March 29, 2018

In the Matter of the Administrative Offset Petition

DAVID E. YOUNG v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

P.S. Docket No. AO 13-327

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:
David E. Young

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
Tracy A. Wood
Labor Relations Specialist

INITIAL DECISION

Petitioner David E. Young filed a Petition after receiving a Reconsideration of Existence/Amount of Debt finding him liable for three debts totaling $3,111.84.  I find that the Postal Service is entitled to recover $860.98 of its debt assessment, but is not entitled to recover the remaining $2,250.86.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Mr. Young was a full-time, regular mail handler at the New Castle, Pennsylvania Processing and Distribution Facility (Resp. Exh. 1).  On March 9, 2011, he was placed in emergency off-duty (without pay) status and was advised that he could use accrued annual leave while in that status.  On March 15, 2011, the Postal Service issued a Notice of Removal.  (Resp. Exhs. 2a, 2b).
2. Immediately following the Notice of Removal, Mr. Young elected to use his accrued annual leave.  At the beginning of 2011, Mr. Young was advanced 160 hours of annual leave (see Resp. Exh. 6 at 1 (Employee and Labor Relations Manual (ELM),
   § 512.311)).  At the time he was placed off-duty on March 9, 2011, Mr. Young had earned 60 hours of annual leave, leaving him with 100 hours of advanced unearned leave (Resp. Exh. 3a).
3. Mr. Young used 96 hours of annual leave before going on leave without pay (LWOP) (Resp. Exh. 3a), and was overdrawn by 36 hours, valued at $860.98 based on his annual salary (Resp. Exhs. 3a, 3b).
4. Mr. Young filed a grievance challenging his removal.  The grievance was resolved by arbitration and resulted in Mr. Young’s removal from the Postal Service on January 12, 2012.  (Resp. Exh. 1).
5. In addition to the Notice of Removal, the Postal Service sent Mr. Young a PS Form 3011, Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Coverage or Termination While in Leave without Pay Status (Resp. Exhs. 2b, 5).  The form allows an employee to discontinue health insurance coverage while in LWOP status and advises that if the form is not returned, health insurance coverage will continue (Resp. Exh. 5).  The record does not establish whether Mr. Young returned the form.
6. The Postal Service sent Mr. Young four invoices for his portion of the health benefit premiums between July 2011 and February 2012, seeking a total of $1,212.39 (Resp. Exh. 4 at 1-9).
7. The Postal Service also created an invoice for $1,038.47 for uncollected Flexible Spending Account (FSA) contributions while Mr. Young was on LWOP (Resp. Exh. 4 at 10¹).

DECISION

Under the Debt Collection Act, the Postal Service has the initial burden to establish that a debt exists for which an employee is liable.  Prado v. United States Postal Service, DCA 16-200, 2018 WL 1362944 (January 30, 2018); Saunders v. United States Postal Service, AO 14-307, 2015 WL 13647622 (I.D. February 24, 2015).  In a case involving FEHB premiums and FSA payments, the Postal Service must establish that the employee was enrolled in the FEHB and FSA programs during the period in which it seeks the overdue premiums and that it failed to collect those premiums from the employee for the same coverage period.  See, e.g., Lukas v. U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, VA 17-135, 2018 WL 1362949 (February 14, 2018); Willis v. United States Postal Service, DCA 16-258, 2017 WL 5516578 (July 18, 2017), recon. den., 2017 WL 5516579 (August 17, 2017).  Here, the Postal Service submitted no evidence that Petitioner was enrolled in an FSA benefits program or had FEHB coverage during the time alleged, and has not met its initial burden of proof.  The only evidence presented by the Postal Service is invoices for the alleged debts.  When an employee contests an alleged debt, the fact that the Postal Service issued an invoice proves nothing more than that someone prepared and printed the invoice.  Marcus V. Carter, DCA 08-323, 2008 WL 11383916 (December 23, 2008).  The Petition is thus granted with respect to the FEHB and FSA payments.  Mr. Young is not liable for the alleged debt of $2,250.86 related to those payments.
The Postal Service has met its burden with respect to the overdrawn annual leave debt.  Annual leave is not earned while an employee is on leave without pay.  Thus, for every 80 hours Mr. Young was in a nonpay status (in this case, LWOP), the 160 hours of advanced leave was reduced by 6 hours (ELM § 512.311).  Mr. Young does not contest that his leave was overdrawn by 36 hours, but argues that he should not be responsible for the overdrawn leave because the Postal Service was at fault for improperly granting the leave.  Administrative error does not, however, relieve an employee of a debt.  See, e.g., Riemer v. United States Postal Service, AO 15-286, 2016 WL 10572237 (May 6, 2016).  Mr. Young is liable for the overdrawn annual leave in the amount of $860.98.
Mr. Young requests forgiveness of the debt based on financial hardship.  A hearing official in an administrative offset case does not have the authority to grant a waiver, but may consider financial hardship in setting a repayment schedule. See Kathryn R. Yates, AO 08-67, 2008 WL 11383898 (June 18, 2008).
Neither the Postal Service nor Mr. Young proposed an offset schedule.  However, Mr. Young did submit evidence to support his claim of financial hardship.  Based on that evidence, I find that Mr. Young must pay $75 per month until the debt is repaid.

ORDER

The Petition is granted in part and denied in part.  Mr. Young shall pay $75 per month until the debt of $860.98 is satisfied.

Diane M. Mego
Administrative Judge