September 9, 2008

 

In the Matter of the Petition by                                         

                                                                                                                                  

TINA KIDD                                                                                                                

 

P.S. Docket No. DCA 08-152

 

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:         

Tina Kidd                                          

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:     

William S. Estep

Labor Relations Specialist

United States Postal Service
           

FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982

 

Petitioner, Tina Kidd, filed a Petition for Hearing after receiving a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets from her supervisor.  This Notice stated the Postal Service’s intention to withhold $403.47 from Petitioner’s salary to collect a payroll related debt.

On July 15, 2008, the undersigned conducted a telephone conference with Postal Service representative, William Estep, and Petitioner, Tina Kidd.  After discussion of various alternatives, the parties agreed that this case would be decided on written submissions.

Accordingly, a schedule was set for the parties to file written submissions of evidence and argument beyond that filed with the Petition and Postal Service Answer.  The Order and Memorandum of Telephone Conference, dated July 15, 2008, also gave the parties some instruction on the type of evidence that should be submitted.  By Order dated July 28, 2008, Respondent’s request for an extension of time was granted.  The extension, to August 5, 2008 for filing evidence and argument, and to August 21, 2008 for filing rebuttal evidence/argument, applied to both parties.  Neither party has filed anything other than the Petition and the Postal Service Answer.

The following findings of fact are based on the Petition and the Answer, and attached documents.

FINDINGS OF FACT

            1.  On September 13, 2007, Petitioner was notified by a letter that she owed the Postal Service $403.47 for a “payroll related benefit.”[1]

            2.  On September 15, 2007, a supervisor signed a PS Form 3239, Payroll Deduction Authorization to Liquidate Postal Service Indebtedness, to authorize involuntary collection from Petitioner.  This form listed the debt as $403.37, but contained no information as to what the debt was for.  (Form 3239 attached to Petition).

 

3.  On April 3, 2008, Petitioner was issued a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets, also stating that Petitioner owed the Postal Service $403.47 for a “payroll related benefit,” and noting that she had not acted to repay the debt.  (Notice attached to Petition).

DECISION

            Neither party filed anything that identifies the alleged debt, beyond the phrase “payroll related benefit.”  Petitioner did not state why she believes she does not owe this alleged debt.  The initial burden of proof, however, is on the Postal Service to demonstrate what the alleged debt is based on and to at least state a theory as to why the employee owes the debt.

            In this case, the Postal Service Answer consists of nothing more than a recitation of the fact that Petitioner received the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets and has not paid the debt, with attached copies of the same documents that Petitioner submitted and copies of the Notice of Docketing and the Assigning Order that we sent to both parties.  Respondent has failed to carry its burden of proof.  Therefore, the Petition is granted.  Respondent may not collect $403.47 from Petitioner’s salary.

 

 

Bruce R. Houston

Chief Administrative Law Judge

 

 

 


[1] This letter is not included in the case file.  It is referenced in the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets.