March 20, 2001

In the Matter of the Petition by

ALLSIE H. PEARSON
67 Duncan Road

          at

Hempstead, NY 11550-4646

P.S. Docket No. DCA 01-52

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:
Allsie H. Pearson
67 Duncan Road
Hempstead, NY 11550-4646

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
Donohue F. Elliott
Labor Relations Specialist
United States Postal Service
J.A.F. Building
421 8^th Avenue, Room 3505
New York, NY 10199-9401

Petitioner, Allsie H. Pearson, filed a Petition after receiving an invoice dated January 26, 2001, from the Accounting Service Center in Eagan, Minnesota. This invoice indicated that Petitioner owed the Postal Service $255.33.

Respondent's Answer, which argued that the Petition was untimely and should be dismissed, was treated as a motion to dismiss. Petitioner was given an opportunity to reply to the motion, and he did so. The following findings of fact are based on all the information filed by the parties.

1. At the time pertinent to this case, Petitioner was a window clerk at the Knickerbocker Station in New York City. On September 15, 1997, Petitioner was issued a Letter of Demand for $255.33, alleging that his flexible credit account was found to be short that amount in an audit on September 12, 1997. (Answer, Tab 2).

2. Sometime thereafter, Petitioner was issued a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets by a supervisor stating that, as Petitioner had not acted to pay the debt, the Postal Service intended to withhold money from his paycheck, beginning on January 1, 2000. The Notice was not dated and Petitioner did not sign to indicate receipt of it, but a witness signed it, noting, "employee refused to sign." Included with the Notice were a Statement of Debtor's Rights and Responsibilities, and a copy of the Rules of Procedure Governing Hearings Under the Debt Collection Act. These documents clearly stated the requirement that a Petition for hearing must be filed within fifteen days of receipt of the Notice. (Answer, Tab 1).

3. Sometime thereafter, Petitioner's union filed a grievance on his behalf. In a letter dated December 31, 1999, a management representative denied the grievance on the basis that issuance of the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets provided the grievant with rights under the Debt Collection Act and that the matter was no longer "in the purview of the National Agreement." The union appealed this decision to arbitration. (Answer, Tabs 4 and 5).

4. On May 3, 2000, an arbitrator, noting that Petitioner had received the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets, agreed with the management decision and ruled that "this matter is not subject to arbitration." (Answer, Tab 3).

5. On or about February 5, 2001, Petitioner received an invoice listing the $255.33 debt and directing payment to the Accounting Service Center in Eagan, Minnesota. Petitioner filed his Petition on February 7, 2001. (Petition; Answer, Tab 8).

The Debt Collection Act and Respondent’s implementing regulations require that a petition for a hearing be filed within 15 days after receipt of a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets. 5 U.S.C. §5514(a)(2); Employee and Labor Relations Manual 452.331; 39 C.F.R. § 961.4. An employee may be deemed to have waived his right to a hearing if the petition is filed after the 15-day period and the employee "fails to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Hearing Official good cause for the delay." 39 C.F.R. §961.10(a).

The evidence submitted by Respondent (Findings of Fact 2-4) shows that Petitioner received the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets at least as early as December 1999. His Petition, therefore, is well over a year late. In reply to the motion to dismiss, he does not dispute this fact, but complains that the Postal Service did not provide him with documents that he asked for and did not make him aware of the arbitrator's May 3, 2000 ruling. He does not say when he asked for documents, and provides no details. He also complains that the Postal Service has not acted in a timely manner, in that the Letter of Demand was issued in September 1997 and the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets more than two years later.

Unlike the requirement that an employee file a petition within fifteen days of receipt of the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets, there is no statutory time limit for issuance of the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets. Neither this, nor the other matters raised by Petitioner, constitutes a basis

for excusing his late filing. Accordingly, Respondent's motion is granted and the Petition is dismissed.

					Bruce R. Houston
					Chief Administrative Law Judge