In the Matter of the Petition by ) January 13, 1995 ) ) JULIA DIAZ ) 811 S. 5th Street ) ) at ) ) ) Rocky Ford, CO 81607-2338 ) P.S. Docket No. DCA 94-207 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Julia Diaz, pro se 811 South 5th Street Rocky Ford, CO 81607-2338 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Jeffrey W. Claye Labor Relations Specialist Central Plains District United States Postal Service 1124 Pacific Street, Room 312J Omaha, NE 68108-9401
Petitioner, Julia Diaz, filed a petition after receiving a Debt Collection Act notice advising her that she was liable to the Postal Service in the amount of $290.15. The assessment was made as a result of an audit of the main stamp stock at the Liberal, Kansas Post Office at which Petitioner was postmaster.
1. Petitioner was formerly the postmaster of the Liberal, Kansas Post Office.
2. In April 1994 an audit of the vending machine credit at the Liberal Post Office showed an overage of $1384.68. On October 17, 1994, another audit of that credit indicated a shortage of $1106,49. The previous overage was applied to the later shortage and the balance, $278.19, was placed in an account designated AIC 175. (Answer, Exhibit 2).
3. From August 25, 1994, through October 17, 1994, Petitioner assumed the responsibility for the main stamp stock when the customer service supervisor, the usual main stock custodian, suffered a heart attack. On or about October 17, 1994, Petitioner left the Liberal Post Office. ("Petitioner's Response to Management written testimony" (Response); Answer, Exhibit 6).
4. At the time she left, a transfer audit was conducted of the main stamp stock. The PS Form 3294 used to record the results of the audit reflected a shortage in the amount of $125.94. Another document in the record suggests that there was an additional main stock shortage in the amount of $81.25 recorded on October 14, 1994. However, the record contains no Form 3294 or other document directly supporting the claim of the additional shortage. (Answer, Exhibits 1, 6).
5. By letter dated October 21, 1994, Respondent demanded that Petitioner pay $290.151/ as a result of an alleged shortage in the main stamp stock. Although Identified only as a "Letter of Demand," the letter was accompanied by a -Statement of Debtor's Rights & Responsibilities" that included the right to petition for a hearing under 39 C.F.R. Part 961 (regulations governing hearings under the Debt Collection Act). Respondent also issued to Petitioner an invoice dated October 27, 1994, in the amount of $290.232/ . (Attachments to Petition).
6. Petitioner filed a timely petition under the Debt Collection Act.
7. Handbook F-1, Post Office Accounting Procedures, provides the following with respect to liability for accountable losses:
"131 PostmastersWhen an accountable financial loss occurs and evidence shows the postmaster conscientiously enforced USPS policies and procedures in managing the post office, the Postal Service grants relief for the full amount of the loss. When evidence fails to show the postmaster met those conditions, the Postal Service charges the postmaster with the full amount of the loss.
132 Other Employees
The postmaster consigns postal funds and accountable paper to other employees. Employees are held strictly accountable for any loss unless evidence establishes they exercised reasonable care in the performance of their duties." (Answer, Exhibit 5).
8. Handbook F-1 also specifies tolerances applicable to the counts of stamp credits and the main stock. The handbook specifies that tolerances are to be applied to the main stock count at "offices not required to maintain Forms 3295,' but not at offices required to use that form, when the main stock is transferred. The record does not indicate into which category the Liberal Post Office fell. However, If applicable, the size of the tolerance to be applied to the main stamp stock at Liberal would be $60.3/ (Answer, Exhibits 3, 5).
9. Handbook F-50, Examination of Stamp Credits and Stocks, provides that for post offices that sell postage from the main stock, the main stock is to be treated as any other stamp credit (with certain exceptions not relevant here). f or those offices that do not sell postage from the main stock, no tolerances are to be applied to a count of the main stock. The record does not indicate into which of these categories the Liberal Post Office fall. (Answer, Exhibit 4).
10. During the period that Petitioner was responsible for the main stock, clerks' stamp credits were audited as required; she was present when clerks recounted their stamp requisitions; and received stock was counted by her and a witness. Safe combinations were changed when she was required to assume responsibility for the main stock. (Response).
In its Answer, Respondent argues that the evidence does not indicate that Petitioner conscientiously enforced Postal Service policies and procedures in managing the post office and is, therefore, liable for the loss in accordance with the language in Finding 7, above. As evidence, Respondent argues that Petitioner failed to have the vending machine credit counted for over six months, even though the previous count showed the credit to have an overage of more than $1300. Respondent states that this example is "one of several."
Respondent also argues that under the provisions of Handbooks F-1 and F-50 related to tolerances, no tolerance was to be applied to the main stock when Petitioner transferred it to another employee upon her departure.
Petitioner argues that the evidence shows she conscientiously enforced all procedures relative to administration of stamp credits and stamp accountabilities. As to the alleged failure to timely count the vending machine credit, Petitioner argues that she had been told that that credit was to be audited only annually.
Based on a preponderance of the evidence presented in this matter, I conclude that Petitioner, as postmaster, conscientiously enforced USPS procedures with respect to the main stamp stock when she served as custodian. Petitioner asserted, without contradiction, that clerks' stamp credits were audited as required; that she was present when clerks recounted their stamp requisitions; and that received stock was counted by her and a witness. Further, she asserted that safe combinations were changed when she was required to assume responsibility for the main stock. This evidence is sufficient in this instance to establish a prima facie case that Petitioner conscientiously enforced the applicable procedures. Respondent's only evidence contradicting that conclusion relates to Petitioner's alleged failure to timely audit the vending machine credit. Petitioner responds that she believed that that credit only had to be audited once each year. Based on the very limited record in this matter, I cannot conclude that Petitioner was required to audit that credit more often than annually.
As to Respondent's arguments concerning whether any tolerance was to be applied at the time of transfer of the main stamp stock, I note first that the record does not reflect which of the two categories be applied to the Liberal Post Office -- i.e., whether or not a tolerance was to be applied to the count. Second, the language related to the application of tolerances relates only to the question of whether further inquiry is required to be made into a count that does not precisely balance. See Handbook F-1, Section 472.2. The language does not establish liability for shortages in any person or override the language in Handbook F-1 specifically addressing that topic. Therefore, the fact that there may have been a shortage in the main stock when it was transferred from Petitioner does not, by itself, establish her liability.
Accordingly, I conclude that Petitioner may not be held liable for the shortage with which she has been charged. The petition is granted.
David I. Brochstein Administrative Judge
2/ The record contains no explanation of the minor difference between the amount sought by the letter of demand and the amount noted in the invoice.
3/ Section 472.11 of Handbook F-1 specifies a tolerance of $60 for stamp stocks in excess of $60,000. The main stamp stock at Liberal had a value of approximately $125,000.