United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

A.B., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, RANDOLPH POST 

OFFICE, Charlotte, NC, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 18-1172

Issued: January 15, 2019

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 16, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a November 22, 2017 nonmerit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).1 Pursuant to the Federal 

Employees’ Compensation Act2(FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3 the Board lacks 

jurisdiction to review the merits of this case.

 

1 Under the Board’s Rules of Procedure, an appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of an 

OWCP decision. An appeal is considered filed upon receipt by the Clerk of the Appellate Boards. See 20 C.F.R. 

§ 501.3(e)-(f). One hundred and eighty days from November 22, 2017, the date of OWCP’s last decision was 

May 21, 2018. Since using May 22, 2018, the date the appeal was received by the Clerk of the Appellate Boards 

would result in the loss of appeal rights, the date of the postmark is considered the date of filing. The date of the U.S. 

Postal Service postmark is May 16, 2018, rendering the appeal timely filed. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(f)(1).

2 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

ISSUE

The issue is whether OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for a prerecoupment 

hearing as untimely filed.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 26, 2002 appellant, then a 21-year-old mail carrier, filed a traumatic injury claim 

(Form CA-1) alleging that on that date she was bit on the right hand by a dog while in the 

performance of duty. On May 23, 2012 OWCP accepted her claim for open wound of the finger, 

right hand. On November 13, 2012 it expanded acceptance of appellant’s claim to include posttraumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. OWCP paid her wage-loss compensation 

benefits on the periodic rolls as of November 14, 2012.

By decision dated September 5, 2017, OWCP determined that appellant had forfeited her 

entitlement to compensation beginning January 3, 2017 as, on January 3, 2017, she had pled guilty 

to 18 U.S.C. § 1920 False Statements to Obtain Federal Employees’ Compensation.3 OWCP 

indicated that, as a result of her conviction, and in accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 8148(a) and 20 

C.F.R. § 10.17, appellant was not entitled to receive further benefits under FECA. It noted that it 

would pay for any authorized medical treatment she received prior to the date of the conviction, 

but no further medical treatment would be paid beyond that date. Compensation benefits, 

including schedule award benefits, were terminated effective January 3, 2017, the date of

appellant’s conviction.

On September 5, 2017 OWCP advised appellant of its preliminary determination that she 

had received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $21,381.29 for the period 

January 3 through August 19, 2017 because she continued to receive compensation for this period 

after she pled guilty under 18 U.S.C. § 1920. It also made a preliminary determination that 

appellant was at fault in the creation of the overpayment because she accepted a payment she knew 

or reasonably should have known was incorrect, thereby precluding waiver of recovery of the 

overpayment. OWCP advised appellant that she could submit evidence or arguments contesting 

the fact of overpayment, amount of overpayment, or the finding of fault, and if OWCP then finds 

her without fault, waiver of recovery of the overpayment may be considered. It informed her that 

she could, within 30 days of the date of the preliminary overpayment determination, request a 

telephone conference with the district office, request that the district office issue a final decision 

based on the written evidence of record, or request a prerecoupment hearing. OWCP provided an 

overpayment recovery questionnaire (Form OWCP-20) for her completion and requested that she 

respond with supporting financial documentation within 30 days. No response was received. 

By decision dated October 6, 2017, OWCP finalized its preliminary determination that 

appellant received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $21,381.29 based on her

 

3 The record contains an order signed August 18, 2017 by a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern 

District of Texas, Dallas Division accepting appellant’s guilty plea under 18 U.S.C. § 1920 to one count of False 

Statements to Obtain Federal Employees’ Compensation for the 15 months preceding September 12, 2014. She was 

sentenced to 12 months in prison, restitution in the amount of $41,395.72, and a special assessment fee of $100.00.
3

forfeiture of compensation under 18 U.S.C. § 1920, and that appellant was at fault in the creation 

of the overpayment.

On October 27, 2017 OWCP received an overpayment action request form, dated 

October 11, 2017 and postmarked October 13, 2017, in which appellant requested a prerecoupment 

hearing.

By decision dated November 22, 2017, OWCP denied appellant’s request for a 

prerecoupment hearing as untimely filed. It found that, because her request was not filed within 

30 days of the September 5, 2017 preliminary overpayment determination, she was not entitled to 

a prerecoupment hearing as a matter of right.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

OWCP’s regulations provide that a claimant may request a prerecoupment hearing with 

respect to an overpayment.4 The date of the request is determined by the postmark or other 

carrier’s date marking.5 Failure to request the prerecoupment hearing within 30 days shall 

constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing.6 The only right to a review of a final overpayment 

decision is with the Board.7 The hearing provisions of section 8124(b) of FECA do not apply to 

final overpayment decisions.8

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for a prerecoupment 

hearing as untimely filed. 

OWCP issued a preliminary overpayment determination on September 5, 2017. It advised 

appellant that she had 30 days from that date to request a prerecoupment hearing. On October 27, 

2017 OWCP received an overpayment action request form, dated October 11, 2017 and 

postmarked October 13, 2017, in which she requested a prerecoupment hearing. The timeliness 

of a request for a prerecoupment hearing is determined by the postmark date or other carrier’s 

marking showing when the request was sent to OWCP.9 As appellant’s request for a 

prerecoupment hearing was postmarked on October 13, 2017, more than 30 days after the 

September 5, 2017 preliminary overpayment determination, it was untimely filed. As noted, the 

hearing provisions of section 8124(b) are not applicable to final overpayment decisions, which 

 

4 20 C.F.R. § 10.432.

5

Id. at §§ 10.439, 10.616(a); see also B.W., Docket No. 18-1004 (issued October 24, 2018); C.R., Docket No. 15-

0525 (issued July 20, 2015).

6

Id.

7 20 C.F.R. § 10.440(b).

8

Id.

9 B.W, supra note 5.
4

was issued in this case on October 6, 2017.10 Therefore, OWCP properly denied appellant’s 

request for a prerecoupment hearing as untimely filed.11

On appeal, appellant contends that the 30-day time limitation for prerecoupment hearings 

should not run against her because she was incompetent. However, there is no provision in FECA 

or its regulations which provides an exception for incompetence to toll the 30-day period to request 

a prerecoupment hearing.12 

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for a prerecoupment 

hearing as untimely filed.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 22, 2017 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: January 15, 2019

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

 

10 20 C.F.R. § 10.440(b).

11 See B.W., supra note 5; E.V., Docket No. 17-1328 (issued December 11, 2017); see also R.U., Docket No. 16-

0027 (issued March 24, 2017).

12 20 C.F.R. § 10.432.