United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

V.R., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Los Angeles, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-1429

Issued: August 4, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On July 17, 2020 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 30, 2020 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 to 

consider the merits of this case.2

ISSUES

The issues are: (1) whether appellant received an overpayment of compensation in the 

amount of $3,302.70 for the period August 1 through November 9, 2019, for which he was not at 

fault, because he concurrently received FECA wage-loss compensation benefits and Social 

Security Administration (SSA) age-related retirement benefits without an appropriate offset; 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that subsequent to the issuance of OWCP’s June 30, 2020 decision, appellant submitted 

additional evidence. However, the Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to 

the evidence in the case record that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP 

will not be considered by the Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded 

from reviewing this additional evidence for the first time on appeal. Id.
2

(2) whether OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment; and (3) whether 

OWCP properly required recovery of the overpayment by deducting $100.00 from appellant’s 

continuing compensation payments every 28 days.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 17, 2010 appellant, then a 57-year-old modified letter carrier, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he developed right carpal tunnel syndrome

and right trigger finger due to factors of his federal employment. His retirement coverage was 

noted as Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). OWCP accepted the claim for right 

carpal tunnel syndrome and right trigger finger. It paid appellant wage-loss compensation on the 

supplemental rolls, effective December 4, 2010, and on the periodic rolls effective July 3, 2011. 

On October 10, 2019 OWCP forwarded a FERS/SSA dual benefits calculations transmittal 

to SSA to obtain information as to whether appellant received SSA age-related retirement benefits 

based on federal service.

On October 28, 2019 OWCP received the completed dual benefits calculation worksheet 

from SSA, which indicated appellant’s SSA benefit rates with a FERS offset and without a FERS 

offset. Beginning August 1, 2019, the SSA rate with FERS was $1,987.60 and without FERS was 

$995.70. 

On November 26, 2019 OWCP prepared a FERS offset calculation worksheet wherein it 

noted the calculation of an SSA offset overpayment for the period August 1 through 

November 9, 2019. The total overpayment was determined to be $3,302.70.

By letter dated November 26, 2019, OWCP notified appellant that, based on information 

provided by SSA regarding the amount of his age-related retirement benefits attributable to federal 

service, his FECA wage-loss compensation had been adjusted. It advised appellant that, after the 

SSA offset, he would receive FECA wage-loss compensation benefits every 28 days in the amount 

of $2,160.96.

On November 27, 2019 OWCP issued a preliminary determination finding that an 

overpayment of compensation in the amount of $3,302.70 had been created for the period August 1

through November 9, 2019, because OWCP failed to deduct appellant’s FERS offset from his 

FECA wage-loss compensation. It found him without fault in the creation of the overpayment 

because he was not aware, nor could he reasonably have been expected to know, that OWCP had 

paid compensation incorrectly. OWCP advised appellant that he could submit evidence 

challenging the fact, amount, or finding of fault, and request waiver of recovery of the

overpayment. Additionally, it informed him that, within 30 days, he could request a telephone 

conference, a final decision based on the written evidence, or a prerecoupment hearing. OWCP

requested that he complete the overpayment recovery questionnaire Form OWCP-20 and submit 

supporting financial documentation. It afforded appellant 30 days to respond. 

On December 23, 2019 appellant completed a Form OWCP-20 and requested a 

prerecoupment hearing. He indicated that he had net monthly income of $3,993.96 and listed 

$4,444.68 in monthly expenses. Appellant advised that he had $40.00 cash on hand, between 
3

$300.00 to $509.11 in checking, and $1,944.00 in a savings account. He also noted that he had a 

retirement account and an annuity which were “not active.”

On February 24, 2020 appellant completed another Form OWCP-20, indicating that he had 

$3,924.87 in net monthly income, and $4,859.22 in monthly expenses. He indicated that his assets 

included $50.00 in cash, $1,520.66 in checking accounts, $1,560.39 in savings accounts, and 

$3,322.94 in emergency funds, for a total of $6,453.99.

A prerecoupment hearing was held via telephone on April 7, 2020. Appellant was 

represented by counsel. At the hearing, he explained that he had two timeshare properties.

Appellant noted that one property was purchased for $20,000.00 and the other was purchased for 

$16,000.00. He explained they were paid off, but he had to pay maintenance fees. Appellant also

testified that his expenses exceeded his income by $600.00 per month. 

By decision dated May 14, 2020, OWCP’s hearing representative finalized its preliminary 

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

$3,302.70 for the period August 1 through November 9, 2019, for which he was without fault, 

because it had failed to offset his wage-loss compensation payments by the portion of his SSA

age-related retirement benefits that was attributable to federal service. The hearing representative 

denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment because the evidence of record failed to establish 

that recovery of an overpayment would defeat the purpose of FECA or would be against equity 

and good conscience. The hearing representative noted that appellant’s liquid assets exceeded the 

allowable resource base of $6,200.00 for an individual with no dependents. The hearing 

representative also noted that appellant owned two timeshare properties he had purchased for 

$20,000 and $16,000.00, that there was no estimate of the current fair market value, and that equity 

in a time share or a second home counted toward the resource base. The hearing representative 

determined that OWCP would recover the overpayment by deducting $100.00 every 28 days from 

appellant’s continuing compensation payments.3

By decision dated June 30, 2020, OWCP’s hearing representative reissued the May 14, 

2020 decision.

4

LEGAL PRECEDENT - ISSUE 1

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

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

performance of duty.5 Section 8116 limits the right of an employee to receive compensation.

While an employee is receiving compensation, he or she may not receive salary, pay, or 

remuneration of any type from the United States.6

 

3 The hearing representative assessed an interest rate of one percent.

4 The hearing representative found that a technical error had occurred with regard to the interest rate assessed in the 

May 14, 2020 decision, and that the interest rate was two percent, effective January 1, 2020.

5 5 U.S.C. § 8102(a).

6

Id. at § 8116.
4

Section 10.421(d) of OWCP’s implementing regulations requires that it reduce the amount 

of compensation by the amount of SSA benefits that are attributable to the federal service of the 

employee.7 FECA Bulletin No. 97-09 provides that FECA benefits have to be adjusted for the 

FERS portion of SSA benefits because the portion of the SSA benefit earned as a federal employee 

is part of the FERS retirement package, and the receipt of FECA benefits and federal retirement 

concurrently is a prohibited dual benefit.8

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1

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

of compensation in the amount of $3,302.70 because he concurrently received FECA wage-loss 

compensation benefits and SSA age-related retirement benefits for the period August 1 through

November 9, 2019 without an appropriate offset.

The record indicates that, while appellant was receiving compensation for disability under 

FECA, he was also receiving SSA age-related retirement benefits during the period at issue. A 

claimant cannot receive both compensation for wage-loss and SSA age-related retirement benefits 

attributable to federal service for the same period.9 Consequently, the fact of the overpayment has 

been established.

To determine the amount of the overpayment, the portion of the SSA benefits that were 

attributable to federal service must be calculated. OWCP received documentation from SSA with 

respect to the specific amount of SSA age-related retirement benefits that were attributable to 

federal service. SSA provided the SSA benefit rate with FERS and without FERS for the period 

commencing August 1 through November 9, 2019. OWCP provided its calculation for the relevant 

period based on the SSA worksheet and in its November 27, 2019 preliminary overpayment

determination. 

The Board has reviewed OWCP’s calculation of benefits received by appellant for the 

period August 1 through November 9, 2019, and finds that an overpayment of compensation in 

the amount of $3,302.70 was created.10 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2

Section 8129(b) of FECA provides: “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 

 

7 20 C.F.R. § 10.421(d); see B.B., Docket No. 19-0822 (issued February 18, 2020); B.F., Docket No. 18-1345 

(issued February 6, 2019).

8 FECA Bulletin No. 97-09 (issued February 3, 1997); see also M.D., Docket No. 19-1500 (issued February 24, 

2020); G.K., Docket No. 18-0243 (issued August 17, 2018).

9 See C.B., Docket No. 20-0031 (issued July 27, 2020); D.C., Docket No. 19-0118 (issued January 15, 2020).

10 See L.W., Docket No. 19-0787 (issued October 23, 2019); L.L., Docket No. 18-1103 (issued March 5, 2019); 

D.C., id.
5

without fault and when adjustment or recovery would defeat the purpose of this subchapter or 

would be against equity and good conscience.”

11

Recovery of an overpayment will defeat the purpose of FECA when such recovery would 

cause hardship to a currently or formerly entitled beneficiary because the beneficiary from whom 

OWCP seeks recovery needs substantially all of his or her current income, including compensation 

benefits, to meet current ordinary and necessary living expenses, and the beneficiary’s assets do 

not exceed a specified amount as determined by OWCP.12 An individual is deemed to need 

substantially all of his or her current income to meet current ordinary and necessary living expenses 

if monthly income does not exceed monthly expenses by more than $50.00.13 Also, assets must 

not exceed a resource base of $6,200.00 for an individual or $10,300.00 for an individual with a 

spouse or dependent plus $1,200.00 for each additional dependent.14 An individual’s liquid assets 

include, but are not limited to cash, the value of stocks, bonds, saving accounts, mutual funds, and 

certificate of deposits.15

Recovery of an overpayment is considered to be against equity and good conscience when 

an individual who received an overpayment would experience severe financial hardship in 

attempting to repay the debt or when an individual, in reliance on such payment or on notice that 

such payments would be made, gives up a valuable right or changes his or her position for the 

worse.16

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. The information is also used to 

determine the repayment schedule, if necessary.17

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 2

The Board finds that OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

 

11 5 U.S.C. § 8129(b).

12 20 C.F.R. § 10.436(a)(b). For an individual with no eligible dependents the asset base is $6,200.00. The base 

increases to $10,300.00 for an individual with a spouse or one dependent, plus $1,200.00 for each additional 

dependent. Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 -- Debt Management, Final Overpayment Determinations, 

Chapter 6.400.4(a)(2) (September 2018).

13 Id. at Chapter 6.400.4(a)(3); N.J., Docket No. 19-1170 (issued January 10, 2020); M.A., Docket No. 18-1666 

(issued April 26, 2019).

14 See id. at Chapter 6.400.4(a)(2) (September 2018).

15 Id. at Chapter 6.400.4(b)(3).

16 20 C.F.R. § 10.437(a)(b).

17 Id. at § 10.438(a); M.S., Docket No. 18-0740 (issued February 4, 2019).
6

As OWCP found appellant without fault in the creation of the overpayment, waiver must 

be considered, and repayment is still required unless adjustment or recovery of the overpayment 

would defeat the purpose of FECA or be against equity and good conscience. It considered 

appellant’s financial information to determine if recovery of the overpayment would defeat the 

purpose of FECA. Appellant provided his current monthly income and expenses in a Form 

OWCP-20 on February 24, 2020, as well as a summary of his liquid assets for a total of $6,453.99

in liquid assets. He also noted that he had retirement and annuities, which were “not active.” 

Appellant testified that he owned two timeshare properties, which OWCP found could be 

considered towards the asset base. The evidence of record, therefore, establishes that appellant’s 

liquid assets exceeded the base asset amount of $6,200.00 for an individual.

18

 It was, therefore,

unnecessary for OWCP to consider whether his monthly income exceeded his monthly ordinary 

and necessary expenses by more than $50.00.19 

Appellant has also not established that recovery of the overpayment would be against 

equity and good conscience. He has not submitted evidence to substantiate that he would 

experience severe financial hardship in attempting to repay the debt, or that in reliance on the 

overpayment he gave up a valuable right or changed his position for the worse. Therefore, OWCP 

properly found that recovery of the overpayment would not defeat the purpose of FECA or be 

against equity and good conscience.20

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.21

Section 10.441 of OWCP’s regulations provides that, when an overpayment of 

compensation 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 the 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 hardship.22

The determination that the debt has been compromised does not carry the right to a hearing 

or to review by the Board.23

 

18 See supra note 12.

19 Id.

20 20 C.F.R. § 10.437(a)(b).

21 Id. at § 10.441; see M.P., Docket No. 18-0902 (issued October 16, 2018).

22 Id.

23 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 -- Debt Management, Debt Liquidation, Chapter 6.500.6 

(September 2018).
7

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 3

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

$100.00 every 28 days from appellant’s continuing compensation payments.

In setting the recovery rate at $100.00 every 28 days, OWCP explained that the factors set 

forth at 20 C.F.R. § 10.441(a) had been considered to minimize hardship, while liquidating the 

debt, as appellant had financial resources sufficient for more than ordinary needs.24 Thus, OWCP 

did not abuse its discretion in setting the rate of recovery.25 The Board, therefore, finds that OWCP 

properly required recovery of the overpayment from appellant’s continuing compensation 

payments at the rate of $100.00 every 28 days.26

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that OWCP properly found that appellant received an overpayment of 

compensation in the amount of $3,302.70 for the period August 1 to November 9, 2019, for which 

he was without fault, because he concurrently received FECA wage-loss compensation benefits 

and SSA age-related retirement benefits without an appropriate offset. The Board further finds 

that OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment and properly required recovery 

of the overpayment by deducting $100.00 from appellant’s continuing compensation payments 

every 28 days.

 

24 See R.D., Docket No. 19-0159 (issued April 17, 2020); D.S., Docket No. 18-1447 (issued July 22, 2019).

25 See T.G., Docket No. 17-1989 (issued June 5, 2018); M.D., supra note 8.

26 On appeal, appellant argues that the interest rate should be assessed at one percent as opposed to two percent. 

However, pursuant to OWCP’s procedures, interest is assessed at the rate in effect on the date of the final overpayment 

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

6.500.5(f) (September 2018).
8

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 30, 2020 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: August 4, 2021

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board