,,I--
: RECEIVED
BEFORE THE
POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.
P0STJ.C R&T;TE
COHHlSSIO~
OFF,CE OFTHE SECRETARY
Special
Services
Fees
and Classifications
)
Docket
No.
MC96-3
OFFICE OF THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE OPPOSITION
TO MOTION OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 1120
(July
8, 1996)
The Office
opposition
to
of
the
the
Motion
Reconsideration
of
directed
Commission
by the
reflect
the
delay
the
of
motion
for
The Commission
nearly
a decade
methodology
of
the
Postal
for
Advocate
the
No.
1120,
this
R94-1
information
files
its
Service
1996.
for
Although
presentations
that
attribution
continues
to
resist
by tactics
such
and/or
as the
reconsideration.
and the
over
the
city
carrier
Postal
question
Service
of
access
Act.
1120, Order Directing
Cost Presentations,
-
Postal
28,
cost
No.
Service
States
June
"submit
to
COCA) hereby
United
Docket
Reorganization
1 Order No.
Provide
Additional
of
Postal
production
captioned
Order
Commission's
methodology,"'
.I?
Consumer
which
costs
It
is
have
disagreed
for
attribution
best
the
promotes
view
of
the Postal
June 18, 1996
the
the
goals
OCA that
I-.
Docket
this
No.
MC96-3
issue
opinion
was resolved
27,
resists
1994.
providing
attribution
that
impose
Postal
format
cost
for
in
methodology
Service
produce
is
and each
Postal
more
is
CRA in
are
resistance
on each
the
Commission
§ 3624(c)
to
provide
(2)
if
a PRC-
to
support
proceeding,
the
the
has
of
is
complied
3)
required,
its
Commission's
Service's
it
insignificant,
with
2)
Commission
the
Commission
should
and 4)
Commission
Order
these
arguments
have
No.
merit,
rejected.
argument
differences
Service's
this
using
None
need
Commission's
costs
39 U.S.C.
PRC format,
methodology
cost
in
be categorically
Service's
the
We urge
arguments
Postal
that
willfully
access
refusal
four
costs
the
on Remand,
(CRA).
1)
burdensome.
should
attribution
.-
the
unduly
The Postal
because
frames
claims
54 and nothing
itself
1120
than
its
Analysis
attributable
rather
Postal
Rule
Service
in
R90-1
with
needed.
under
Commission’s
Service
carrier
available
the
PRC Op.
comporting
is
persists
in
Postal
city
reconsideration:
difference
the
analyses
and Revenue
The Postal
the
for
all
in
attribution
penalty
Service
Cost
motion
However,
such
the
and for
decision
methodology
occasion
the
once
and recommended
September
to
2
not
that
the
be applied
in
insignificant
to
accepting
Commission's
is
the
Docket
NO. MC96-3
an example
Commission's
of
the
primacy
Docket
No.
MC96-3
,,*-over
to
costing
be one
matters.
that
Reorganization
methodologies
adopted
off
at
exposition
participants
they
the
et.
al.,
carrier
harmony
Postal
with
are
of
not
at
Rather,
of
been
the
liberty
to
a methodology
most
judged
Postal
employ
explicitly
closely
precedential
to
status
and may not
a participant.
on Remand,
Service
after
and Mail
Commission
cost
has
objectives
as conforming
R90-1
the
methodology
the
prefer.
caprice
access
with
achieves
PRC Op.
by the
America,
was in
Act,
policies
In
city
comports
Commission
congressional
be cast
best
that
by the
Once a costing
an exhaustive
Order
determined
attribution,
congressional
not
Association
that
the
its
approach
Postal
and judicial
of
to
Service's,
objectives:
A balanced
reading
of the Commission's
prior
Opinions
makes it clear
that
the Commission's
view is consistent
with
the view of Congress
and the courts,
that
causality
has primacy
as an attribution
principle,
not
volume variability.
Id.,
( 339.
effects
of
preferred
Postal
basis
Unlike
marginal
definition
Reorganization
for
Court's
Postal
volume
of
interpretation
Service,
changes
Act's
the
requirement
Id.,
"enshrine[sl
costs
as the
Commission
that
the
promotes
"causation
[be]
1 332
conclusion
of
which
on total
attribution,"
attribution."
The Commission's
r-.
the
$4 3622(b)
is
based
(3)
of
upon
title
the
39:
Supreme
the
the
Docket
No.
MC96-3
/--,
The Court,
therefore,
has construed
§ 3622(b) (3) to
obligate
the Commission
to attribute
to subclasses
all
costs
that
can be reliably
associated
with
them,
regardless
of economic
theory,
primarily
for reasons
of
inter-class
equity.
Id.,
1 334.
Attribution
Commission's
causation
of
city
single-subclass
requirement
carrier
stops
access
costs
methodology
as interpreted
by the
best
by the
satisfies
Supreme
the
Court:
Mindful
of this
statutory
obligation,
the Commission
has attributed
costs
under several
different
analytical
criteria.
The most
straightforward
of these
is the
If a cost is incurred
for
criterion
of exclusivity.
the benefit
of only one class
of service,
and would not
be incurred
but for the provision
of that
class
of
service,
the causal
link
to that
service
is selfevident.
For exclusive
costs,
whether
fixed
or
no further
analytical
tool
is required.
.
variable,
of exclusivity,
the Commission
Applying
the same logic
attributed
the access
costs
associated
with
single
subclass
stops,
as soon as the necessary
data became
available.
Id.,
1 335.
The detailed
approaches
Postal
Service's
costs
has been
the
Commission
has
its
clear.
choice
Commission
-.
in
comparison
of
the
R90-1
Remand opinion
position
on attribution
fully
considered,
chosen
an access
The Postal
and participant
time
and
cost
Service
Commission
and
Postal
demonstrates
of
city
finally,
re-treading
carrier
not
the
and
waste
same
the
access
The
rejected.
methodology,
should
that
Service
it
has
further
ground.
made
-
Docket
No.
MC96-3
The Postal
final
Service's
authority
treatment
of
delivery
cost
cost
approaches)
Docket
No.
MC96-3,
coverages
are
irrelevant
eliminate
the
service.
abolish
this
may be the
The choice
delivery.
costs
drives
evaluate
available
the
all
the
approved,
of
entirely
the
fee
cost
these
of
concedes
of
with
special
that,
Commission
and Postal
included
not
for
special
delivery.
The
special
the
it
the
is
the
instant
costs
of
to
issue,
is
the
the
special
cost
treat
to
special
will
need
whether
to
an important
with
methodology
of
and
that
case
in
proposes
associated
an attribution
properly
Service
decisions
this
level
costs
premature
coverage
coverage
delivery
Postal
the
while
services
resolving
factors
case
special
in
cost
the
associated
the
One of
attributable
special
for
In
service.
Commission
delivery
segment
order
should
based
9
to
have
upon
PRC format.
As a separate
r-.
In
in
PRC as the
the
However,
Commission
the
of
that
defunct.
arises
Service
because
service.
consideration
the
continues
as already
be made by the
are
accepting
those
(between
most
they
argument
to
small
for
Service's
delivery
9 costs,
The Postal
are
to
issues
segment
messengers.
Service
resistance
on attribution
differences
0 0 4 6 ‘78
5
ground
for
possible
that
the
increases
for
special
requiring
Commission
services
a PRC-format
might
not
proposed
CRA,
wish
by the
to
it
is
recommend
Postal
,-
Docket
No.
Service
the
MC96-3
because
special
of
the
services
inequity
special
should
have
apples
comparison
of
groups
of
services
Unlike
of
the
the
services
the
of
causation
of
Commission
and
narrow
range
proceeding,
in
future
cost
is
by either
how to
Congress'
Service
they
may
a material
1 324,
the
only
While
Postal
an apples-toincluded/excluded
on the
Commission
or
are
Professor
the
the
the
for
the
instant
and services
affected
city
access
Indeed,
USPS/MOAA approach
not
applying
be small
in
observed
of
between
may
where
component.
enacting
The Postal
differences
classes
view
with
end result
included
Commission
in
particularly
methodology,
for
a long
objectives
approaches
be large
takes
attribution.
particularly
the
the
(3),
cost
services
cost
to
The Commission
Commission
attribution
causation.
special
the
apply
focusing
of
under
the
cost
proceedings,
on Remand,
levels
Service,
Commission's
as compared
case.
of
for
can be made.
access
recommends
coverages
so that
coverages
carrier
Service
principles
the
§ 3622(b)
city
the
from
cost
cost
proceeding
of
to
or
this
requirement
respect
its
proposed
CRA available
the
Postal
question
in
excluded
PRC-format
special
of
included
those
the
OG4679
6
in
that
carrier
the
than
estimated
methodologies."2
,r-
as pointed
2 Likewise,
motion
for reconsideration,
out by the
differences
R90-1
"attribution
much lower
Sowell's
PRC Op.
Postal
Service
in attribution
in
its
Docket
No.
MC96-3
7
004680
:Consequently,
in
extensive,
choosing
Service's
course
compliance
with
Postal
explicitly
Even
policy
under
courts
enabling
give
the
,r-
methodology
discrepancies
3 Nat'1
Cir.
1982).
the
Rule
54(a)
It
for
deference
Postal
that
to
for
of
usurp
the
(3)
of
has
the
Postal
The
is
to
enforce
in
all
cases,
complied
rule
whether
39.
with
does
Commission's
title
Commission
not
Rule
give
authority
And the
may request
54
the
to
rule
additional
(4).
to
an agency's
on the
an affront
to
the
Postal
Service,
the
Postal
Rate
Reorganization
more
make a difference.
it
nature
based
is
and the
follow
that
deference
legislation
jurisprudence
to
are
small.
5 3622(b)
give
matters.3
to
claim
power
apply
states
information
its
the
changes
methodology
or
The general
and
does
established
large
rate
Commission's
Commission
Service's
Service
interpret
the
are
irrelevant.
the
methodology
its
differences
proposed
between
for
The Postal
is
where
attribution
prudent
cost
cases
interpretation
agency's
the
expertise
principles
a regulatee,
Commission's
of
in
of
to
refuse
to
interpretation
of
Act.
special
delivery
in cost coverage.
Wildlife
Fed'n v.
costs
Gorsuch,
also
result
693 F.
in
2d 156,
substantial
169
(D.C.
P
Docket
No.
MC96-3
The Postal
for
it
to
are
directive
that
reasonable
days
of
to
delay
contention
two
sides
the
of
Postal
CRA.
comply
at
fifteen
days
are
liberal
due date
denying
the
motion
the
in
Order
the
early
required,
fifteen
for
No.
stage
that
generate
Service
use
of
of
OCA urges
days
following
should
do
The Commission's
the
estimate
"PRC CRA" is
not
are
models
of
pose
proceeding.
the
burdensome
unduly
Commission
computer
should
the
is
witnesses
Service's
1120
it
the
same coin.
Postal
The Postal
with
this
that
Service
that
be proficient
the
004681
a "PRC CRA" and
one given
to
generate
Service's
generate
so itself
likely
0
a
more
needed
lo-15
to
person-
a serious
If
Commission
a Commission
ten
to
risk
to
set
a
order
reconsideration.4
4 One of the justifications
offered
by the Postal
Service
"[Wlitness
Patelunas
finds
it
for non-compliance
is that,
not be able to exactly
replicate
the
'likely'
that
he ‘will
This contention
is spurious
as the Postal
Commission's
model."'
Service
knows that
all
that
can be expected
is a good faith
not a perfect
or guaranteed
outcome.
effort
to comply,
Docket
No.
MC96-3
,---
In
Service's
the
conclusion,
OCA states
motion
Commission
ml4682
9
for
to
its
opposition
reconsideration
insist
upon
full
of
to
Order
Postal
No.
1120
with
the
order.
served
the
foregoing
compliance
Respectfully
the
and urges
submitted,
DAVID RUDERMAN
Attorney
SHELLEY-S.
Attorney
CERTIFICATE
I hereby
document
accordance
upon
certify
all
with
that
section
OF SERVICE
I have
participants
3.B(3)
DREIFUSS
this
date
of
record
of
the
in
special
this
rules
SHELLEY S. DREIFUSS
Attorney
Washington,
D.C.
July
8, 1996
20268-0001
proceeding
of
'J
in
practice.