United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

B.O., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, 

CHARLESTON NAVAL SHIPYARD, 

Charleston, SC, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 19-0015

Issued: July 29, 2019

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

On September 18, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 22, 2018 decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).

1

 The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 19-0015. 

This case has previously been before the Board.2 By decision dated November 3, 2017, 

the Board affirmed in part, and set aside in part, OWCP’s overpayment decision dated 

October 4, 2016. The Board found that appellant had received an overpayment of compensation 

for the period September 1, 2008 to March 5, 2016 because she received compensation benefits 

from OWCP and the Social Security Administration (SSA) without an appropriate offset. The 

 

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 March 22, 2018, the date of OWCP’s last decision, was 

September 18, 2018. Because using September 24, 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 September 18, 2018, rendering the appeal timely filed. See 20 C.F.R. 

§ 501.3(f)(1).

2 Docket No. 17-0510 (issued November 3, 2017).
2

Board further found that the case was not in posture for decision with respect to the amount of the 

overpayment or the period of the overpayment as SSA had provided OWCP with information 

regarding appellant’s rate of SSA benefits beginning September 2008 both with and without 

Federal Retirement System (FERS) offset while the record established that appellant was covered 

under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS)-Offset retirement plan. The Board found that 

it was unclear from the record whether the rates under the CSRS-Offset retirement plan were the 

same as the rates under the FERS plan. The Board remanded the case for OWCP to obtain 

additional information from SSA and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regarding 

appellant’s retirement system and her SSA rate with and without any offset required based on her 

federal civilian service. The Board instructed OWCP to then recalculate the amount and period of 

the overpayment and issue a de novo decision.

In facsimile (fax) transmittals dated January 8 and February 20, 2018, OWCP requested

that SSA provide information regarding any dual benefits appellant may have received. On 

March 2, 2018 SSA submitted a form which showed SSA rates with a FERS offset and without a 

FERS offset from September 2008 through December 2017. 

By decision dated March 22, 2018, OWCP amended the overpayment amount and found 

that appellant received a $6,361.40 overpayment of compensation from September 1, 2008 through 

March 3, 2018. It noted that the original overpayment was $47,469.74. OWCP reduced the 

amount of the overpayment to $11,161.23 to reflect the amount of the FERS offset based on new 

information from SSA. This was the difference between $47,469.74 and $36,308.51. OWCP 

indicated that appellant had paid $300.00 per month since October 16, 2016 towards the original 

overpayment amount for a total of 18 payments, which reduced the new amount of the 

overpayment to $6,361.40. It further indicated that $4,799.83 was credited to the $11,161.23 

overpayment for payments deducted from appellant’s compensation benefits. OWCP found that 

as a result of the incorrect amount of FERS offset deducted from appellant’s compensation, it had 

deducted $13,307.89 from her compensation for the period covering March 6, 2016 through 

March 3, 2018 in error. It determined that the correct amount of the FERS offset for the stated 

period was $2,445.07. OWCP subtracted $2,445.07 from $13,307.80, which yielded $10,862.82. 

It determined that it had over-deducted $10,862.82 from the $6,361.40 overpayment. OWCP 

therefore concluded that appellant had repaid the overpayment in full and was entitled to a refund 

of $4,501.42.

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that this case is not in posture for 

decision as OWCP did not comply with the Board’s instructions as set forth in its November 3, 

2017 decision. By that decision, the Board found that the record established that appellant was 

not covered by FERS, but was instead under the CSRS-Offset retirement plan. On remand OWCP 

was to obtain additional information from SSA and OPM regarding appellant’s retirement system 

and her SSA rate with and without an offset required based on her federal civilian service. 

However, OWCP calculated the amount of the overpayment in this case based only upon the 

information received from SSA, which included rate information for a FERS offset and without a 

FERS offset. OWCP did not determine whether the rates in the FERS plan were the same as the 

rates under the CSRS-Offset retirement plan. OWCP should have sought clarification from SSA 

and OPM regarding appellant’s retirement coverage under the CSRS-Offset retirement plan prior 

to determining the amount of the overpayment.
3

On return of the case record OWCP should consult with SSA and OPM regarding 

appellant’s retirement coverage under the CSRS-Offset retirement plan and her SSA rate with and 

without any offset. Only after obtaining all of the necessary information should it then make 

findings of fact regarding the amount of the overpayment. After determining the amount of the

overpayment, OWCP shall develop the matters of fault, waiver of recovery of overpayment, and 

method of recovery. After this and other such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP 

shall issue a de novo decision.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 22, 2018 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside, and the case is remanded to OWCP for action

consistent with this order.

Issued: July 29, 2019

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board