By Tracy Peterson

NEW YORK CITY, May 7--Somewhere on the third floor of the New York State Department of Social Services, a hearing is about to take place. The room is small, approximately 6 feet in all directions.

Michelle Rivera enters this dark musty place, trembling. With her younger child on her hip and a green file folder under her arm, she pushes the stroller ahead of her into the room.

This is her first venture in fighting for herself.

A former welfare recipient, supporting herself and two children on the proceeds of a part-time job, she received a letter in March demanding that she repay $1,155 to the government.

The letter claimed that she had received too many food stamps two years ago during a six-month period. Rivera, a junior at Hunter College, asked for what is called a fair hearing, that is, she wanted a chance to argue her case and prove the agency wrong.

Present at the hearing were the hearing officer, a representative of the welfare department and a supporter from the campus Welfare Rights Initiative.

Almost immediately, an awkward silence fell over the room. The faint cooing and babbling of one-year old Kylana, fidgeting on her mother's lap brought the room to life.

"We have a budding advocate here," joked Judge Marilyn Mosberg Shapiro, ``and that may be the most profound statement we'll hear today."

Marie Van Leren, representing the welfare department, spoke briefly and acknowledged that her records were incomplete. She did not have a sufficient record of Rivera's pay stubs, she said.

For the agency to prevail, Rivera would have had to be ineligible for food assistance for the entire period.

Rivera stated otherwise.

"I submitted all my pay stubs, everything I was supposed to do, but still they didn't close my case. It's the agency's mistake not mine," said Rivera. She added even though her case was not closed, she did not receive the $177 a month in food stamps the agency claimed she did.

``This was not a lot and didn't always last till the end of the month. I always ended up having to borrow money," said Rivera.

Shapiro immediately concluded that at this time she could not make a decision.

"I'm not comfortable with the amount of earnings we have here. I need to know the exact amount. I need more information before I could make a decision," she stated. "However,'' she continued, "I think it's safe to say there has been an over-issuance of food stamps here."

Rivera, wiping her daughter's runny nose, attempted to recount her experience with the welfare office. Shapiro stated flatly that she would contact Albany and ask them to review the records again and a written decision would be sent to Rivera within 10 days. She urged Rivera to review all her records.

"The bottom line is there has been an overpayment of these benefits and the city wants their money back,'' said Shapiro. "You have been successful at this hearing. You have achieved as much as you can in challenging this issue," she said.

Rivera couldn't help but think otherwise.

She felt the weight of the world push down on her as she struggled to pull herself and her daughter up from the chair to leave.