, yes, this will
work.
Senator Mikulski. My time has expired. Let me say one thing
in conclusion.
First of all, I think you have got a process underway, but
you should know the way I feel. I really was very reluctant to
go back into Hart Building over this gas, chlorine dioxide. It
has never been tried in a civilian facility. I was worried
about me and I was worried about Brentwood. What was I worried
about? The consequences of the decontamination. I was sure that
they were going to kill anthrax, but I did not know if when
killing anthrax, they would set me up for other respiratory and
other consequences. This is what we need to be standing sentry
over. I really want to work with you. We have bipartisan
support here.
Last, but not at all least, I would also urge you to bring
into your process, through Dr. Marburger, the retired people at
Fort Detrick, the retired workers at Fort Detrick who worked on
anthrax decontamination, and I am going to give you an article
from the Baltimore Sun about who they are.
Mr. Potter. Great.
Senator Mikulski. But these were the guys who worked with
it. But, again, God bless you, and we look forward to working
with you.
Mr. Potter. I appreciate your support, Senator.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Reed?
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Potter, thank you for your testimony today, you and
your colleagues. It is good to see Tom Day here, formerly from
the Providence Post Office.
You have several serious challenges. One is to protect the
health of your workers and also to, once again, inspire
confidence in the mails. Sanitizing the mails is one approach,
but even if that works extremely well, are you still
contemplating having a regular testing of Postal facilities on
an ongoing basis, not just for anthrax, but for other
occupational problems?
Mr. Potter. Yes. One of the things I listed was the
placement of detection equipment throughout our facilities. We
are taking a number of steps and have taken a number of steps
to reduce any risk from anthrax or dust, and one of the things
that we are going to do is put detection equipment throughout
our system. We are modifying our operations to eliminate dust
in the air. At our machines, we are going to have vacuums. We
are going to create down-drafts on machines. We have changed a
lot of our cleaning agents so that if there is an incident of
anthrax, it will be cleaned in the normal process of doing
business.
So we are looking at everything, and we would like to be a
model for the rest of America, when all is said and done.
Senator Reed. Now your focus is, as it should be at this
point, on anthrax, but I presume that you are also obviously
interested in other occupational hazards that are in the
workplace in the Postal offices. Are you planning more
generally than just counteracting anthrax?
Mr. Potter. The type of equipment we are talking about will
take care of any biochemical agents. As I said, we are looking
at the environment within the Postal Service and making
modifications as we speak to assure that our employees are not
subjected to threats in the mail.
We had just completed this past summer a review of our
hazardous material instructions and had just gone through a
retraining of our employees and our safety teams around
America. So this is something we give constant attention to,
have constant concern about, and certainly, as we go through
this process, we are looking at anything that is a threat to
our employees.
Senator Reed. At the conclusion of your proposed plans,
will you have tested all of the Postal facilities in the United
States and installed detection devices in every facility?
Mr. Potter. We are in the process of testing all of the
main processing plants throughout America. Over 250 facilities
will be tested, not for any other reason than just as a
precaution. We are going to test them specifically for anthrax.
We have no plan right now to test all 40,000 locations that
we have. However, if, in these hub facilities, because all of
the mail comes into our plants and then moves out from those
plants to Post Offices that you are familiar with, the stations
and the branches, if we detect a problem there, then we would
proceed to test other facilities.
Senator Reed. Now my question follows on the comments that
Senator Mikulski made. Is this plan to test based upon advice
from the CDC, from experts in the field or this simply is kind
of what your gut tells you to do right now?
Mr. Potter. Every day at 10 o'clock--in fact, I am missing
the meeting today--we meet with the leadership from our unions
and management associations to discuss all of the issues around
what we are dealing with. We are talking about protocol, about
closing facilities, and they are concerned obviously for their
membership. And they wanted to take, and suggested that we
take, some precautionary measures. One measure that they
suggested, not only to test for anthrax, but just to reassure
those people in areas that are not affected or have not been
affected that their facilities are safe, they suggested that we
go beyond the East Coast and those where we have problems, but
look at the entire country, again, as a precautionary measure,
as a means of reassuring our employees that they are in a safe
workplace.
Senator Reed. I understand that, but my question, getting
back to it, goes to the level of ongoing scientific and
technical advice you are getting now by the experts--
presumably, CDC, Public Health Service--and looking ahead to
the extent that you are going to internalize, as an ongoing
process, this type of collaboration with these other agencies
because we all hope and pray that this is the only incident of
this kind, but if it happens in the future, I do not think
anyone here wants you to go back to square one and start
coordinating again. Can you give us an idea?
Mr. Potter. We are very much up the learning curve. All
that we have learned in the Florida, New Jersey, Washington,
D.C., and New York areas, that is shared throughout the
country.
Again, we are building protocol on what should occur if and
when anthrax appears either in somebody's office or at
somebody's home. We have an immediate procedure so that we can
back up, and we now know that, you know, if there is a threat,
in terms of where that mail moved through the system.
We have gone through a systematic approach of analyzing
those pieces, determining what information on those pieces is
available to us so that we can plot the path of the mail and
take the appropriate measures, in terms of closing facilities,
making sure employees are appropriately medically treated, and
so we have a game plan around that, and we are ready to go with
that game plan. We are all praying, though, that October 9th
was the last anthrax letter that we will see.
Senator Reed. So do I. Thank you, very much, Mr. Potter.
Senator Dorgan. Senator DeWine.
Senator DeWine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Postmaster Potter, let me again wish you well. We
appreciate your leadership. We know you have a very tough and
difficult job. I appreciate the comments that the panel has
made in regard to how effective the procedure will be and is at
Lima, the Titan procedure. Though, for the record, I would like
to get a couple of things clarified, if I could. I would like
for you to make some comment on this.
There was an article in the Chicago Tribune, a person by
the name of Ashkoff Chopra, a professor of microbiology and
immunology at the University of Texas, was quoted as saying
that Sure-Beam--and this is Titan's--technique for cleaning the
mail in Lima may kill only 50 to 60 percent of the spores. Any
comment about that?
Mr. Potter. Well, again, we had and conducted an extensive
test, and it did kill 100 percent of the spores that we put in
to be tested.
Senator DeWine. This was not anthrax, of course, though?
Mr. Potter. No, it killed everything. It killed any living
organism. I will let Tom----
Senator DeWine. Excuse me. But that was irrespective of the
package, size of the package, what was in the package, the
configuration of the package, et cetera?
Mr. Day. Senator, I do not want to get too specific on----
Senator DeWine. We do not want you to get too specific.
Mr. Day. Okay. I would just say that I think--and I am not
aware of the article you are referencing or the doctor--the
person who is speaking may have referenced food irradiation
technology and the dosing levels used there. What they may be
unaware of is what we are doing in Ohio and exactly the level
of irradiation being applied. Again, I can provide you a copy
of the test documents. We clearly have shown it to be
effective.
Senator DeWine. Well, I would like that. I would appreciate
that very much. And, I would just ask you to at least check the
article and get your comments on that.
When I first contacted your office, I was told about the
study that was conducted by your office. And, this actually was
a--we found out it was a joint study conducted by the Titan
Corporation, itself, in partnership with the University of
North Carolina, at the AFRI facility.
According to AFRI, multiple errors remained in the draft
version, and AFRI will not approve the study until corrections
are made. Furthermore, despite statements by Titan and your
office, the participants in the study from AFRI and the
University of North Carolina informed my staff that they did
not test the effectiveness of electronic-beam radiation on
actual contaminated mail.
Now, maybe you are well beyond that, but when I contacted
your office, they said and said, ``Oh, no. This test shows that
this can be done on mail.'' And, when we got into it and we
looked at what the Government said, the Government comes back
and says, ``No, we did not test mail, and in fact the study is
not complete. There were some errors in the study and we have
not signed off on the final draft.'' So, I just want to make
sure, that is not what we are relying on for this. Is that
correct?
Mr. Potter. Absolutely not. We were concerned----
Senator DeWine. Because that is--excuse me--but that is
what your office told me when we called.
Mr. Potter. Right. We had some concerns about some initial
studies. That is why the movement of mail to Lima did not move
out as quickly as it did, because we wanted to make sure that
that technology worked. So we did put biochemical agents in the
mail. They were not anthrax. And we actually tested the
equipment. We also have quality control checks being placed on
this mail. They put a meter into trays of mail to determine
whether or not sufficient energy hits the center of the mail
that is being treated.
Senator DeWine. Good.
Mr. Potter. So we have done actual tests on mail. We have
the results of those tests, and we have an ongoing quality
effort to assure that what we treat is successfully treated.
Senator DeWine. And you are convinced that even though you
did not use anthrax, what you did use is, from a scientific
point of view, is the equivalent in the sense of eradication,
testing the eradication?
Mr. Day. Yes, Senator.
Senator DeWine. That is fine. I see my time is almost up.
And, I appreciate it. This does in fact clarify this.
One final question. Tell me about the contract with Titan,
because when I contacted Titan, they could give me a little
information, but they said, ``We really cannot tell you much
because we have a nondisclosure contract,'' which I found,
quite candidly, to be rather strange, that the Post Office
would enter into a contract and Titan could not tell me much
about it, could not tell the public much about it because you
had insisted that they had a nondisclosure statement.
Mr. Potter. Well, we were concerned that people might
assume that that was the technology of choice as we described
earlier. It is certainly technology that we can get off the
shelf, but not necessarily technology of choice.
Senator DeWine. And, I appreciate that. I understand that.
What is the contract then? Just briefly as my time is up.
Mr. Day. Senator, with Titan we have done two basic things.
First we have brought under contract the processing capability
of their facility in Ohio. We have full capacity, 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week.
Senator DeWine. You bought the operation?
Mr. Day. We bought the whole thing for 6 months.
In addition, we bought available technology systems that
they could sell to us, eight systems that we are deploying. We
are looking at a location here in the D.C. Metropolitan area.
We are also looking to get a site in the New York/New Jersey
Metropolitan area.
Senator DeWine. That was in the statement you gave us
earlier.
Mr. Day. Yes, it is.
Senator DeWine. And, what is the figure for the 6 months in
Lima?
Mr. Day. I believe it is $2.4 million.
Mr. Potter. I will provide it for the record.
Senator DeWine. Yes. If it is any different than that, just
let us know. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Byrd?
Senator Byrd. Mr. Chairman, I understand that my colleague,
Senator Stevens, has another engagement. At this point I would
be happy to have him go ahead of me if he wishes.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Senator. I canceled
that to stay here and I will be here till 11:30. Thank you.
Senator Byrd. All right. Mr. Postmaster General, we laugh
about it here, ironing your mail like my wife used to iron my
shirts--I have about worn them all out by now--spraying your
mail with Lysol as a disinfectant, putting your mail in a
microwave. Why are the American people doing these things? Why
are they asking these questions? Because there is an atmosphere
of concern and fear that permeates this country.
You are here today to ask the Congress for money. Cicero
said, ``There is no fortress that money cannot take.'' You are
up against a very impregnable fortress in dealing with this
concern that permeates the country.
That is our business, is to help you at this point. Now,
you have asked for--you have estimated your cost to be $3 to $4
billion, and you have listed certain major elements, one of
which, and I see eight items on that list shown in your speech,
purchase of equipment to sanitize mail entering our system.
That is what we have been talking about mainly here. You have
been allocated $175 million to date. How much of that has been
spent? You said a lot of it had been spent already. How much of
it has been spent?
Mr. Potter. $100 million of the $175 million was identified
for sanitizing equipment. We have spent some $40 million of
that amount. The monies for gloves, medication, et cetera, I
think the last tally we had was somewhere in the neighborhood
of $60 million has already been spent.
Senator Byrd. All right. Now, you mention costs to be $3 to
$4 billion, and I take it that this purchase of equipment to
sanitize mail entering your system is probably going to
constitute the major portion of that overall cost. We have
already passed our bill dealing with the Postal Service. The
last train out of the station is the Defense appropriations
bill. Of course, there is that appropriation that we have
already agreed upon, the $40 billion appropriation, about $30
billion of that which is, I think, possibly a way to help fund
this need.
When you talk about $3 to $4 billion, over what period of
time are you contemplating spending $3 to $4 billion, if
Congress appropriates?
Mr. Potter. Senator, I hope to spend it as quickly as
possible, but in reality, it is going to take several years to
spend that type of money.
Senator Byrd. When you say ``several years'' what are you
talking about, 2 years?
Mr. Potter. Two, maybe three. It is all going to be a
function of the type of technology that we choose, Senator, and
the ability of those that provide it to manufacture the numbers
of equipment that we need. So I wish I could be more specific,
Senator, but until we have the technology selected and until we
understand the production capability of those who would provide
it, I cannot give you a better answer.
Senator Byrd. All right. As I understand it, the x-ray
irradiation and the electronic beam irradiation are the two--or
one of those two that you have most confidence in--and then
there is the chlorine dioxide, which I understand you are still
testing.
Mr. Potter. Right.
Senator Byrd. Well, now, of those three which is the most
sure, which would cost the most, which would cost the least,
and which can be put into place the earliest?
Mr. Potter. The one we are most sure about right now is
electron-beam x-ray. It is the most expensive technology, but
it can be made, and it would be compatible with our operations
as I described earlier, allow us to maintain current service
levels.
Senator Byrd. I am reading the words. Electronic-beam
irradiation, x-ray irradiation. Is that one or two items?
Mr. Potter. There are two different technologies, Senator.
One is electron beam and the other is electron-beam radiation.
And the electron beam radiation is the better technology. It is
more compatible. It is more productive, allow us to again meet
current service standards.
Senator Byrd. What would that cost as compared with the
chlorine dioxide?
Mr. Potter. My estimate is about twice as much, but I will
turn it to Tom Day, if I could.
Mr. Day. Senator, let me just clarify. On the x-ray,
typically what an x-ray technology is----
Senator Byrd. You do not need to be too specific along that
line. I am interested in the dollar figure, and that is why you
are here.
Mr. Day. Okay. Either electronic beam or the x-ray version,
we do not have specific figures, but I would tell you on order
of magnitude that if--and I emphasize if chlorine dioxide were
to be effective on the treatment of mail, and we do not know
that now, that is why we are still testing.
Senator Byrd. All right.
Mr. Day. If it were to be effective, it would be at
substantially lower cost than either electronic beam or x-ray.
Senator Byrd. When do you think, when will you know?
Mr. Day. I am working with several companies right now to
build prototypes to put into a live mail environment or at
least--let me rephrase that--use live mail as a test means,
again, working with the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research
Institute to test the biosimulants, so as to get past theory,
and test that this technology really works. I am moving forward
with that over the next couple of weeks to get at least
preliminary results to decide is this worth pursuing or are we
simply not getting the effectiveness that is necessary?
Senator Byrd. How lengthy is the period of time when you
will know that, 6 months?
Mr. Day. On the negative side, I think in a matter of weeks
we could know that it may not work, and I do not mean to be
pessimistic, but we would know that quicker. If we get
favorable results, then we need some very strict tests and
research protocol that I think collectively the scientific
community could say reliably to the American public, that, yes,
this is a safe technology that truly does the job. That could
take months.
Senator Byrd. 6 months?
Mr. Day. I think we could get an answer in 6 months.
Senator Byrd. It is conceivable then, you do not want to
wait 6 months. You need to be doing something, I assume, to
deal with this. The something that you could do within that
period would be perhaps what you are doing, the installation of
the electronic beam irradiation technology medium, whatever
that is. Is that right?
Mr. Day. Yes, sir.
Senator Byrd. That would be something.
Mr. Day. In a short term, that is why we have contracted
for irradiation and gotten some systems because we do know at
this point that that technology works.
Senator Byrd. Yes. Now, the $3 to $4 billion figure, I
assume that is contemplating the use of the more expensive
approach; is that a fair assumption?
Mr. Day. Yes, Senator.
Senator Byrd. Now, I believe you said it would take 2 years
probably, or 3, to spend the $3 to $4 billion. Conceivably, you
are going to have a mixed approach, at least in the beginning,
and you may discard the chlorine dioxide approach all together,
you may at some point depending upon your tests. How much of
this $3 to $4 billion are you asking for, Mr. Postmaster
General, now? Let us say we have the last train out of the
station. We have two trains here. We have the $40 billion train
that we have already agreed upon, and perhaps at least the
initial cost, in addition to the $175 million that you have
already gotten from that approach. If we meet the total need,
if we would say this money, okay, you are going to get your $3
to $4 billion. Now, how much of that do you need Congress to
give or to allocate in the next 6 months?
Mr. Potter. In the next 6 months? There are a number of
things that are in there that we are going to have to have and
not just electron beam. We are changing all of our vacuum
cleaning systems to go to HEPA vacs, so that we do not spread
dust. We are modifying our ventilation systems in our
facilities so that if a spore were to become airborne, it would
be captured by that system. So in the next 6 months I think we
are talking on the order of $750 to a billion. Again, we will
provide more detail for the Committee as we plow through the
numbers, but we are working feverishly to identify suppliers,
and identify specific costs. So, again, I hesitate to be so
general about it, but you can understand, this is a work in
progress.
Senator Byrd. Yes. You have been very helpful. If I have
further questions, I will await Senator Stevens and the others.
I will await the next round. Thank you very much.
Mr. Potter. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. Senator Stevens, could I ask where this
Army Radiology--is this in Aberdeen or is it Fort Detrick?
Mr. Day. Senator, it is in Maryland. It is in Bethesda.
Financial Consequences of Terrorists Attacks
Senator Dorgan. Senator Stevens.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want
to follow up for the same purpose as Senator Byrd. We have to
figure out what kind of freight goes on that train as it leaves
the station, and in which car we put the money for your
request. We have a defense bill, and we have a bill to deal
with the $20 billion that is available to the President. We
have got a request for allocation of that money completely, and
we have the possibility of adding emergency money, which in the
last couple of days has been very seriously challenged, and I
seriously question whether we are going to be able to add any
emergency money. So we are going to have to figure out what of
the money that you need must be made available to you before,
say, May of next year at the earliest. I assume we will
probably get a supplemental out by May to June next year, and
we will still be dealing with 2002 money, but the question is,
what do you need--and this is what Senator Byrd and I are
thinking about right now--what must you have before we leave
town for Christmas so that you can do the things that you must
do to protect your people and the American public, and assure
that the mail will continue and the system will be set up as
rapidly as possible.
I have got to add, you know, I have not been home since
September 11. I have not received a letter from my State.
Unfortunately all of my mail was addressed to the office since
we travel so often. I think most of us get all of our mail at
the office. I am waiting for my water to be turned off and
other things around here, because even the bills came to the
office and they are somewhere in your system. So I have a
parochial interest in getting that system up and running and
make sure my water is not turned off.
Senator Stevens. But beyond that, we really need to know,
what do you need to have in the bank so you can draw against it
between now and June 1st? But we have to have that by Tuesday,
Postmaster General.
Mr. Potter. You will have that by Tuesday, and I am not
trying to be evasive. I just----
Senator Stevens. I am not trying to be overly demanding
either, but that is our time frame.
Mr. Potter. Well, we heard it. He has got it.
Senator Stevens. If we do not have it by then, we will not
be able to get the bill done by Thursday, and hopefully, we are
trying to get the bill done before we leave for Thanksgiving.
So I do not have any other questions other than to
emphasize that we need to assure you that we are going to do
something to get you the money you need. The only question I
have is the $175 million part of the billion dollars?
Mr. Potter. No, no, it was not part of the----
Senator Stevens. It is in addition to 175 million?
Mr. Potter. Yes, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Well, be sure you have some people with
awfully sharp pencils, because if we give you a billion
dollars, someone else is going to lose a billion dollars, other
people who have convinced the President's people that their
needs have the highest priorities are in that list now, and we
will have to determine that your priority is higher than
theirs, and take out something and put it in. So I hope you
have real sharp pencils.
Mr. Potter. We will, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. To underscore what Senator Stevens and
Senator Byrd have said, if the money is not made available in
the immediate time period ahead with the stimulus or economic
recovery package or Homeland Security piece, if it is not part
of that, it would likely be part of the next fiscal year's
appropriation in some form or another, which would be available
to you next October 1st. And I assume from your testimony today
that there is an urgency here that is significant.
Now, you are talking about two different requests. One is a
request that deals with security of the postal system, and the
second deals with your financial losses. And I want to talk
about both of them just for a moment. But first I want to ask a
question about safeguarding the mail. You indicated that you
wanted to treat the mail at its origin, but it seems to me, you
have a mail system at the present that has a blue postal box on
the corner of a street someplace, and you have got a postal
worker that picks the mail out of that box and takes it to a
distribution center and then sends it downstream from the
distribution center, finally to the mailbox of the customer,
and there is an upstream from the distribution system to where
it is gathered from all the various boxes.
Mr. Potter. Right.
Senator Dorgan. How does one safeguard the upstream portion
of this collection? That is the point I do not understand.
Mr. Potter. Well, we are working on a number of
methodologies. We have that same concern. We are looking at a
number of different options that we might have to do that. It
may require that we modify the mailbox, but the idea would be
that our employees would not come into contact with any dust
that might be generated as the mail is collected.
Today what we have, we have provided employees with masks
and with gloves to protect them from anything that might become
airborne there. But in the future we are looking at redesign of
the mailbox such that we could collect mail from that box
without having employees come into contact or be exposed.
Once it got to the facility, that same device would be then
introduced. The first thing we would do when we got it to a
processing plant would be to treat that mail.
Senator Dorgan. You say that you had predicted a loss of
$1.35 billion as you entered this fiscal year, and what has
happened since September 11 and then subsequently the anthrax
attacks, may affect your bottom line by as much as $2 billion
additionally. Tell me how much of that $2 billion is
annualized, because we are talking about a relatively short
period of time.
Mr. Potter. Well, we just extrapolated the $418 million in
terms of our shortfall in the first two accounting periods of
the year, and we projected out. So it is an annualized number,
the $2 billion.
Senator Dorgan. All right. So the $2 billion is an effect
from September 11 forward?
Mr. Potter. Forward.
Senator Dorgan. On a full-year basis.
Mr. Potter. Right, through next September. The reason we
couched it in the terms that we did is that we are hopeful,
very hopeful that that projection is high. You know, we do know
that we have the $418 million effect, and, you know, we can't
accurately predict what the behavior of our customers or the
mailing public is going to be moving into the future. But,
again, it was just a rough projection.
Senator Dorgan. Are you delivering this same request to the
White House, Mr. Potter?
Mr. Potter. I have had discussions, yes, with Governor
Ridge about our situation. In fact, those early discussions are
what led to the White House authorizing the $175 million that
they did.
Senator Dorgan. And the testimony you have provided here
today suggests that on the issue of security you expect you
will need $3 billion or more, quote-unquote, according to the
testimony. Senator Byrd, I think, in probing a bit, elicited
information that suggested certain technologies might cost less
than that $3 billion. Is that correct?
Mr. Day. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator Dorgan. Can you tell us how much less? Instead of
$3 billion or more, what would the best case be if you were to
use a less expensive technology that you discovered to be
effective?
Mr. Day. I couldn't give you an exact number, Senator. I
would just say that we do know it would be significantly less.
We are looking at different technologies. If it was chlorine
dioxide, the major component is it requires far less
construction, although we haven't fully scoped out the level of
venting and filtration systems that would be needed for
chlorine dioxide. So we still need to work out the scale, but I
would tell you it would be substantially less.
Senator Dorgan. From your testimony, I didn't understand
completely. You are not questioning whether chlorine dioxide
kills anthrax spores, are you?
Mr. Day. No.
Senator Dorgan. It does, right?
Mr. Day. Chlorine dioxide clearly kills anthrax spores, as
I understand it. The question is its penetration capability. If
it is inside a sealed envelope, how long do you need to expose
the mail to chlorine dioxide in order to achieve the kill.
Senator Dorgan. I understand. Now, the $3 billion or more,
which may be less, is for security. The $2 billion is what you
say you need to continue operations and to make up for the loss
that you are experiencing as a result of the diminished use,
and interrupted use, I might say, of the postal system because
of the terrorist attacks. Is that correct?
Mr. Potter. Yes. Yes, that is the case.
Senator Dorgan. The $2 billion is something that Congress
is going to have to come to grips with. Does it feel it has an
obligation to make the Postal Service whole? Should that be
made up with respect to increased postal rates and so on? It is
different than the $3 billion. The $3 billion, either more or
less, I think Senator Byrd and Senator Stevens both asked the
questions about the security piece of the $3 billion with
respect to timing. You have been relatively non-specific, and I
understand why with respect to both the amount and the timing
today. And I think the quicker that you are able to get that
information to us, the better for our planning.
But with respect to the $3 billion, plus or minus, on
security issues, did you indicate that $1 billion of that you
think is needed in a time certain prior to--the period between
now and next summer? Is that what you are testifying to?
Mr. Potter. Yes. And----
Senator Dorgan. And what are the consequences of your not
getting that in that time period?
Mr. Potter. Well, the consequences are that obviously it
will put the Postal Service in a weaker financial position. And
depending on whether or not we get those monies, we would
probably be bumping up against our ability to borrow money. We
would probably exhaust that ability. That would happen in the
next September time frame.
Do you want to add to that?
Mr. Strasser. Yes, Senator, our ability to finance the
security as well as the business impact is extremely
constrained. Even before the attacks, coming into this fiscal
year we saw structural changes in the growth of mail that we
have counted on historically to cover the increased costs. For
example, in October we delivered to 1,270,000 locations that we
didn't deliver to last October. And so when we talk about our
revenues being below last year, we are trying to cover the
costs of the universal service delivery network as well as
cover the normal increase in costs like health benefits.
So we are severely constrained. If, in fact, this $400
million shortfall in net income continues for a number of
months and approaches the $2 billion and we exceed $3 billion
in deficits--we already have frozen all facilities
construction. We haven't constructed facilities since last
February. So we have done everything possible from a financing
point of view.
If we have a $2 billion business impact, we will be at the
maximum borrowing level that we can be at. We will be talking
about concerns of severe service reductions because we won't be
able to finance payroll or the payments to OPM for our
retirement liabilities.
Senator Dorgan. Well, let me conclude by saying we need for
you to get us good information as quickly as is possible. We do
not have the option, in my judgment, of saying that what has
happened here with respect to anthrax and the discovery of some
pathetic human beings to use the U.S. mail service as an
instrument of delivery of terror, we can't say that this
doesn't matter and that we are not concerned about security and
we are going to do nothing about it. The question is not
whether we are going to do something about it. The question is
how and when. And so we really need information and good
information from you in a very timely way.
Let me, before I call on my two colleagues for additional
questions, tell you that I grew up in a town of 300 people, and
the post office was the center of our social life. I mean I
remember as a kid and growing up in my hometown the post office
was the center where people came and visited and exchanged
views about things. I had a town meeting in Glenburn, North
Dakota one day and a fellow said to me--and town meetings are
often complaints about things that are going wrong, and a
fellow stood up and he said I want to tell you, Mr. Senator, a
good thing about the U.S. mail system. And I said gee, that is
interesting, you have got some good news. He said yes. He said
I received a letter that was addressed to Grampa, Glenburn,
North Dakota, and I received it from the local post office here
in Glenburn, and it was a letter that was intended for me.
I said, well, how on earth could that have happened? He
said, well, the postmaster is right over there. The postmaster
had stopped in at the meeting. And I said to the postmaster,
how did that happen? Well, he said, we had this letter come in
that says Grampa, Glenburn, North Dakota, and the postmark was
Silver Spring, Maryland, and we knew that Ernie had some
relatives out in Silver Spring, Maryland, so we sent it to him
and it turns out to be his grandson writing Grampa in Glenburn,
North Dakota.
That probably can only happen in a very small community,
but it is a wonderful thing to know it does happen around our
country. I am a big believer in the U.S. postal system. You
sometimes do things in the system that gives me heartburn. I
clench my teeth and grind my teeth sometimes when I read the
news about one thing or another, bonuses and so on, but despite
all of that, this system is important to this country. This
Congress has an obligation to make this system work and help
you make it work. These terrorist attacks were things that you
could not have anticipated. They are not something you are
responsible for, and this country must respond as a country to
these threats.
Senator Byrd has talked a lot about homeland security with
respect to the economic recovery package. Clearly, homeland
security, in my judgment, also means security of America's
mails, and so I want to thank you for your testimony. I am
going to call on my ranking member, and then Senator Byrd, for
additional questions. Senator Campbell.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You mentioned
the mail in your small hometown. We compare small hometowns
very often. I got a letter that there was no ZIP code and no
post office box that was delivered to me. It just said Senator
S.O.B. Campbell, Ignacio, Colorado.
And, darn it, they delivered it.
Let me make just a couple of general observations that
clearly Senator Byrd has alluded to, and Senator Dorgan, too,
that this is going to be some tough decisions. And from my
perspective, security has got to take priority over lost
revenues, at least at first.
I wanted to just ask one question, though, and that is I
was looking at an article in The Washington Post, and a
gentleman by the name of Robert McLean, executive director of
the Mailers Council, noted that the operating costs of these
machines would be about $1 billion a year. Have you factored
that into your request, too?
Mr. Strasser. No, Senator, not entirely. The ultimate
system design that we determine to use and the design of the
equipment would affect that figure. There have been estimates
that the operating costs could run as high as an extra billion
dollars a year.
What we have factored in, and we are attempting to factor
in once we get the configuration and understanding, is the
training for the employees and the phasing in of the necessary
security equipment.
Senator Campbell. I see. And maybe just one last question,
Mr. Chairman, because I see some friends in the audience from
the Letter Carriers and the Postal Workers.
Mr. Postmaster General, you talked about the flow of
tracking letters that could be contaminated and you--I think
part of my potential question was already answered when you
said the mailboxes, the drop boxes that are on the street
corners in many cities and towns after the post offices closed,
you are trying to devise some kind of a system where the people
who pick that mail up would not actually touch the letters. Is
that not correct?
Mr. Potter. Well, they would be protected from it, yes,
Senator.
Senator Campbell. Some kind of a thing that is sealed or
something, where they take the whole bag in and then in turn it
goes through a sanitizing machine?
Mr. Potter. Yes.
Senator Campbell. I think that is my last question, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Thank you, Senator Campbell. Senator Byrd?
Senator Byrd. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
The 6-day rural free delivery got its start where?
Mr. Potter. West Virginia.
Senator Byrd. Right.
Senator Dorgan. That was not a lucky guess, I know.
Senator Byrd. I have a little horse-drawn buggy, first
rural free delivery sitting right in my office. I will show it
to you if you ever get over there.
Senator Campbell. That is when you get your whole request.
Senator Byrd. What year was that?
Mr. Potter. I don't know.
Mr. Strasser. 1893.
Mr. Potter. I thought it was 1896, but, anyhow.
Senator Byrd. And where did this rural delivery start in
West Virginia? Charles Town, Halltown, and Uvilla. Write that
down.
Mr. Potter. I am going to study up on West Virginia history
before I come back.
Senator Byrd. Also I would say, Mr. Postmaster General, for
several years I have insisted on there being language in the
committee report that goes to the Floor with the bill making
appropriations for the Postal Service, that there be language
providing for 6-day mail service. I come from a rural area
where the flag means something, and in many little communities
there is the flag at the post office, and that represents the
Federal Government. That represents the man in the striped
pants, Uncle Sam.
The first letter that my two daughters wrote to me to
congratulate me on my 36 birthday, is the first year I came to
Congress, had three one-cent stamps on it. Three cents. I was
36 years old. And within 12 days, I will be 84 years old, but I
am still young.
Now let me ask you just a couple of questions. Suppose you
do not get this money. Suppose Congress were to be unresponsive
to your request. Then what will your option be? Will you only
sanitize mail that goes in and out of the service where you
have machines in New York and Washington? Will you have to
limit the sanitization to two or three of your largest post
offices, largest cities? You will get some of this, I am sure.
But how are you going to live within your means if you do not
get this $2-$3 billion?
Mr. Potter. Well, Senator----
Senator Byrd. And still protect as many people as you can
protect?
Mr. Potter. Certainly that is one of the things that we
have thought, I would not say long and hard because we have
only been dealing with this for a short period of time, but it
has been on the forefront of our thinking. Certainly, as you
described, one option that we would have is to look at risk and
only use these systems where the risk might exist today, and we
would use our Inspection Service and the FBI and other law
enforcement agencies to help us to assess that risk.
I have a concern about that because if you have a system
that does not cover the entire width and breadth of the United
States, you have a vulnerability. So we would like to shore up
and eliminate any vulnerability in our system.
Certainly then if we made a commitment to do that, one
option is again to deploy equipment based on risk and extend
deployment over a number of years, which leaves us vulnerable.
We might have to look at service because the key here for the
Postal Service is the confidence that the American public has
in the mail. You know, a lack of confidence in the mail is very
detrimental to our system, and it really is going to take away
one of the freedoms that the American public enjoys today.
Senator Byrd. What will be the impact? I know you cannot
set a dollar figure on this. Just comment on this question.
What will be the impact on the American economy if we do not
act together to provide the kind of confidence that people have
a right to expect in the safety to themselves and to their
loved ones of the U.S. mail?
Mr. Potter. Well, as I described in my testimony, the
mailing industry is not just the Postal Service, you know. We
are a $68 billion organization with some 800,000 employees, but
we just recently went through an exercise with leaders in the
mailing community, and what we have determined was that the
mailing industry employs some 9 million Americans. The mailing
industry is a $900 billion entity, 8 percent of the gross
domestic product. So a lack of confidence in the system that
carries trillions of dollars of payments through the mail
certainly would disrupt this economy and at a time when the
economy, is challenged. Having the mail system, losing
credibility would exacerbate the economic downturn that we have
seen.
Senator Byrd. I have only one final comment, Mr. Chairman.
We talk about waiting until next year on a supplemental. Bin
Laden is not going to wait for a supplemental if he decides to
strike. I assume that you can make this money that you are
requesting work more effectively, and it can give a more
effective protection to the postal workers and to the American
people if it is provided to you earlier rather than later. I
guess you would like to have this billion dollars you are
talking about, at least that much, up front.
Mr. Potter. Yes, sir.
Senator Byrd. Rather than spread throughout the first year.
Mr. Potter. Yes, sir, we would like to have the ability to
know that it is there so we can aggressively spend. Now, to be
very candid with you, we would not spend it on the day we got
it. It would be spent over a period of months.
You heard from Mr. Day about all the analysis that is
currently under way. There are things that we do not need
analysis on. Vacuum cleaning systems, the HEPA vacs, that would
capture the spores. Ventilation systems. We want to move out as
aggressively as we can with those, and yes, and we would spend
that money over the course of the next few months.
Senator Byrd. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I think this has
been a very informative hearing, as far as I am concerned, and
I think your witnesses have been good and among the best that I
have heard.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Byrd, thank you very much. I think
the point that you made is critically important for all of us
to understand, and that is terrorists will not wait for
Congress. Terrorists commit acts of evil on their own time
frame, not ours. We must, it seems to me, take action as
quickly as is prudent and as we are capable of taking to try to
provide the security for the American people, the postal
workers and others.
Let me ask two additional questions. You indicated that
going into the fiscal year--now this is about not the security
piece, but the other $2 billion with respect to operational
costs--you had a $1\1/2\ billion expected deficit in the Postal
Service going into the fiscal year, and you think the
consequences of the terrorist acts will add $2 billion to that.
That is $3\1/2\ billion. You have implemented some cost-cutting
and streamlining and consolidation measures which will reduce
that some.
Assume for a moment that Congress does nothing with respect
to that piece of your request, we do what we need to do with
respect to security, but do nothing on the operational side.
Can you tell us what kind of postal increase would be required
to make up the difference in the Postal Service financing?
Mr. Strasser. Senator, that is a multi-dimensional
question. Due to the nature of the process that we set, we are
already in a process to raise postage rates from 34 with a
recommended rate of 37 cents. That assumed that we would break
even in 2003.
The issue is more along the lines if in fact we start this
spiral that the old Post Office Department was in, where the
constant raising of rates caused a diminution of volume growth,
what we have been able to see in the 30 years since the
Congress and the president enacted Postal Reorganization is an
ability on the part of the Postal Service to cover its expenses
and the addition of some 50 million addresses to the universal
delivery system through postage revenues, for the most part.
As you mentioned yourself in 1976 and 1977, we were
increasing rates rapidly during a poor economic period, and the
delicate balance of raising rates during that time was
problematic. If we in fact lost $3 billion and had to go
further into debt, we would have to have some mechanism to
substantially change our current rate situation. Moving
forward, depending on how much mail volume decline we saw, we
could be--if we saw a 10 percent mail volume decline, for
example, that has to make up $7 billion in revenue, which very
roughly would translate into postage rates that would be in the
order of 15 to 20 percent across the board, which would then
further threaten the volume and the mail business that counts
on moderate rates. And that is why it is very, very difficult--
it is not just the First Class stamp, it is the entire effect
on the industry.
Senator Dorgan. Well, I understand a couple of things. One
is the uncertainty about what this does to the long term use of
the mail by the American citizen and, therefore, what it does
to your demand.
Second, the only way for you to deal with a loss is to try
to increase your revenue, which is a postal rate increase, or
diminish service. I want to say that Senator Byrd's discussion
about 6-day mail delivery service, you should understand that
he is the general of a very large army on that issue. We are
not about to allow folks to go to 5-day delivery in this
country. I have signed up as a corporal, I guess, or whatever
service I can be, but I was pleased to work with him to include
that language again in our appropriation bill.
Let me make one final point. I mentioned the grampa from
Glenburn, but I do this only because I think it is important
for the American people to understand what the mail system
means, especially the Postal Service.
I was last weekend with a man named Les Snavely in Bismarck
who is a long-time friend of mine. He is from Bowman, North
Dakota, and some while ago, a couple of years ago--he collects
antique motorcycles and restores them and he is well known for
that. And someone from Kentucky wrote him a letter and he
addressed it to the man who collects antique motorcycles in
southwestern North Dakota. That is even more non-specific. But
somehow it got to western North Dakota and one of the postal
workers or letter carriers or postmasters happened to know that
it was Les Snavely down in Bowman, a high school teacher who is
the man who collects antique motorcycles, and he got a letter
addressed to the man who collects antique motorcycles in
southwestern North Dakota.
Conclusion of Hearing
Again, one more piece of good news, it seems to me, for a
postal system that sometimes has some problems, but in most
cases works well for this country. I hope you will pass our
commendation on to those postal workers and letter carriers and
the rest of the folks in the system that every day in every way
go out and provide public service; service that has been deemed
now to be more dangerous in recent weeks, but service that we
nonetheless very much appreciate as American citizens.
This hearing is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., Thursday, November 8, the
hearing was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to
reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
-