October 6, 2005

In the Matter of the Petition by

 

GLEN A. PATTERSON

600 NW 190th Street

at

Miami Gardens, FL 33169-3909

P.S. Docket No. AO 05-62

 

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:

Glen A . Patterson

600 NW 190th Street

Miami Gardens, FL  33169-3909

 

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:

Rick H. Avery

Labor Relations Specialist

United States Postal Service

2200 NW 72nd Avenue

Miami, FL  33152-9401

 

POSTAL SERVICE DECISION

 

            Petitioner, Glen A. Patterson, has filed an appeal from the Initial Decision of an Administrative Law Judge, which holds that Petitioner is indebted to the Postal Service in the amount of $4,112.44.  Petitioner contends that he is not indebted to the Postal Service for $1,817.24 for the continuation of pay (COP) he received from November 4, 1999 through December 17, 1999, or for the remaining $2,295.20, which the Administrative Law Judge determined he received as regular and holiday pay when he also was receiving annuity payments as part of his Postal Service retirement benefits.  Petitioner has attached to his appeal additional documents, which he contends establish that he is not indebted to the Postal Service in any amount.[1]

In the Initial Decision, the Administrative Law Judge concluded that Petitioner was indebted to the Postal Service, but the amount of the debt was not clearly established on the record presented.  Thus, using a jury verdict approach, the Administrative Law Judge concluded that the Postal Service was entitled to recover $4,112.44.

Petitioner has not shown that the Initial Decision is clearly erroneous or that any other grounds exist for the Judicial Officer to exercise his discretion to grant review of the decision and relieve him of the debt asserted by the Postal Service.  The record establishes that Petitioner received and has not repaid the COP for the period alleged, even though his injury compensation claim was denied and he elected to repay the COP rather than using accumulated leave.  The record also establishes that Petitioner received both regular pay and his retirement annuity for some period of time following May 8, 2000, the last day he worked for the Postal Service.  As the record is not sufficient to determine the exact rate and amount Petitioner received either as double pay (including holiday pay) following his retirement or the COP he received while on leave from the Postal Service, we can find no error in the Administrative Law Judge’s use of the jury verdict approach to calculate the total amount Petitioner owes to the Postal Service.

Accordingly, Petitioner’s appeal is denied, and Respondent may begin to collect $4,112.44, minus any funds already withheld, from Petitioner's annuity. 

                                                                                    James A. Cohen

                                                                                    Judicial Officer


[1] Petitioner attached several documents to his appeal, some of which had not been previously presented for inclusion in the record.  Since no showing has been made that the evidence was newly discovered or that it was otherwise unavailable for inclusion in the record before the Administrative Law Judge, it will not be considered on appeal.  Cf. Christian Duru and Femmy Akene, P.S. Docket No. MD 00-490 (P.S.D. March 21, 2001); The Pelican Group and Consultis, Inc., P.S. Docket No. MD 00-475 (P.S.D. Feb. 5, 2001); Paula A. Sheppard and Lisa M. Signorelli, P.S. Docket No. MD 97-190 (P.S.D. Aug. 15, 1997).