P.S. Docket No. AWG 22-30

FINAL DECISION

The Postal Service seeks to collect a debt from Donald Edwards by administrative wage garnishment through the Treasury Department. The Postal Service claims that Mr. Edwards had a negative 104-hour annual leave balance, valued at $2,566.99, when he separated. The debt was later referred to the Treasury Department. After the Treasury Department added collection fees, the total amount of the debt now being sought is $3,337.09. Mr. Edwards argues that he should be excused from the debt because he was not sure of his employment status in 2014, and the Postal Service did not timely pursue its right to collect.   
For the reasons discussed below, the petition is denied. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Mr. Edwards was employed by the Postal Service until he separated on July 22, 2014 (Exh. 5 at 6; Tr. 18). As of that date, he had a negative 104-hour annual leave balance (Exh. 5 at 6). The Postal Service calculated the value of those hours based on Mr. Edwards’s hourly rate, which was calculated by dividing his annual salary by 2080 hours (Tr. 18–20).   
2. Mr. Edwards’s supervisor had tried to fire him several times before 2014. Then in 2014, the supervisor told him “not to come to work anymore.” (Tr. 26–27). At that point, Mr. Edwards was not sure whether he had been fired (Tr. 27). 
3. The Postal Service sent an invoice to Mr. Edwards in October 2014 for $2,566.99 based on a negative 104-hour annual leave balance as of his separation date. Attached to the invoice was a Notice of Debt Determination advising Mr. Edwards that he could request review of the debt with the Judicial Officer Department. (Exh. 3).  
4. In March 2021, the Treasury Department sent Mr. Edwards a Notice of Intent to Initiate Administrative Wage Garnishment Proceedings. The Treasury Department sought to collect $3,337.09 from Mr. Edwards based on the negative annual leave balance. The amount was based on the original value of the debt plus collection fees added by the Treasury Department. (Exh. 4).  

DECISION

A retiring or separating employee's negative annual leave balance equates to a salary overpayment, entitling the Postal Service to recover the monetary value of the paid but unearned annual leave. To recover, the Postal Service must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it made the salary overpayments, the amount of the overpayments, and that the employee was not entitled to them. Employee and Labor Relations Manual § 512.72; Amerson v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-319, 2022 WL 622379 (February 1, 2022); Reneau v. United States Postal Service, AO 15-211, 2016 WL 10572230 (August 2, 2016). Here, the Postal Service has met that burden through documentary evidence and witness testimony. It has proved both the existence and amount of the debt based on Mr. Edwards’s negative annual leave balance as of July 2014. 
Mr. Edwards raised several defenses to the debt assessment. First, he argued that the Postal Service waited too long to collect the debt. He faults the Postal Service for failing to explain why it waited from 2014 until 2021 to seek the remedy of wage garnishment. But the relevant statute, 31 U.S.C. § 3716(e)(1), states that there is no statute of limitations on the government's right to collect debts such as the one at issue. In accordance with that statute's plain text, we have consistently held that the government may pursue nontax debts under the Debt Collection Act regardless of the age of the debt. Gray v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-367, 2022 WL 1487585 (April 7, 2022) (citing Joelanda Kelly v. United States Postal Service, DCA 19-203, 2020 WL 2198024 (April 29, 2020)); Merritt W. Foster III, DCA 07-119, 2009 WL 10690542 (May 27, 2009). As these cases hold, Mr. Edwards’s argument lacks merit. The Postal Service is not barred from collecting the debt even though it accrued in 2014.   
Next, Mr. Edwards argues that he was confused about his employment status in 2014. He claims to have not known the meaning or implication of his supervisor’s statement telling him not to come to work. But even if true, Mr. Edwards has not explained how his beliefs affect the debt. Regardless of his confusion, the record establishes that he worked for the Postal Service until July 2014. The record also establishes that he had a negative annual leave balance. Thus, in the absence of any further analysis explaining how his confusion should excuse the debt, this argument fails.   
Finally, Mr. Edwards made a vague allegation that either the Postal Service or the Treasury Department collected at least part of the debt in 2017. That allegation, however, fails for lack of proof. Mr. Edwards did not produce any documents or credible testimony to support this claim.  And documents submitted by the Postal Service also appear to refute this claim (Resp. Exh. 2). 

ORDER

The petition is denied. The Postal Service, through the Treasury Department, may collect the debt underlying this petition by administrative wage garnishment.