In the Matter of the Petition by: 

 PROPERTY EXCHANGE & SALES, INC.,
 625 N. New Ballas #209, St. Louis,
 MO  63141-6713;

 Denial of Application for Post Office Box at Creve Coeur, MO

 P.S. Docket No. 39/14

 05/08/92

 Grant, Quentin E.

 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: R. Jacobs, 625 N. New Ballas #209,
 St. Louis, MO  63141-6713

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Jerry Belenker, Esq., Consumer Protection
 Division, Law Department, United States Postal Service,
 Washington, DC  20260-1144

Each party has moved for summary judgment in its favor on the ground that there are no genuine issues of material fact requiring an evidentiary hearing. Both parties have filed with their motions documents offered to support their positions. In arriving at this decision, the pleadings, all arguments made in the motions, and all documents filed by the parties have been considered.

1. On April 13, 1990, there was filed with the Creve Coeur Branch of the St. Louis, MO, Post Office an application for post office box (Form 1093) to be assigned, according to Box 1 thereof, to "M. Dillard, VP & Dir., Property Exchange & Sales." The application was signed "M. Dillard, V. President." The application requested the reassignment of Box 12705 at the Creve Coeur Branch, formerly assigned to Property Exchange & Sales, Inc. (hereinafter Property Exchange). The application was treated as having been filed by Property Exchange and was denied by the Postal Service on the ground that the box had been rented to another postal customer on failure of Property Exchange to pay the box rental.

2. The denial of the request for reassignment of Box 12705 was the subject of an earlier proceeding, Property Exchange & Sales, Inc., P.S. Docket No. 37/120 (I.D. 5/8/91; appeal denied P.S.D. 9/12/91) wherein the petition was dismissed because it presented a demand for which the regulations provide no relief.

3. Thereafter, on March 13, 1992, the Field Division General Manager/Postmaster, treating the April 13, 1990 Form 1093 as an application for a new box, issued a determination denying the application on the ground of inability to verify the information that M. Dillard (the applicant) is Vice President of the corporation and that the address of the corporation is 6612 Torlina Dr., citing Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) § 951.141 as authority.

4. In a "Supplemental Petition for Order of Entitlement to Post Office Box," Property Exchange, by R. Jacobs, opposes the determination on various grounds summarized as follows:

a. Under DMM § 951.142a the application should have been considered verified upon submission because Petitioner was a known applicant, having rented a box at the Creve Coeur Post Office for eight years.

b. That a postal clerk, nevertheless, required identification from M. Dillard when she presented the application; that Ms. Dillard presented her driver's license showing her address as 6612 Torlina which the clerk accepted and noted as verification.

c. That there was no discrepancy between information on the application and on the identification presented and, therefore, the application should have been approved and the box assigned.

5. The Postal Service argues that the denial of the application was proper in that it was based on the belief of the postmaster, founded on the investigative report of a postal inspector, that Petitioner presented false information on the application in that M. Dillard is not a legitimate officer of Property Exchange which is merely using her and her residential address as a means of avoiding disclosure of the personal residential address of R. Jacobs and/or the actual business address of Property Exchange.

6. The investigative report relied on by the postmaster, and by the Postal Service in this proceeding, is contained in the declaration of Postal Inspector W. H. Zieseniss, Jr. (Attachment C to Respondent's Answer and Motion for Summary Judgment). Paragraph 8 of the declaration reports the following relevant facts ascertained by the postal inspector during an interview of Mildred Dillard on April 26, 1991, at her residence, 6612 Torlina Drive, St. Louis, Mo 63134:

a. Ms. Dillard, approximately 74 years of age, met Richard Jacobs in 1982 when she began employment as a housekeeper at his residence. She worked for him one day a week for about seven or eight years.

b. At no time did she perform any duties or receive any pay as vice-president or in any other capacity for Property Exchange.

c. She was aware that Mr. Jacobs occasionally said that she was Property Exchange's vice-president but did not know why he did so unless it was for convenience.

d. She was never given Mr. Jacobs' telephone number.

e. Ms. Dillard terminated her housekeeping employment by Mr. Jacobs in late 1989 or early 1990.

f. Her last contact with Mr. Jacobs was in April 1990 when she accompanied him to the Creve Coeur Post Office in an attempt to rent Box 12705. She did not remember signing the Form 1093. She said that the signature appeared to be hers but that she did not fill in the information in any of the other boxes.

7. In Property Exchange's response to the Postal Service's contention that Ms. Dillard is not a legitimate officer of Property Exchange, R. Jacobs flatly states that the contention is false and that, in any event, the Postal Service has no "jurisdiction or mandate" to question and investigate the legitimacy of the vice presidency of Ms. Dillard. Mr. Jacobs says the Postal Service investigation found that Ms. Dillard has been officially listed as vice-president of the corporation in the Office of the Secretary of State of Missouri. The declaration of Postal Inspector Zieseniss, at pages 4 and 5, states that only in the annual report filed with that office in 1987 was Mildred Dillard listed as an officer of Property Exchange.

The issue presented for decision herein is whether the postmaster properly determined that box service should be denied because false information was provided on the Form 1093.

The applicant for a post office box as set forth in box 1 on the 1093 is "M. Dillard V.P. Property Exchange & Sales, Inc.", is signed "M. Dillard, V. President" and the address provided is 6612 Torlina. Given the way this information was presented on the form, the postmaster understandably took 6612 Torlina as the address of Property Exchange and, in verifying this information, found that it was not the address of the corporation but, rather, Ms. Dillard's residential address. Further, the investigation by the postal inspector disclosed that Ms. Dillard is not the vice-president of the corporation in any ordinary, conventional, or accepted sense. The postmaster was not bound to accept as true the information provided in the application. DMM § 951.141 contemplates, and impliedly authorizes, investigation of information provided by box applicants in its last sentence. $tn 951.141 Application

a. A Form 1093 is used to obtain post office box service. Blank applications may be obtained at any post office. An applicant must complete all spaces on the form which require customer-provided information and submit the completed form to any postal facility which provides window service to the public. The facility at which the application is submitted need not be the same as that at which the post office box service is desired. Furnishing false information on the application or refusal to furnish required information may be sufficient reason for denial of the application or discontinuance of service. (Emphasis supplied)

The postmaster properly denied Petitioner's application because it contained false information as found above. His determination dated March 13, 1992, is sustained.

Grant, Quentin E,
Chief Administrative Law Judge