United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

M.H., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Newburyport, MA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 16-1209 

Issued: February 16, 2017 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On May 18, 2016 appellant filed a timely appeal from a May 4, 2016 merit decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ 

Compensation Act1

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over 

the merits of this case. 

ISSUES 

The issues are: (1) whether OWCP properly determined that appellant received an 

overpayment of compensation in the amount of $765.22 for the period March 28 through April 4, 

2015; and (2) whether OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

Appellant, a 43-year-old letter carrier, has an accepted occupational disease claim for 

right plantar fasciitis, bilateral hallux rigidus, and sequela of left foot pathological fracture, 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

which arose on or about September 1, 2012. OWCP also accepted that he experienced a 

recurrence of disability beginning September 29, 2014. Appellant received wage-loss 

compensation for temporary total disability. OWCP placed him on the periodic compensation 

rolls, effective December 14, 2014. 

On March 23, 2015 appellant advised OWCP that he planned to return to full-time 

regular duty, effective March 28, 2015. On March 30, 2015 the employing establishment 

confirmed (Form CA-3) that he resumed his full-time regular duties on March 28, 2015. OWCP 

subsequently removed appellant from the periodic compensation rolls. 

On April 4, 2015 OWCP paid appellant net compensation in the amount of $1,496.78 for 

the 28-day period of March 8 through April 4, 2015. The payment was disbursed via electronic 

funds transfer (EFT/direct deposit). On that same date, OWCP disbursed an additional 

$1,181.48 (EFT) for appellant’s child support obligation. 

On May 20, 2015 OWCP notified appellant of its preliminary determination that he 

received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $765.22 for the period March 28 

through April 4, 2015. It explained that the overpayment occurred because he received wageloss compensation for temporary total disability following his March 28, 2015 return to full-time 

work. Appellant was entitled to wage-loss compensation for only 20 of the 28 days covered by 

the April 4, 2015 periodic rolls payment.2

 OWCP also advised of its preliminary determination 

that he was not at fault in creating the overpayment. The May 20, 2015 preliminary 

determination advised appellant of his appeal rights. OWCP instructed him to complete an 

overpayment recovery questionnaire (Form OWCP-20) and submit supporting financial 

documentation. 

On May 27, 2015 appellant requested a prerecoupment hearing, which was scheduled for 

February 18, 2016. He submitted his May 27, 2015 Form OWCP-20 overpayment recovery 

questionnaire wherein he reported total monthly income of $4,845.09 and total monthly expenses 

of $4,133.00, which included child support. In part 3 of the form -- without fault statement -- 

appellant noted that “[t]he overpayment was an error of OWCP not me. It shouldn’t have to be 

my problem now.” He did not submit any financial documentation to support his reported 

monthly income and expenses. 

Appellant did not participate in the scheduled prerecoupment hearing, therefore, the 

Branch of Hearings and Review treated his request as a review of the written record. 

By decision dated May 4, 2016, the hearing representative found that appellant received 

an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $765.22 for the period March 28 to 

April 4, 2015. She also determined that he was not at fault in the creation of the overpayment. 

Additionally, the hearing representative denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment, noting 

that appellant failed to provide any documentation supporting his claimed expenses. 

 2

 Of the total funds ($2,678.26) disbursed on April 4, 2015, appellant’s was only entitled to receive $1,913.04 

($2,678.26 ÷ 28 days = $95.65 per day × 20 days), which represented an overpayment of compensation in the 

amount of $765.22. 
3

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 1 

Section 8102 of FECA provides that the United States shall pay compensation for the 

disability of an employee resulting from personal injury sustained while in the performance of 

duty.3

Section 8116 of FECA defines the limitations on the right to receive compensation 

benefits. This section of FECA provides that, while an employee is receiving compensation, he 

or she may not receive salary, pay, or remuneration of any type from the United States, except in 

limited circumstances.4 OWCP regulations provide that compensation for wage loss due to 

disability is available only for any periods during which an employee’s work-related medical 

condition prevents him or her from earning the wages earned before the work-related injury.5

A claimant is not entitled to receive temporary total disability and actual earnings for the 

same period.6

 OWCP procedures provide that an overpayment of compensation is created when 

a claimant returns to work, but continues to receive wage-loss compensation.7

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1 

The Board finds that appellant received an overpayment of compensation in the amount 

of $765.22. The record supports, and appellant has not disputed, that he returned to full-time 

work on March 28, 2015, but continued to receive wage-loss compensation for temporary total 

disability through April 4, 2015. When an employee returns to work and ceases to have any loss 

of wages, he is no longer entitled to compensation for wage loss.8 Appellant does not dispute the 

amount of the overpayment, but rather argues that “[t]he overpayment was an error of OWCP not 

me. It shouldn’t have to be my problem now.” As he has not disputed the amount of the 

overpayment and he returned to work on March 28, 2015, appellant was not entitled to disability 

compensation for the eight-day period following his return to work. Accordingly, OWCP 

properly found an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $765.22. 

The Board will affirm the hearing representative’s May 4, 2016 finding regarding the fact 

and amount of the overpayment. Additionally, the Board will not disturb the hearing 

representative’s finding that appellant was not at fault in creating the above-noted overpayment. 

 3

 5 U.S.C. § 8102. 

4 Id. at § 8116(a). 

5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.500(a). 

6 See R.W., Docket No. 13-1285 (issued November 13, 2013). 

7

 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 -- Debt Management, Initial Overpayment Actions, Chapter 6.200.2a 

(May 2004). 

8 See Kenneth E. Rush, 51 ECAB 116 (1999). 
4

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2 

The waiver or refusal to waive an overpayment of compensation by OWCP is a matter 

that rests within OWCP’s discretion pursuant to statutory guidelines.9 These statutory guidelines 

are found in section 8129(b) of FECA which states: Adjustment or recovery [of an 

overpayment] by the United States may not be made when incorrect payment has been made to 

an individual who is without fault and when adjustment or recovery would defeat the purpose of 

this subchapter or would be against equity and good conscience.10 When a claimant is found to 

be without fault in the matter of the overpayment, then, in accordance with section 8129(b), 

OWCP may only recover the overpayment if it determined that recovery of the overpayment 

would neither defeat the purpose of FECA nor be against equity and good conscience.11 

Section 10.438 of OWCP’s regulations provide that the individual who received the 

overpayment is responsible for providing information about income, expenses, and assets as 

specified by OWCP. This information is needed to determine whether or not recovery of an 

overpayment would defeat the purpose of FECA or be against equity and good conscience. This 

information will also be used to determine the repayment schedule, if necessary. Failure to 

submit the requested information within 30 days of the request shall result in denial of waiver, 

and no further request for waiver shall be considered until the requested information is 

furnished.12 

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 2 

Appellant failed to provide any financial information within the appropriate time period 

to show that he was entitled to waiver of recovery of the overpayment of compensation. The 

Board notes that he merely filled in his income and expenses, but did not provide any 

documentation to support his reported financial situation. Because appellant did not comply with 

section 10.438 of OWCP’s regulations, he is not entitled to waiver of recovery of the $765.22 

overpayment of compensation. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that OWCP properly determined that appellant received an overpayment 

of compensation in the amount of $765.22. The Board also finds that OWCP properly denied 

waiver of recovery of the overpayment. 

 9 See Robert Atchison, 41 ECAB 83, 87 (1989). 

10 5 U.S.C. § 8129(b). 

11 M.G., Docket No. 14-1917 (issued January 22, 2015). 

12 20 C.F.R. § 10.438. 
5

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the May 4, 2016 decision of the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: February 16, 2017 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board