April 13, 2004
In the Matter of the Petition by
SYLVIA FIRESTONE
606 Jasmine Avenue
at
Corona Del Mar, CA 92625-2307
)
Determination to Terminate Post Office Box Service to P.O. Box 244, Corona Del Mar, CA 92626-0244
P.S. Docket No. POB 03-293
APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:
Ronald S. Cooper, Esq.
4630 Campus Drive, Suite 211
Newport Beach, CA 92660-1805
APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
Catherine A. Green, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel
United States Postal Service
475 L’Enfant Plaza SW, Room 6112
Washington, DC 20260-1135
POSTAL SERVICE DECISION
Petitioner has filed a Petition to Revoke, Amend or Modify (Petition) the final Order of the Judicial Officer upholding the termination of service to P.O. Box 244, Corona Del Mar, CA 92626-0244. Respondent, the General Counsel of the United States Postal Service, opposes the Petition.
BACKGROUND
On July 3, 2003, the Postmaster of the Corona Del Mar, CA Post Office notified Petitioner that service to her post office box had been terminated following a disturbance at that post office involving Petitioner and the Postmaster. Petitioner filed a timely appeal from the Postmaster’s determination and the matter was assigned to an Administrative Law Judge for processing and the issuance of an initial decision. While the matter was pending before the assigned Administrative Law Judge, Respondent filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Motion) in which it claimed there were no material issues of fact in dispute and that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Petitioner did not file a response to Respondent’s Motion and on September 30, 2003, the Administrative Law Judge issued an Initial Decision in which he granted Respondent’s Motion and upheld the termination of service to Petitioner’s post office box. Although Petitioner was notified she could appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s Initial Decision to the Judicial Officer, no appeal was filed and by Order of the Judicial Officer dated October 22, 2003, the Initial Decision became the final agency decision in accordance with 39 C.F.R. §958.9. Thereafter, the Postal Service properly rented P.O. Box 244 to another customer. Petitioner now seeks to have the Judicial Officer amend, modify or revoke the final Order to allow her to obtain service at P.O. Box 244.
Decision
Petitioner argues that the early July 2003 incident at the Corona Del Mar Post Office was caused by a misunderstanding and did not justify terminating service to her post office box. Petitioner also alleges that the Corona Del Mar Postmaster’s personal animosity, bigotry and prejudice towards her was the true reason for the termination.
Petitioner was given a full opportunity to respond to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment and to file an appeal from the Initial Decision with the Judicial Officer. A petition to revoke, amend or modify is not a second opportunity to present facts or arguments that should have been presented initially to the presiding Administrative Law Judge and to the Judicial Officer on appeal. Petitioner has not shown any newly discovered evidence that could not have been presented to the presiding Administrative Law Judge nor has she shown any change of circumstance or errors of fact or law which would warrant granting her Petition.[1] While Petitioner attempts to explain the early July 2003 incident at the Corona Del Mar Post Office as a misunderstanding, the evidence presented by Respondent to the Administrative Law Judge establishes that Petitioner’s conduct was abusive, threatening and disruptive and a proper basis for terminating her post office box service under applicable Postal Service regulations.[2] Moreover, Petitioner presented no timely evidence to support her allegation that the termination of service was the result of the Postmaster’s personal animosity toward her and a subsequent investigation failed to substantiate Petitioner’s assertion of bigotry or prejudice.
Finally, even if it had been shown that Petitioner’s post office box was improperly terminated, Postal Service regulations do not provide for the return of a post office box to a former boxholder after the box has been properly rented to another customer following the issuance of a final order by the Judicial Officer.[3]
Accordingly, the Petition to Revoke, Amend or Modify is denied.
James A. Cohen
[1] James D. Mample and Dorris C. Mample, P.S. Docket No. 40/75 (P.S.D. on Petition to Revoke, Amend, or Modify, Sept. 2, 1993); David S. Deriemer, P.S. Docket No. 39/141 (P.S.D. on Petition to Revoke, Amend, or Modify Order, Dec. 22, 1992).
[2] Domestic Mail Manual Section D910.8.2 (DMM Issue 58).
[3] See Sindy D. Thomas, P.S. Docket No. POB 02-96 (P.S.D. Feb. 28, 2003); William Kuntz, III, P.S. Docket No. 40/55 (P.S.D. April 26, 1993); Property Exchange & Sales, Inc., P.S. Docket No. 37/120 (P.S.D. Sept. 12, 1991).