BEFORE TEE
POSTAL RATE CO~~SSION
20268-0001
WASHINGTON,
D.C.
SPECIAL
SERVICES FEES
AND CLASSIFICATIONS
RECEI~
Docket
)
1
No.
MCg6-3
MAJOR MAILERS ASSOCIATION'S
RESPONSE
TO THE POSTAL SERVICE MOTION
FOR RECONSIDERATION
Major
for
Mailers
Association
reconsideration
of
opposes
Order
No.
the
Postal
Service's
request
a repetitive
event:
1120.
suMl4ARY
Yogi
"It's
deja
second
to
Berra
time
in
reconsider
the
all
to
over
can
twenty-five
rate
If
case.
the
Commission
the
time
need
for
for
Service
the
again
revenue
to
here.
asks
the
city
MC96-3
the
the
using
carrier
access
intransigence
in
general
side-step
relief
study
than
next
For
Commission
a cost
Service's
No.
for
true
of
attributing
waits
be pressed
also
production
Docket
Commission
will
Service's
in
is
the
constraints,
better
the
describing
That
directing
method
of
confronted
when
months,
an Order
Because
be
say,
again."
Commission-approved
costs.
of
vu,
used
the
without
a general
rate
issue
case,
because
delay.
DISCUSSION
A.
The Service's
Motion
Is A Replay
of The Refusal
To Comply
With A
Similar
Commission
Order
In Docket
The
supposedly
present
controversy
resolved
in
Docket
is
R94-1
a replay
No.
R94-1.
of
a
dispute
There,
as
that
was
here,
the
rPostal
Service
filed
its
s
preferred
0c 4729
methodology
did
not
for
disclose
approved
asking
assigning
city
what
its
methodology.
the
carrier
costs
would
Noting
Service
to
supply
access
be
this,
costs.
under
the
MMA filed
information
The
Service
Commission-
interrogatories
showing
those
undisclosed
costs.
In
Ruling
Service
to
No.
answer
Presiding
Office
that
requested
the
"legal
to
eventually
instead
No.
MMA's
know"
Service
the
current
was
its
was
of
pending
request
for
the
the
by
the
the
for
reconsideration
Because
of The Time Limits
For Deciding
General
Rate Cases,
this
Limited
Rate
Case Is the Best
Forum For Confronting
the Postal
Service's
Intransisence
Service's
4).
of
the
Although
Commission
itself
Officer's
Ruling
that
the
Postal
reconsiderati0n.l
is
B.
the
noting
need
2,
contentions
request
request,
of
Presiding
its
general
MMA's
pp.
the
rulings,
"legitimate
provided
the
ordered
later
part
R94-l/38,
Service,
many
of
than
In
prior
in
importance
and
Ruling
Postal
rejected
repeats
Service's
(P.O.
Officer
In
information
information
by
R94-l/38
the
cost
Presiding
interrogatories.
demonstrate"
this
of
the
reaffirmed
burden...to
parties
R94-l/a
no more
The
worthwhile
one.
rate
cases
like
Docket
No.
R90-1,
the
Commission
I
/--
The Presiding
Officer
found
that
the Service's
assertions
of "undue
burden"
were "not
credible"
and "defie[d]
credibility"
(P.O.
Ruling
NO. R94-l/38.
pp. 7-8).
The Presiding
Officer
also
observed
that
the Service's
contentions
that
its
experts
would
not know how to apply
the Commission-approved
For a
"are
not credible
assertions"
(Id.
at 7).
methodology
detailed
analysis
of court
decisions
holding
that
it
is not an
undue burden
to require
parties
like
the Service
to compile
see MMA's Response
to the Postal
studies
and perform
research,
Service's
Motion
for
Resconsideration
in Docket
No. R94-1,
pp.
7.
4-
will
always
be under
with
the
Postal
If
the
R94-1,
approved
Will
of
there
is
file
its
will
Nos.
Service
oppose
the
the
no doubt
about
to
the
did
the
it
using
If
those
the
Service
in
Postal
in
Docket
Commission-
cases,
the
showing
Commission
will
file
this
The
did
the
information
methodology.
information,
case--as
in
cost
issue
consequences.
rate
it
provide
confrontation
the
case--without
As
the
confront
general
method.
Commission's
produce
to
this
resolving
issue.
fails
and
requests
avoid
this
next
MC95-1,
costing
to
over
Commission
proceeding,
Service
pressure
Service
the
effect
orders
another
it
request
to
for
reconsideration.
once
And the
Commission
again.
In
Service
is
likely
increase.
relief
any
The
within
No
sense
costs,
and
they
Docket
No.
MC96-3,
period
the
--as
Service
"unreasonably
failing
to
the
respond
Commission..."
great
will
urgency
Postal
will
minor
circumstance,
time
in
case,
10 month
of
The
a few
be
Act's
constrained
rate
Commission
proceeding.
only
general
to
the
such
may feel
do
the
Commission
Section
near
be
within
the
No.
(39
this
provide
urgent
revenues
In
(1)).
No.
MC96-3
exceed
any
higher
rates
revenue
impact.
In
extend
consideration
of
the
time
to
[a]
in
for
these
10 month
the
[its]
its
event,
proposes
contemplates--if
a reasonable
revenue
Docket
to
the
USC 53624(c)
future.
free
issue
R94-1,
proposed
to
current
3624(c)(2)
delay[s]
(39
period
minimal
will
the
time
Service
with
of
to
side-step
Docket
compelled
the
Postal
in
feel
attaches
for
services,
as
need
Service's
so
to
Postal
request...by
lawful
order
of
USC 53624(c)(2)).
rThis
Docket
thus
presents
the
Commission
with
a
rare
opportunity
seize
to
vindicate
its
principles,
and
the
Commission
should
it.
THEREFORE,
Service's
request
MMA requests
for
the
Commission
reconsideration
of
to
Order
deny
No.
Respectfully
the
Postal
1120.
submitted,
Rshard
Littell
$&eNd;;teenth
St.
N.W.
Washington,
DC 20036
Phone:
(202)
466-8260
Counsel
July
15,
for
1996
CERTIFICATE
I hereby
certify
document
(1) upon the
upon the other
parties
that
U.S.
by
I
have
OF SERVICE
this
day
effrey
Julyl5,
MUA
1996
served
the
Plummer
foregoing
and (2)