UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before The
POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20268-0001
Postal Rate and Fee Changes,
2000
Docket No. R2000-1
)
OFFICE OF THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF WITNESSES FOR HEARING
AND SUGGESTON FOR APPEARANCE OF
CONTINGENCY WITNESSES AS A PANEL
(June 19,200O)
To:
Hon. Edward J. Gleiman
Presiding Officer
Pursuant
to the Presiding
Office of the Consumer
regarding
July 21, 2000.
contingency
The witnesses
hearing.
(“OCA”)
dates on which its witnesses
for July 6 through
the 004’s
Advocate
Officer’s Ruling No. R2000-l/71,
witnesses
hereby provides
May 26, 2000, the
the following
information
will be available for the hearings now scheduled
Also, the OCA suggests
that provision
be made for
to appear as a panel.
on the OCA’s staff are available
for the entire period
of the
The other three of the OCA witnesses will be available on the following dates:
Burns -July 6 & 7;
Rosenberg - July 6 through July 19;
Ewen - July 6 through July 18.
The OCA suggests
be cross-examined
that witnesses
on their
testimonies
Burns and Rosenberg
concerning
appear as a panel to
the appropriate
level of the
Docket No. R2000-1
contingency
-2-
provision.
Research
Institute
contingency
The OCA retained
(“NRRI”)
request.
the services
at Ohio State University
NRRI assigned
the project, and they determined
of the National
to address
the Postal Service’s
Mr. Burns and Dr. Rosenberg
to present coordinated
Regulatory
testimony
to collaborate
addressing
on
various
aspects of the contingency.
The Burns
provides
a critique
Rosenberg’s
contingency
Because
and Rosenberg
of the Postal
analysis.
answered
Service’s
See, e.g., OCA-T-3
recommendation,
of the interrelated
likely that questions
testimonies
are closely
coordinated.
direct case which
at 17.
which is concurred
underlies
Dr. Rosenberg
in by Mr. Burns.
nature of the Burns and Rosenberg
Mr. Burns
part of Dr.
makes the specific
See OCA-T-2 at 12.
analyses,
it appears
may be asked of one witness which may be more appropriately
by the other,
When such witnesses
refer a question to the other.
appear
seriatim,
Depending
the answer may or may not eventually
the potential
the transcript
record.
appear in the record.
as counsel repeats a line of questioning
round of hearings
not the appropriate
in this Docket.
repetitive material appears
in
for the other witness.
referred to other witnesses
Following
Even if it does, it may be
creating the potential for an unclear
Even in the best of circumstances,
The problem of questions
to
on whether the other witness will appear later,
out of the context of the original line of questions,
or incomplete
exists for one witness
was noted during the first
a series of objections
person to whom to direct a line of questioning,
from a panel of witnesses
that a witness was
the Presiding
may avoid confusion.
Officer
observed
that taking testimony
The
Presiding
Officer noted that “this is complex material and that one person can’t have all
Docket No. R2000-1
the answers
-3-
but it may be that we need to in Year 30 re-examine
doing some of this questioning
This is an instance,
panel
makes
preparation
eminent
how we go about
in the hearing room.” Tr. 13/5060-61,
the OCA submits, that having two witnesses
sense.
of their respective
Mr. Burns
testimonies.
and Dr. Rosenberg
Both witnesses
address the same issue, and both make references
appear
as a
coordinated
in the
appear for the OCA, both
to the substantive
testimony
of the
other.
A panel
examining
witness
appearance
of these
witnesses
counsel and to the Commission.
or the other.
more appropriately
An advantage
answered
asks of the panel,
responses.
immediate
follow-up of responses
If the Commission
Again,
witnesses
travel
decides to hear witnesses
arrangements
and the OCA.
follow-up.
witness
would
immediately,
For questions
may respond,
have
is
that
or both
full opportunity
for
from either or both witnesses.
the OCA requests that they be scheduled
economical
counsel
to one
is that if the question
it can be answered
for immediate
the more appropriate
can offer
to cross-
Counsel may still direct questions
by the other witness,
witnesses
be advantageous
to a panel appearance
and counsel would have the opportunity
counsel
would
and
Burns and Rosenberg
for the same day.
facilitate
helpful
separately,
This will permit the most
consultation
between
the
Docket No. R2000-1
-4-
Respectfully
submitted,
OFFICE OF THE CONSUMER
ADVOCATE
Director
Office of the Consumer Advocate
KENNETH
Attorney
E. RICHARDSON
1333 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20268-0001
(202) 789-6859; Fax (202) 789-6819
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this date served the foregoing
participants
of record in this proceeding
in accordance
‘v:NW
@
JENNIE D. WALLACE
Washington, D.C. 20268-0001
June 19.2000
upon all
with Section 12 of the Rules of
Practice.
bk4j
document