This management alert presents our concerns regarding the international inbound mail verification process at select U.S. Postal Service international service centers (Project Number 16RG006MR000). These concerns came to our attention during our Extraterritorial Offices of Exchange review (Project Number 15RG034MS000).

Read Full Report

Comments (1)

  • anon

    Good first step, but still needs to be monitored until it becomes standard procedure at all inbound facilities. Does it really take six months for SFO ISC to insure that all CN35 are scanned before processing? Or that ETOE mail should be immediately rejected? Do they even have stickers that say ÔÇ£Return to Origin ÔÇô Refused by USPSÔÇØ? The rise in ePackets volume and other type of inbound mail most likely created storage and time processing challenges, but international inbound mail verification has to be as close to perfection as possible. Even if scanning every receptacle is to be desired, there are still many other problems with inbound mail verification that management needs to address. Not only do containers need to be properly accepted and verified, but some classes of mail require additional handling. Inbound express should be accounted for at item level and every irregularity has to be properly recorded. Every item in the receptacle needs to be cross-referenced with the itemized dispatch list to insure a correct inventory. In addition, each item should be physically inspected for safety, damage, or any other entry irregularity. This process should be automated to electronically record discrepancies and immediately produce verification notes in addition to the receptacleÔÇÖs ÔÇ£receipt record.ÔÇØ But if it takes SFO ISC six months just to implement tag scanning, I wonder how many years it would take for item-level entry verification? There is definitely some need for internal innovation at all ISCs to provide the best possible verification system. Interesting that the Chicago ISC was not included in the audit and in my opinion they need a lot of attention. IÔÇÖm glad to see this audit and hope to see more in this category. It is becoming more obvious that international mail is not something that should be dismissed as a lesser priority and therefore not worthy of discussion.

    Feb 18, 2016