March 29, 2019

RYAN THOMAS BECHARD v UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

PSBCA No. 6769

APPEARANCE FOR APPELLANT
Ryan Thomas Bechard

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT
Valerie J. Pelton, Esq.
United States Postal Service Law Department

OPINION OF THE BOARD

Ryan Thomas Bechard filed a series of submissions seeking to initiate litigation before the Board.  The Postal Service filed a Motion to Dismiss asserting that the Board lacks jurisdiction because Mr. Bechard does not have a contract with the Postal Service.  The Board issued an Order directing Mr. Bechard to reply to that motion.  We specifically instructed Mr. Bechard to identify a contract to which he is a party with the Postal Service, within the meaning of the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-09.  Order, March 21, 2019.  On March 27, 2019, Mr. Bechard filed an Objection to Motion to Dismiss.  Because the Board lacks jurisdiction, we dismiss this case.
Mr. Bechard bears the burden of establishing the Board’s jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.  Brandt v. United States, 710 F.3d 1369, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2013).  By its terms, the CDA “applies to any express or implied contract . . . made by an executive agency for (1) the procurement of property, other than real property in being; (2) the procurement of services; (3) the procurement of construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of real property; or (4) the disposal of personal property.”  41 U.S.C. § 7102(a).  As we explained in Triumph Donnelly Studios LLC v. United States Postal Service, PSBCA No. 6683, 17-1 BCA ¶ 36,833:
In the absence of a disputes clause or jurisdiction over a matter assigned to us by the Postmaster General, neither of which are involved here, our jurisdiction is based on the Contract Disputes Act.  The CDA waives sovereign immunity and gives the Board the authority to hear appeals from contracting officer’s decisions issued by the Postal Service and the Postal Regulatory Commission.  41 U.S.C. § 7105(e)(1)(c).

Mr. Bechard’s arguments for the existence of a CDA contract with the Postal Service are inscrutable.  He appears to argue that his birth certificate and social security card are contracts with the United States, and because the Postal Service is an agency of the United States, they provide a basis for our jurisdiction.  “Just to make certain that there is absolutely a contract between myself and United States/U.S.P.S.,” Mr. Bechard also submitted a Declaration of Transfer in Trust for “all property of the estate within business entity RYAN T BECHARD” with the Judicial Officer or General Counsel of the Postal Service among others, designated as trustees.  That document also is inscrutable.
We are unable to discern the actions or harm for which Mr. Bechard seeks relief.  The only thing that is clear in this matter is that Mr. Bechard has not identified a contract within the meaning of the CDA, to which he and the Postal Service are parties.  Without identification of such a contract, we lack jurisdiction and must dismiss this case.

ORDER

This case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Gary E. Shapiro
Administrative Judge
Chairman

Alan R. Caramella
Administrative Judge
Vice Chairman

Diane M. Mego
Administrative Judge
Board Member