United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

A.A., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD 

SAFETY & INSPECTION SERVICE, 

Columbus, OH, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0751

Issued: December 12, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On April 13, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 22, 2022 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 $7,466.01 for the period July 19, 2020 through 

October 9, 2021 because she improperly received wage-loss compensation at an augmented 

compensation rate to which she was not entitled; (2) whether it properly found appellant at fault 

in the creation of the overpayment, thereby precluding waiver of recovery of the overpayment; and 

(3) whether OWCP properly required recovery of the overpayment by deducting $250.00 from 

appellant’s continuing compensation payments every 28 days.

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

FACTUAL HISTORY

On May 2, 2019 appellant, then a 47-year-old consumer safety inspector, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on May 2, 2019 she injured her left knee when she missed 

a step while climbing up concrete steps and fell onto her knee in the performance of duty. OWCP 

accepted the claim for left knee sprain, contusion, and lateral meniscus tear. It paid appellant 

wage-loss compensation on the supplemental rolls commencing September 12, 2019 and on the 

periodic rolls as of December 8, 2019, at the augmented rate of 75 percent. 

In a Form EN-1032 dated June 26, 2020, appellant claimed her daughter, P.A., with a date 

of birth of February 7, 2002, as a dependent noting that her daughter did not reside with her, but 

that she provided support for college expenses and money for food and clothes. The EN-1032 

defined a child as eligible to be considered a dependent for augmented compensation if the child 

was under the age of 18 and living with her; an unmarried child 18 years or over, but who is unable 

to support herself or himself because of physical or mental disability; or an unmarried child under 

23 years of age who is a full-time student and has not completed four years of school beyond the 

high school level.

In a Form EN-1032 signed and dated June 28, 2021, appellant indicated that she had an 

eligible dependent, her daughter P.A., and as such, was entitled to wage-loss compensation at the 

augmented rate of 75 percent. She indicated her daughter’s date of birth was February 7, 2002, 

that her daughter did not live with her, and that she was applying to attend college. The EN-1032 

form again provided the definitions for eligible dependents.

By letter dated June 28, 2021, OWCP advised appellant that augmented compensation was 

payable for an unmarried child who had reached the age of 18 and was a full-time student who had 

not completed four years of education beyond high school. It provided her with a form to complete 

if she was continuing to claim augmented compensation for P.A. as a student.

In a memorandum of telephone call (Form CA-110) dated October 7, 2021, appellant 

informed OWCP that her daughter graduated high school in June 2020 and did not go to college. 

On October 14, 2021 OWCP advised appellant that it had made a preliminary overpayment 

determination that she received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $7,466.01 for 

the period July 19, 2020 through October 19, 2021 because she received compensation at the 

augmented three-fourths rate instead of the two-thirds rate when she had no dependents. It noted 

that she had received a total of $54,607.00 for wage-loss compensation at the augmented rate based 

on an eligible dependent from July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021. Appellant, however, was 

only entitled to receive $47,140.99 in compensation based on the appropriate two-thirds rate for 

lack of an eligible dependent, resulting in a $7,466.01 overpayment.

2

 OWCP found that she was 

with fault in the creation of the overpayment because she knew or reasonably should have known 

that there was no entitlement to compensation at the augmented rate because she did not have an 

eligible dependent. It indicated that appellant neglected to provide notification within 90 days of 

the dependency change and knowingly continued to accept compensation payments at the 

augmented rate despite such knowledge. OWCP advised her that she could submit evidence 

2 The record contains a manual adjustment form and worksheets regarding the dates and calculations of the 

overpayment of compensation.
3

challenging the fact, amount, or finding of fault and request waiver of the overpayment. It 

provided an overpayment action request form and informed appellant that she could submit 

additional evidence in writing or at a prerecoupment hearing, but that a prerecoupment hearing 

must be requested within 30 days of the date of the written notice of the overpayment. OWCP 

requested that she complete and return an enclosed overpayment recovery questionnaire (Form 

OWCP-20) within 30 days to be considered regarding the questions of waiver and method of 

recovery of the overpayment. It also requested that appellant submit supporting financial 

documentation, including copies of income tax returns, bank account statements, bills, pay slips, 

and any other records to support income and expenses. No further evidence was received.

By decision dated March 22, 2022, OWCP finalized its preliminary overpayment 

determination, finding that appellant had received an overpayment of compensation in the amount 

of $7,466.01 for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021 because she had improperly 

received augmented compensation without having eligible dependents. It found her at fault in the 

creation of the overpayment because she had neglected to provide notification of the dependency 

change within 90 days and she continued to knowingly accept compensation at a rate to which she 

was not entitled. Therefore, OWCP found that appellant was not entitled to waiver of recovery. 

It advised her that the overpayment would be recovered by deduction of $250.00 from her

continuing compensation payments every 28 days. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 1

FECA provides that the United States shall pay compensation for the disability or death of 

an employee resulting from a personal injury sustained while in the performance of duty. 3 If the 

disability is total, the United States shall pay the employee during the period of total disability the 

basic compensation rate of 66 2/3 percent of her monthly pay. A disabled employee is entitled to 

an augmented compensation rate of 75 percent if he or she has one or more dependents.4

A dependent includes an unmarried child who, while living with the employee or receiving 

regular contributions from the employee toward his or her support, is either under 18 years of age 

or over 18 years of age and incapable of self-support due to physical or mental disability.

5

 A child

is also considered a dependent if he or she is an unmarried student under 23 years of age who has 

not completed four years of education beyond the high school level and is currently pursuing a 

full-time course of study at a qualifying college, university, or training program.

6

If a claimant received compensation at the augmented rate during a period when he or she 

did not have an eligible dependent, the difference between the compensation that was disbursed at 

3

5 U.S.C. § 8102(a).

4 E.B., Docket No. 19-1571 (issued December 31, 2020); R.G.,Docket No. 18-1251 (issued November 26, 2019);

O.R., 59 ECAB 432, 436 (2008); id. at §§ 8105(a) and 8110(b).

5

Id. at § 8110(a).

6 E.B., supra note 4; R.G., supra note 4;see also E.G., 59 ECAB 599, 603 n.10 (2008).
4

the 75 percent augmented rate and the compensation that should have been disbursed at the 66 2/3 

percent basic rate constitutes an overpayment of compensation.

7

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1

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

of compensation in the amount of $7,466.01 for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021 

because she received wage-loss compensation at an augmented compensation rate to which she 

was not entitled.

The evidence of record reflects that appellant continued to receive compensation at the 

augmented rate from July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021, despite the fact that her daughter, 

P.A., who was initially claimed as a dependent, turned 18 years old on February 7, 2020, graduated 

high school in June 2020, but did not attend college. Therefore, she no longer qualified as an 

eligible dependent under FECA.

Compensation records confirm that OWCP continued to pay appellant compensation at the 

augmented rate from July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021, which amounted to a total of 

$54,607.00. Appellant, however, was only entitled to receive $47,140.99 in compensation at the 

basic rate, resulting in an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $7,466.01. Accordingly, 

the Board finds that OWCP properly determined that she received an overpayment of 

compensation in the amount of $7,466.01 for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021.

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2

5 U.S.C. § 8129(b) provides: “Adjustment or recovery 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 FECA or would be against equity and good 

conscience.”

8

 A claimant who is at fault in the creation of the overpayment is not entitled to 

waiver.9 On the issue of fault 20 C.F.R. § 10.433(a) provides that an individual will be found at 

fault if he or she has done any of the following: (1) made an incorrect statement as to a material 

fact which he or she knew or should have known to be incorrect; (2) failed to provide information 

which he or she knew or should have known to be material; or (3) accepted a payment which he 

or she knew or should have known was incorrect.

10

With respect to whether an individual is without fault, section 10.433(b) of OWCP’s 

regulations provide that whether or not OWCP determines that an individual was at fault with 

respect to the creation of an overpayment depends on the circumstances surrounding the 

7

S.D., Docket No. 17-0309 (issued August7, 2018);RalphP. Beachum, Sr., 55 ECAB 442, 445 (2004).

8

5 U.S.C. § 8129(b).

9

See C.Y.,Docket No. 18-0263 (issued September 14, 2018).

10 20 C.F.R. § 10.433(a).
5

overpayment. The degree of care expected may vary with the complexity of those circumstances 

and the individual’s capacity to realize that he or she is being overpaid.

11

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 2

The Board finds that OWCP properly determined that appellant was at fault in the creation 

of the overpayment of compensation for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021, thereby 

precluding waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

In a Form EN-1032 dated June 26, 2020, appellant claimed her daughter, P.A., with a date 

of birth of February 7, 2002, as a dependent noting that her daughter did not reside with her, but 

that she provided support for college expenses and money for food and clothes. The EN-1032 

form contained a definition of a dependent child for augmented compensation as an unmarried 

child under the age of 18 and living with appellant; an unmarried child 18 years or over, but who 

is unable of supporting herself or himself because of physical or mental disability; or an unmarried 

child under 23 years of age who is a full-time student and has not completed four years of school 

beyond the high school level. By June 26, 2020 appellant’s daughter, P.A., was 18 years of age,

had graduated from high school and was not attending college. Appellant again on an EN-1032 

dated June 28, 2021 noted her daughter turned 18 on February 7, 2020 and was applying to attend 

college. It was not until October 7, 2021 that appellant informed OWCP that her daughter 

graduated high school in June 2020 and did not go to college. 

The Board finds that OWCP properly determined that appellant was at fault in the creation 

of the overpayment because she knew or should have known that she improperly continued to 

claim her daughter as a dependent when she no longer had an eligible dependent as of June 2020. 

OWCP’s procedures provide that if the claimant promptly notifies it of a dependency change, she 

should be found without fault. However, if notice is not provided within 90 days of such a change, 

the claimant is with fault because she has knowingly continued to receive compensation at the 

augmented compensation rate when she had no eligible dependents.12

Given the circumstances of this case, the Board finds that appellant failed to notify OWCP 

of the dependency change within 90 days and accepted compensation at a rate she knew or should 

have known that she was not entitled to receive. Appellant was therefore at fault in the creation 

of the overpayment and OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 3

The Board’s jurisdiction over recovery of an overpayment is limited to reviewing those 

cases where OWCP seeks recovery from continuing compensation under FECA. 13

11 Id. at § 10.433(b);see also D.M., Docket No. 17-0983 (issued August3, 2018).

12 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 -- Debt Management, Initial Determinations in an Overpayment,

Chapter 6.300.4g(2)(September 2020).

13 20 C.F.R. § 10.441;see M.P.,Docket No. 18-0902(issued October 16, 2018).
6

Section 10.441(a) of OWCP’s regulations14 provides in pertinent part:

“When an overpayment has been made to an individual who is entitled to further 

payments, the individual shall refund to OWCP the amount of the overpayment as 

soon as the error is discovered or his or her attention is called to same. If no refund 

is made, OWCP shall decrease later payments of compensation, taking into account 

the probable extent of future payments, the rate of compensation, the financial 

circumstances of the individual, and any other relevant factors, so as to minimize 

any hardship.”

15

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 3

The Board finds that OWCP properly required repayment of the overpayment by deducting

$250.00 every 28 days from appellant’s compensation payments.

OWCP’s regulations provide that the overpaid individual is responsible for providing 

information about income, expenses, and assets as specified by OWCP. 16 When an individual fails 

to provide requested financial information, OWCP should follow minimum collection guidelines 

designed to collect the debt promptly and in full.17

OWCP provided appellant a Form OWCP-20 with its October 14, 2021 preliminary

overpayment determination and afforded her the opportunity to provide appropriate financial 

information and documentation.18 Appellant did not complete the Form OWCP-20 prior to the 

March 22, 2022 final overpayment decision.

As appellant did not submit a completed Form OWCP-20 and supporting financial 

documentation as requested, the Board finds that OWCP properly required recovery of the 

overpayment from appellant’s continuing compensation payments at the rate of $250.00 every 28 

days to minimize hardship.

CONCLUSION

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

of compensation in the amount of $7,466.01 for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021 

because she improperly received wage-loss compensation at an augmented compensation rate to 

which she was not entitled. The Board further finds that she was at fault in the creation of the 

overpayment for the period July 19, 2020 through October 9, 2021, thereby precluding waiver of 

the recovery of the overpayment. OWCP also properly required recovery of the overpayment by 

deducting $250.00 from appellant’s continuing compensation payments every 28 days.

14 Id. at § 10.441(a).

15 Id.;see C.M., Docket No. 19-1451 (issued March 4, 2020).

16 20 C.F.R. § 10.438. See also F.B., Docket No. 21-0680 (issued February 23, 2022).

17 See A.S.,Docket No. 19-0171 (issued June 12, 2019); Frederick Arters, 53 ECAB 397 (2002).

18 20 C.F.R. § 10.438.
7

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 22, 2022 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: December 12, 2022

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board