To Deutsche Post AG, Bonn
We have been engaged to perform a limited assurance engagement on selected data of the “Sustainability Report 2009 – changing ways” (the “Sustainability Report”) for the business year 2008 of Deutsche Post AG, Bonn.

Management’s Responsibility
Deutsche Post AG’s management is responsible for the preparation of the Sustainability Report, using the criteria stated in the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 (p. 07-17) of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI):

• Materiality,
• Stakeholder Inclusiveness,
• Sustainability Context,
• Completeness,
• Balance,
• Clarity,
• Accuracy,
• Timeliness,
• Comparability and
• Reliability.

This responsibility includes the selection and application of appropriate methods to prepare the Sustainability Report and the use of assumptions and estimates for individual sustainability disclosures which are reasonable in the circumstances. Furthermore, the responsibility of Deutsche Post AG’s management includes designing, implementing and maintaining systems and processes relevant for the preparation of the Sustainability Report.

Practitioner’s Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express a conclusion based on our work performed as to whether any matters have come to our attention that cause us to believe that the data of the Sustainability Report marked with a grey dot or text with grey underscore have not been prepared in accordance with the abovementioned criteria of the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 of the GRI. We also have been engaged to report on recommendations for the further development of sustainability management and sustainability reporting on the basis of the results of our assurance engagement.

We conducted our work in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000. This standard requires that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the assurance engagement to express our conclusion with limited assurance.

In a limited assurance engagement the evidence-gathering procedures are more limited than in a reasonable assurance engagement (for example, an audit of financial statements in accordance with § (Article) 317 HGB (“Handelsgesetzbuch”: “German Commercial Code”)), and therefore less assurance is obtained than in a reasonable assurance engagement.

The procedures selected depend on the practitioner’s judgment. This includes the assessment of the risk of material incompliance of the data marked with a grey dot  or text with grey underscore with the abovementioned criteria. Within the scope of our work we performed amongst others the following procedures:

• Inspection of the development of the processes for gathering, analysing and aggregating the selected data marked with a grey dot or text with grey underscore on the level of the headquarter and for some data on the level of operations in Bonn, Darmstadt, Milton Keynes and Brussels.
• Inquiries of the central unit responsible for preparing the Sustainability Report about the development of the process to prepare the Sustainability Report and the internal control system aligned with this process.
• Comparison of selected data with corresponding data in the financial annual report 2009.
• Inquiries of employees in the departments of Procurement, Idea Management, HR, Real Estate, CSR Strategy and Policy, Fleet Management, Health Department and Environment Strategy and Policy and representatives of MAIL, EXPRESS, GLOBAL FORWARDING/FREIGHT and SUPPLY CHAIN.
• Examination of the methods and procedures for determining CO₂ emissions and the Carbon Efficiency Index including the process and responsibilities, limitations of the system and emissions factors as well as inspection of a sample of physical data of activity on site in Bonn, Milton Keynes and Brussels.
• Obtaining evidence for the accuracy of the data marked with a grey dot or text with grey underscore , e.g. by inspecting notifications to public authorities, contracts, reports of suppliers and by analysing data based on IT-system reports.

Conclusion
Based on our limited assurance engagement, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the data in the Sustainability Report marked with a grey dot or text with grey underscore have not been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the abovementioned criteria of the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 (p. 07-17) of the GRI.

Emphasis of matter – Recommendations
Without qualifying our conclusion above, we recommend for the further development of sustainability management and sustainability reporting the following:

• We recommend that the systems and processes of sustainability management, in terms of design, degree of implementation and application are driven forward across the entire Group. We further recommend that the existing sustainability management structures and their development are better communicated to stakeholders.
• We recommend documenting the process of provision and consolidation of information for the Sustainability Report in order to ensure a better traceability and clear allocation of responsibility for specific contents. This includes the final sign-off for most relevant parts of the report.
• Whilst there has been some progress in several significant aspects of the data gathering process for the Sustainability Report, necessary controls have not yet been implemented on all organisational levels. We recommend defining and implementing a framework for an internal control system for the data generation for the entire Group. The documentation of performed controls should be carried out more stringently.

Frankfurt am Main, March 19, 2009

PricewaterhouseCoopers
Aktiengesellschaft
Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft

sgd. Michael Werner       sgd. ppa. Nina Müller

                                            Wirtschaftsprüfer (German Public Auditor)