In the Matter of the Petition by ) April 8, 1999
)
FRANK GOMON )
P.O. Box 570031 )
Tarzana, CA 91357-0031 )
)
)
Refusal to Provide Post Office )
Box Service ) P.S. Docket No. POB 99-69
APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Frank Gomon
P.O. Box 570031
Tarzana, CA 91357-0031
APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Michael W. Mumbach, Esq.
Civil Practice Section
United States Postal Service
475 L’Enfant Plaza, SW, Room 6235
Washington, D.C. 20260-1127
INITIAL DECISION
This is the third Petition recently filed by Mr. Gomon. In the first case, the decision of the Tarzana Postmaster to terminate Mr. Gomon’s post office box service was upheld because Mr. Gomon had failed to provide a verifiable physical address on his application form. P.S. Docket No. POB 98-505 (I.D. Dec. 21, 1998, P.S.D. Feb. 18, 1999).
In the second case, the decision of the Tarzana Postmaster to not rent Mr. Gomon a second post office box was also upheld, for the same reason. P.S. Docket No. POB 99-13 (I.D. Feb. 26, 1999). In both cases, Mr. Gomon had listed as his address on his application form, PS Form 1093, the address of the Union Rescue Mission. This is a place that provides beds to homeless persons or others in need of temporary shelter. Mr. Gomon did not claim that he actually resided there.
In this case, Petitioner’s application for a third post office box, his Form 1093, dated January 27, 1999, lists his residence as 231 Winston Street, Los Angeles, California 90013. The Petition further identifies this address as that of another shelter, the St. Vincent’s Cardinal Manning Center. Mr. Gomon refers to it as an "address where I can reside when a bed is available," and attaches a memorandum from a social worker to support that statement.
The Postal Service has again filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that there are no material facts in dispute. The facts in this case are essentially the same as in the earlier cases. Postal regulations require a box applicant to identify a "physical address," and to "provide proof of the physical address." Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) §D910.2.4. As was true in the earlier cases, Mr. Gomon does not claim to be homeless, nor does he claim that he resides at either of the shelters, only that he can spend a night there if he wants to and if a bed is available. This does not entitle him to a post office box. He also argues that, if the postmaster is unwilling to accept the address that Petitioner has identified, then the postmaster has to prove where Petitioner actually does reside. That is incorrect. Based on the information presented to him, the postmaster acted reasonably in concluding that Petitioner had not satisfied the requirements of the DMM. The postmaster is not required to do more.
The postmaster’s determination not to rent Petitioner a third post office box, based on failure to comply with Section D910.2.4 of the Domestic Mail Manual, is sustained. Accordingly, Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the Petition is dismissed.
Bruce R. Houston Chief Administrative Law Judge