P.S. Docket No. AWG 22-113

FINAL DECISION

The Postal Service seeks to collect from Ms. Durham an overpayment of 23 days of Continuation of Pay (COP) and one day of holiday pay. The Postal Service transferred the debt to the Department of Treasury (Treasury) for collection. Including its collection fees, Treasury seeks to collect $4,703.83 by administrative wage garnishment. Ms. Durham challenges the existence and amount of the debt. The petition was assigned to me for a hearing, which was held on June 17, 2022.

FINDINGS OF FACT

On August 4, 2011, Ms. Durham was in a motor vehicle accident while working as a carrier with the Postal Service. She could not return to work due to injury. (Resp. Exhs. 1–2). From the date of her injury until October 21, 2011 (the last day of pay period 22/2011), the Postal Service paid her COP. And because a federal holiday fell within these pay periods, she was also paid one day of holiday pay. (Resp. Exhs. 3–7; Tr. 20–24).
The Postal Service later discovered that her COP should have ended on September 18, 2011, which was during week 2 of pay period 20 (Tr. 19–20). It converted 23 days of COP and one day of holiday pay in pay periods 21 and 22 of 2011 to Leave Without Pay-Injured on Duty (LWOP-IOD). This action generated an invoice and notice dated February 29, 2012, to Ms. Durham to reimburse the agency for the overpayment. (Tonya Durham February 29, 2012 Invoice; Tr. 29–30). The amount owed was calculated by adding the gross amounts she was paid during pay periods 21 and 22, which came to $3,578.80 (Resp. Exhs. 3, 4; Tr. 17–19).
Ms. Durham left the Postal Service in 2018 (Resp. Exh. 1). The debt was then transferred to Treasury for collection and Treasury issued a Notice of Intent to Initiate Administrative Wage Garnishment Proceedings (Treasury Notice) on June 2, 2021. This action prompted Ms. Durham to file a petition for hearing on June 10, 2021.

DECISION

This matter arises under our administrative wage garnishment jurisdiction. Under 31 C.F.R. § 285.12(c), the Postal Service must send any nontax debt to Treasury for collection after 120 days. These debts may involve any nontax indebtedness to the Postal Service by a former employee. The procedures by which the Postal Service transfers this debt are set forth in 31 C.F.R. § 285.11. Also, the Postal Service has a separate agreement with Treasury that governs hearings in these debts. See, e.g., CY2023 Agreement to Certify Federal Nontax Debts for the Centralized Receivables Service, the Cross-Servicing Program, and the Treasury Offset Program (Treasury Certification Agreement).
If a debtor requests a hearing after receipt of a Treasury Notice, the matter is referred to the Judicial Officer for resolution. Our review of these debts is largely limited to two issues. The first issue is whether the Postal Service complied with due process provisions under the regulations and its obligations under the Treasury Certification Agreement. This review consists of accepting evidence from the Postal Service that before its referral of the debt to Treasury, the Postal Service gave the debtor appropriate notice to the debtor's “last known address.” 31 C.F.R. § 285.11(e)(1). The second issue is whether the debt is valid. The Postal Service carries the burden of proof on both issues. If successful, Treasury may collect both the debt and any related Treasury fees by administrative wage garnishment. Henry v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-524, 2022 WL 1715225 (May 26, 2022). 
To recover a salary overpayment, the Postal Service bears the initial burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the overpayment was made, the amount of the overpayment, and that the employee was not entitled to keep the overpayment. Jordan v. United States Postal Service, AO 19-66, 2019 WL 4233901 (I.D. August 22, 2019, aff'd, September 30, 2019). The Employee and Labor Relations Manual (ELM) states that employees who suffer job-related disabilities are entitled to COP for, among other things, “the period of the disability, up to a maximum of 45 calendar days, for a traumatic job-related injury.” ELM § 541.131; Jackson v. United States Postal Service, DCA 20-187, 2021 WL 1390578 (March 22, 2021). Moreover, an employee is eligible for holiday leave pay if they are in a pay status either the last scheduled hour before or the first scheduled hour after the holiday or designated holiday. ELM § 434.421. COP is considered a pay status (Tr. 21). LWOP-IOD, however, is not. ELM §§ 364, 514.1.
The Postal Service proved through testimony and documentary evidence that it overpaid Ms. Durham 23 days of COP and one day of holiday leave in the amount of $3,578.80. With potential Treasury fees, the debt totals $4,703.83.
Ms. Durham makes several arguments in her defense. First, she states that she does not recall receiving the invoice before it was referred to Treasury. A failure to recall receipt, however, does not excuse the debt or even the Treasury collection fees. What matters is whether the Postal Service sent written notice of the debt to the employee’s last known address. Carrillo v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-388, 2022 WL 2610530 (June 21, 2022). Ms. Durham does not allege the invoice was sent to an incorrect address. In fact, the invoice was sent to the same address listed on her PS Form 50 and on the Treasury Notice, which led to her filing of this petition. (Exh. 1; Tonya Durham February 29, 2012 Invoice, Treasury Notice). Ms. Durham also acknowledged that she received some type of statement, would hear from the Postal Service sporadically, and would call it in response. (Tr. 29–31).
Ms. Durham further testified that she believed that the debt was resolved through her litigation against the driver who struck her vehicle. (Tr. 33–34, 37). Ms. Durham, however, provided no evidence showing that the debt was handled or paid through that litigation, to which the Postal Service was not a party. She submitted her attorney’s fee agreement and correspondence with her attorney about interrogatory responses, none of which support her claim. (Petitioner Combined Exhibits)
Ms. Durham also argued that it is unfair for the government to seek payment 11 years after the debt was incurred. 31 U.S.C. § 3716(e)(1) states that there is no statute of limitations to collect debts such as the one at issue. We have long held that the government may pursue nontax debts under the Debt Collection Act regardless of the age of the debt. Edwards v. United States Postal Service, AWG 22-30, 2022 WL 16836196 (October 14, 2022). Her argument therefore fails.

ORDER

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