In the Matter of the Petition by:	) September 2, 1993
					)
 JAMES D. MAMPLE  and			)
 DORRIS C. MAMPLE			)
 P.O. Box 1809				)
 Oakdale, CA  95361-1809		)
					)
					)
 Termination of Post Office 		)
 Box Service for P.O. Box 1809		)
 Oakdale, CA  95361-1809		) P. S. Docket No. 40/75


 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONERS:		James D. Mample
 P.O. Box 1809
 Oakdale, CA  95361-1809


 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:		Jeannine H. Walter, Esq.
 Consumer Protection Law
 United States Postal Service
 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
 Washington, DC  20260-1147

Petitioners have filed a further appeal opposing the decision to close P.O. Box 1809 for violation of Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) § 951.164. The Oakdale, CA Postmaster's decision to close P.O. Box 1809 was upheld by an Initial Decision of an Administrative Law Judge which the Judicial Officer made the Final Agency Decision under 39 C.F.R. 958.11 by Order dated June 15, 1993, and affirmed in a Postal Service Decision dated August 13, 1993, issued in response to Petitioners' untimely appeal.

Petitioners have reiterated their previous arguments all of which have been thoroughly considered by the Administrative Law Judge and the Judicial Officer.^1/ Petitioners have not shown that either the Initial Decision or the Postal Service Decision contain any errors of fact or law^2/ or that any other grounds exist for the Judicial Officer to revoke, amend or modify the prior decisions. Accordingly, Petitioners' further appeal is denied.

					James A. Cohen
					Judicial Officer   

1/ Contrary to Petitioners' assertion, in deciding this case the Judicial Officer considered all of the arguments presented in Petitioners' letters dated Dec. 15, 1992, February 22, 1993, and July 5, 1993.

2/ Petitioners contend that it is unfair to change the DMM "in the middle of the game." While a new DMM did take effect during the pendency of this case only the section numbers, not the substance of the applicable regulations were changed. Moreover in arriving at their respective decisions, both the Administrative Law Judge and the Judicial Officer applied the provisions in effect at the time the Postmaster determined Petitioners' post office box should be closed.