United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

F.G., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION,

San Francisco, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0200

Issued: August 23, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On November 19, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a September 29, 2021 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.2

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that, following the September 29, 2021 decision, appellant submitted additional evidence to 

OWCP. 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

ISSUE

The issue is whether OWCP properly calculated the period and amount of an underpayment 

of wage-loss compensation.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On September 19, 1996 appellant, then a 41-year-old criminal investigator, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he sustained an emotional condition causally 

related to factors of his federal employment, including repeated, prolonged exposure to life 

threatening situations. He noted that he first became aware of his condition and first realized its 

relation to his federal employment on September 11, 1996. Appellant stopped work on June 22, 

1997 and did not return. 

By decision dated October 9, 1997, OWCP accepted the claim for major depressive 

disorder. It paid appellant wage-loss compensation on the supplemental rolls commencing

October 17, 1997. 

In a November 19, 1997 letter, OWCP advised appellant that it was deducting premiums 

for optional life insurance (OLI) from his continuing compensation payments. 

By decision dated August 9, 2000, OWCP expanded its acceptance of appellant’s claim to 

include aggravation of bruxism. By decision dated August 14, 2000, it further expanded its 

acceptance of the claim to include depressive psychosis and a psychogenic disorder. 

On June 20, 2014 appellant began work in the private sector as a retail cashier.

By decision dated October 9, 2014, OWCP finalized a September 2, 2014 proposed 

reduction of appellant’s compensation, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §§ 8106 and 8115, to find that he was 

not totally disabled and capable of earning wages in the selected position of information clerk, 

Department of Labor, Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT)# 237.367-022, at the rate of 

$190.00 a week. It continued to pay him wage-loss compensation on the periodic rolls based on 

the loss of wage-earning capacity determination. 

Appellant attained 62 years of age on May 13, 2017.3

In a May 31, 2017 file memorandum, OWCP noted that appellant was enrolled in basic life 

insurance under Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) coverage, and had elected 

postretirement basic life insurance (PRBLI) with no deduction. Appellant’s OLI code was G0. 

A May 31, 2017 periodic rolls payment plate indicates that, commencing May 28, 2017, 

OWCP began deducting premiums for PRBLI from appellant’s continuing compensation 

3 On May 18, 2017 appellant notified OWCP that he was no longer entitled to receive compensation at the 

augmented 75 percent rate as his divorce would be finalized, effective May 22, 2017, and he had no other eligible 

dependents. 
3

payments every 28 days. It also deducted $25.50 for basic life insurance (BLI) premiums and 

$73.04 for OLI premiums.

In a February 11, 2020 letter, OWCP notified appellant that he had the option of continuing 

his Option B or Option C life insurance coverage beyond age 65, and provided an election form. 4 

Appellant attained 65 years of age on May 13, 2020.

In a letter dated August 14, 2020, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) notified 

OWCP to begin deducting FEGLI basic life insurance premiums under code E1 at the 50 percent 

rate, and OLI Option C premiums under code 1X, full reduction. It noted that the commencing 

date for appellant’s postretirement deductions was July 4, 1998, the date OWCP placed him on the 

periodic rolls. OPM explained that OWCP must change his life insurance code from G0 to E1,

effective on the periodic rolls enrollment date of July 4, 1998. Appellant had not enrolled in 

Option B. He had one multiple of BLI Option C at 50 percent reduction. OPM instructed OWCP 

to reimburse appellant the premiums for one multiple of Option B retroactive to July 4, 1998, 

noting that he had one multiple of Option C until he reached age 65. It further advised OWCP to 

review his BLI premiums throughout the period he received FECA compensation as it appeared 

the premiums deducted were “too high.”

On March 12, 2021 OWCP calculated that, for the period October 9, 2014 through 

September 12, 2020, it had deducted $1,845.11 for BLI premiums, but should have deducted 

$1,991.93, resulting in a $146.82 under deduction. For the same period, it had deducted $5,355.16 

for OLI premiums, but should have deducted only $403.39, creating a $4,951.77 underpayment to 

appellant. OWCP also deducted $12,629.84 for PRBLI premiums, but should have deducted only 

$4,521.42, resulting in a $8,108.42 underpayment to appellant. It added the three amounts to total 

a $12,913.37 underpayment of wage-loss compensation for the period October 9, 2014 through 

September 12, 2020. OWCP issued appellant a supplemental payment in the amount of 

$12,913.37 on March 15, 2021. 

In letters dated June 2, July 9, and August 16, 2021, appellant requested that OWCP review 

its BLI and OLI premium deductions for the period June 2002 through June 2014. He enclosed a 

September 23, 1999 OWCP letter indicating that OWCP had deducted $9.80 in OLI premiums and

$30.04 in BLI premiums from his continuing compensation payments.

An August 17, 2021 compensation payment history indicates that OWCP placed appellant 

on the periodic rolls effective June 21, 1998. 

In an August 19, 2021 memorandum, OWCP acknowledged that it had over deducted BLI, 

OLI, and PRBLI premiums. Appellant’s OLI code G0 should have been code E1, with BLI at 50 

percent reduction and one multiple of Option C at full reduction, effective July 4, 1998. OWCP 

also noted that the final base salary on which FEGLI was based was $88,262.50. It calculated that,

for the period July 4, 1998 through June 28, 2014, it had over deducted $3,100.19 in OLI 

premiums, $1,607.33 in PRBLI premiums, and under deducted $297.08 in BLI premiums. OWCP 

4 Appellant married on June 11, 2020. OWCP paid him compensation at the 75 percent rate, commencing June 21, 

2020, as he had an eligible dependent.
4

added the three amounts to equal $4,410.44. On August 19, 2021 it issued appellant a 

supplemental payment in the amount of $4,410.44. 

In a development letter dated August 24, 2021, OWCP noted that, for the period July 4, 

1998 through June 28, 2014, it had deducted $5,468.84 in BLI premiums whereas the correct 

amount was $5,765.92, a difference of $297.08. It had also deducted $3,480.40 in OLI premiums 

under code G0, whereas the proper amount was $380.21 under code E1, a difference of $3,100.19. 

OWCP also deducted $17,848.72 in PRBLI premiums, but should have deducted $16,241.39, a 

difference of $1,607.33. It added the three amounts to equal $4,410.44. OWCP noted that it had 

already made adjustments for $13,412.97 in over deducted life insurance premiums for the period 

June 29, 2014 through September 12, 2020. It afforded appellant 30 days to provide “information 

to substantiate a revision of [the] underpayment” based on the over deductions. OWCP enclosed 

an August 17, 2021 compensation payment history for the period December 29, 1996 through 

June 28, 2014, which noted that he received compensation on the periodic rolls effective

June 21, 1998. 

In response, appellant submitted letters dated September 1 and 3, 2021, indicating that he 

disagreed with the calculation of PRBLI premiums of $16,241.39. He contended that OWCP 

should have deducted only $9,241.80 in PRBLI premiums, based on the $43.80 premium amount 

specified on his January 1, 2003 OPM annuity statement (Form RI 20-25), multiplied by 211 pay 

periods July 4, 1998 through June 28, 2014. Appellant submitted copies of OPM annuity 

statements indicating that, if he were not in receipt of compensation payments from OWCP, as of 

July 5, 1998, OWCP would deduct $37.96 in PRBLI premiums, and $43.80 as of January 1, 2003.

By decision dated September 15, 2021 and reissued on September 29, 2021, OWCP denied 

appellant’s claim for additional compensation in addition to the $4,410.44 paid on August 19, 2021 

due to its over deduction of life insurance premiums for the period July 4, 1998 through 

June 28, 2014. It found that, for the period at issue, it had deducted $5,765.92 in BLI premiums, 

$297.08 more than the correct amount was of $5,468.84. OWCP had also deducted $3,480.40 in 

OLI premiums whereas the proper amount was $380.21, a difference of $3,100.19. It also 

deducted $17,848.72 in PRBLI premiums, $1,607.33 more than the correct amount of $16,241.39. 

OWCP added the one under deduction and two over deductions to equal $4,410.44, the amount 

issued to appellant on August 19, 2021. It found that the OPM annuity statements indicated that 

the annuity would be in effect only if he were not in receipt of FECA benefits. As appellant was 

paid monetary compensation benefits under FECA from July 4, 1998 through June 28, 2014, the 

annuity and deductions listed were not in effect. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

FECA5 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 his or her 

duty.6 

5

Supra note 1.

6

5 U.S.C. § 8102(a).
5

Under the FEGLI Program, most civilian employees of the Federal Government are eligible 

to participate in basic life insurance and one or more of the options. 7 The coverage for basic life 

insurance is effective unless waived,8 and premiums for basic and optional life insurance coverage 

are withheld from the employee’s pay.9

A 1980 amendment of 5 U.S.C. § 8706(b)(2) provided that an employee receiving 

compensation under FECA could elect continuous withholdings from his or her compensation, so 

that his or her life insurance coverage could be continued without reduction. 5 C.F.R. § 870.701 

(December 5, 1980) provided that an eligible employee had the option of choosing no life 

insurance; Option A -- basic coverage (at no additional cost) subject to continuous withholdings 

from compensation payments that would be reduced by two percent a month after age 65 with a 

maximum reduction of 75 percent; Option B -- basic coverage (at an additional premium) subject 

to continuous withholdings from compensation payments that would be reduced by one percent a 

month after age 65 with a maximum reduction of 50 percent; or Option C -- basic coverage subject 

to continuous withholdings from compensation payments with no reductions after age 65 (at a 

greater premium).10

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that this case is not in posture for decision.

OWCP has established that it under deducted BLI and over deducted OLI, and PRBLI 

premiums from appellant’s continuing compensation payments. Its March 12, 2021 calculations 

and August 19, 2021 memorandum demonstrate that he was underpaid $4,410.44 for the period 

July 4, 1998 through June 28, 2014. 

The Board finds, however, that there is insufficient evidence to establish that the over

deduction of life insurance premiums did not begin until July 4, 1998. In its August 14, 2020 

letter, OPM asserted that the period of over deduction began on July 4, 1998, the date OWCP 

placed appellant on the periodic compensation rolls. However, OWCP’s August 17, 2021 

compensation payment history demonstrated that OWCP placed him on the periodic rolls as of 

June 21, 1998. OPM also indicated that appellant’s BLI premiums throughout the period he 

received FECA compensation were “too high.”

The period and amount of the over deductions and resultant underpayment of wage-loss 

compensation are, therefore, in question. Accordingly, the Board finds that the case must be 

remanded to determine the appropriate period and amount of over deduction of life insurance 

7

Id. at § 8702(a).

8

Id. at § 8702(b).

9

Id. at § 8707.

10 J.K., Docket No. 20-1545 (issued July 27, 2021). See C.A., Docket No. 18-1284 (issued April15, 2019); V.H., 

Docket No. 18-1124 (issued January 16, 2019).
6

premiums.11 Following this and other such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP 

shall issue a de novo decision.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that this case is not in posture for decision.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the September 29, 2021 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings 

consistent with this decision of the Board.

Issued: August 23, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

11 Cf. P.J., Docket No. 21-1107 (issued January 31, 2022) (where the Board remanded the claim to OWCP for 

clarification of the amount and period of an overpayment of compensation).