PRC Issues Determination Required by Law to Provide Transparency and Accountability for USPS

Washington, DC – 3/28/25 – As required by title 39 of the U.S. Code, today the Postal Regulatory Commission issued the FY 2024 Annual Compliance Determination assessing the Postal Service’s compliance with standards for service performance and legal requirements for rates. The Determination is based on an analysis of information provided by the Postal Service. The law requires the Commission to take action to address noncompliance by the Postal Service.

The Commission finds that 19 out of 27 Market Dominant products or categories failed to meet their service performance targets and no category of First-Class Mail met its target in FY 2024. The Commission directs the Postal Service to take corrective action to improve service performance and increase transparency.

For Competitive products as a whole, the Commission finds that total revenues were higher than cost coverage requirements, meeting the law’s prohibition against cross-subsidizing Competitive products. The Commission also finds that some Market Dominant mail classes and products failed to cover their costs, while multiple Competitive products did not cover their costs. For individual products and classes that lost money in FY 2024, the Commission directs the Postal Service to take action to ensure that these products comply with the law by covering their costs.

One Response to "PRC Issues Determination Required by Law to Provide Transparency and Accountability for USPS"

  1. Poor Louis Dejoy. He just couldn’t catch a break with these folks. They’re apparently all about performance while he was trying to balance the budget, or at least break even, which cannot be done and maintain the level of service of the past. The guy had a point, though. These people sit back on high and criticize and point out deficiencies but add nothing to finding solutions. No doubt that the 50 billion dollar number Decoy blamed the PRC for is accurate. I have a decent memory, and when the DFA was made public and debated, I just don’t remember any of these people either individually or collectively questioning it. Now they’ve called it a failure, offering no alternative. Maybe they should go.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.