In the Matter of the Petition by: March 17, 1993 DR. CAREY CARPENTER President The First Ozark Company P. O. Box 3557 Springfield, MO 65808-3557 Proposed Termination of Post Office Box Service For P. O. Box 3557, Springfield, MO P.S. Docket No. 40/63 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Dr. Carey Carpenter, Pro Se P. O. Box 1919 Farmington, NM 87499-1919 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Rodney Gould, Esq. Consumer Protection Division Law Department United States Postal Service Washington, DC 20260-1144
INITIAL DECISION
This proceeding arises out of a Petition filed by Dr. Carey Carpenter on December 4, 1992, appealing the Postmaster's Determination of November 6, 1992, to close P. O. Box 3557. The Postmaster determined that the box should be closed because it was being used for the sole purpose of forwarding.1/
Respondent Postal Service filed a Motion to Dismiss alleging that there is no genuine issue of fact which would necessitate an oral hearing. In this regard, Respondent contends there is no dispute that during 1991 and 1992 Petitioner filed 16 separate change-of-address orders requesting about 600 days of mail forwarding, and that even if the number of actual forwarding days was only 335, as alleged by Petitioner, that the box should still be closed due to the violation of DMM § 951.164.
Petitioner filed an Answer and Motion to Continue Use of Subject Box. He contends, inter alia, that the "sole purpose" for having the box was not to have his mail forwarded since he did pick up some mail from the box in person. He also asserts that the actual number of forwarding days was less than the number that he originally requested because: (1) 12 of the 16 change-of-address orders were discontinued by telephone or in person prior to the expiration date on the original request, (2) forwarding was sometimes delayed by the Postmaster, and, (3) the October 2, 1992, change-of-address order was never implemented. He also suggests that his entire seven-year history with the box should be considered rather than the two years in issue.
Although some facts are disputed, the record contains a sufficient number of undisputed facts to render a decision herein. The following findings of fact and conclusions of law are based upon the pleadings, memoranda, and exhibits attached thereto:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Petitioner Dr. Carey Carpenter has rented P. O. Box 3557, Springfield, MO 65808-3557 for over seven years. During the last two years, 1991 and 1992, Petitioner submitted 16 temporary change-of-address orders (Forms 3575) to the Postmaster with respect to this box.
2. These change-of-address orders requested that mail addressed to the
box be forwarded outside the state between the following dates:
1991
Starting Date Date to Discontinue
February 2 February 14
February 27 April 15
March 11 April 15
April 19 May 25
June 12 August 15
August 15 October 10
September 25 October 15
November 11, 1991 January 15, 1992
1992
Starting Date Date to Discontinue
January 15 February 15
February 15 March 15
March 25 April 15
April 20 July 15
June 10 September 15
July 31 August 15
August 15 September 15
October 2 December 15
3. These change-of-address orders requested forwarding of mail for about 270 days in 1991 and 318 days in 1992. This left only about 62 days in 1991 and 27 days in 1992 (up to December 15) when forwarding was not requested.2/
4. With the exception of the October 2, 1992, request, forwarding was implemented by the Postmaster within a few days of the requested starting date.3/ Contrary to Petitioner's assertion, the October 2 request was implemented on November 7, 1992 (Exh. 1, p. 9), at which time all mail which had accumulated in the box since October 2 was forwarded.
5. Petitioner returned to Springfield, Missouri, on some occasions prior to the "date to discontinue forwarding" on his change-of-address order, and picked up his mail from the post office box. Accordingly, the number of days that mail was actually forwarded by the Postmaster was less than the number of days that he originally requested.4/
6. On November 6, 1992, the Postmaster issued a Determination that Box 3557 should not be renewed because the box was being used solely for the purpose of forwarding mail in violation of DMM § 951.164.
7. In his Petition, Dr. Carpenter denies that he violated any regulation or condition relating to the care or use of the box, including DMM § 951.164.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Domestic Mail Manual § 951.82 provides that a Postmaster may close a post office box when the box customer has violated any regulation or condition relating to the use of the box. DMM § 951.164 provides: Forwarding. Boxes may not be used when the sole purpose is, by subsequently filing change-of-address orders, to have mail forwarded or transferred to another address by the Postal Service, free of charge.
2. Petitioner argues that his entire history of box use should be examined, including about five years in which he allegedly did not have his mail forwarded. However, the only issue is whether the Postmaster properly determined that Petitioner's use of the box during the past two years constituted a violation of the regulations. Accordingly, the prior history will not be considered.
3. During the period in issue Petitioner filed 16 temporary change-of-address orders which requested forwarding of his mail to addresses other than Springfield, Missouri, about 80% of the time. Petitioner contends that he canceled some of these orders prior to the originally requested date to discontinue, which resulted in fewer days on which his mail was forwarded. However, even if his recollection is correct on these dates, his heavy use of the box for forwarding still constitutes a violation of DMM § 951.164.5/ Mrs. Junior E. Powell, P. S. Docket No. 21/159 (P. S. D. Nov. 29, 1985) (11 change of address orders in 2 1/2 years). 4. Also, the fact that the Postmaster delayed the implementation of his forwarding orders by a few days, or even a month for the October 2, 1992, request, has no bearing on Petitioner's use of the box. In each instance, all of his mail was actually forwarded to the destination he requested.
5. There is no material issue of fact which would require an oral hearing. In view of the above findings and conclusions, the Postmaster's Determination is sustained and the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted. Accordingly, the Petition is dismissed.
Randolph D. Mason
Acting Chief Administrative Law Judge
1/ By previous letter the Postmaster had informed Petitioner of Domestic Mail Manual § 951.164, which prohibits the use of a box when the sole purpose is, by subsequently filing change-of-address orders, to have mail forwarded or transferred to another address by the Postal Service, free of charge.
2/ In 1991 there were four periods of 13, 4, 18, and 27 days, respectively, in which mail forwarding was not requested by change-of-address order. In 1992, there were only two such periods: 10 days in March and 17 days in September-October.
3/ Although forwarding in the "late spring" of 1992 may have been temporarily interrupted, the Postmaster began forwarding under the April 20 order on April 22, 1992.
4/ By Petitioner's calculation, there were only about 335 days during 1991-1992 during which the mail was actually forwarded. He states that he terminated the forwarding orders early by phone on seven occasions and in person on three occasions. He also fails to count the 74 days of forwarding after the October 2, 1992, order, arguing that the order was never implemented by the Postmaster. However, as indicated above, all of that mail was forwarded beginning on November 7, 1992.
5/ It is noted that prior to the Determination letter, his alleged early terminations during 1992 would only have reduced his forwarding time by about 53 days.