United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

P.W., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Escondido, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1128

Issued: June 2, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On July 19, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a May 19, 2021 merit decision of the 

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

1 Appellant submitted a timely request for oral argument before the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.5(b). Pursuant to the 

Board’s Rules of Procedure, oral argument may be held in the discretion of the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.5(a). In 

support of appellant’s oral argument request, appellant asserted that the amount of overpayment was incorrect and that 

waiver of recovery should have been granted. The Board, in exercising its discretion, denies appellant’s request for 

oral argument because the arguments on appeal ca n adequately be addressed in a decision based on a review of the 

case record. Oral argument in this appeal would further delay issuance of a Board decision and not serve a useful 

purpose. As such, the oral argument request is denied and this decision is based on the case record as submitted to 

the Board.
2

Compensation Act2(FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over 

the merits of this case.3

ISSUES

The issues are: (1) whether OWCP properly determined that appellant received an 

overpayment of compensation in the amount of $12,370.09 for the period March 1, 2018 through 

April 27, 2019, for which she was without fault, as she concurrently received Social Security 

Administration (SSA) age-related retirement benefits and FECA wage-loss compensation, without 

appropriate offset; and (2) whether OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On September 24, 2007 appellant, then a 59-year-old modified carrier, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she sustained a right upper extremity injury 

as a result of factors of her federal employment including fine manipulation and computer work. 

OWCP accepted the claim for right-sided cervical and thoracic strain/sprain, and lumbar sprain. 

A memorandum to the file dated February 11, 2008 noted that appellant’s retirement system 

coverage was under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). Appellant was in receipt 

of compensation for partial disability based upon her work restriction’s limitation of her number 

of work hours. OWCP initially paid appellant wage-loss compensation on the supplemental rolls 

as of March 2, 2009. OWCP paid appellant compensation on the periodic rolls from June 7, 2009

until September 14, 2019.

On March 27, 2019 OWCP provided SSA with a FERS/SSA dual benefits form to obtain 

information regarding appellant’s potential receipt of SSA age-related retirement benefits.

On April 2, 2019 SSA completed the dual benefits form, which indicated appellant’s SSA 

benefit rates with a FERS offset and without a FERS offset from March to December 2018. 

Beginning March 2018, the SSA rate with FERS was $2,488.80 and without FERS was $1,595.80. 

Beginning December 2018, the SSA rate with FERS was $2,558.40 and without FERS was 

$1,640.40.

On April 25, 2019 OWCP prepared a FERS offset overpayment calculation worksheet 

wherein it noted the calculation of appellant’s SSA offset overpayment from March 1, 2018 

through April 27, 2019. It found that she received an overpayment of compensation in the amount 

of $8,095.88 for the period March 1 through November 30, 2018 and $4,479.03 for the period 

December 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019. The total overpayment was determined to be 

$12,574.91.

2

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

3 The Board notes that, following the May19, 2021 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. 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.
3

In a preliminary overpayment determination dated April 26, 2019, OWCP notified 

appellant that she had received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $12,574.91 

because appellant received SSA age-related retirement benefits based upon her federal service, 

without appropriate offset, at the same time she received FECA wage-loss compensation for the 

period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019. It explained that the overpayment occurred because 

appellant’s compensation was not reduced by the FERS/SSA amount. OWCP found appellant 

without fault in the creation of the overpayment and forwarded an overpayment action request 

form and a Form OWCP-20. It requested that she provide supporting financial documentation 

including income tax returns, bank account statements, bills and cancelled checks, pay slips, and 

any other records to support her reported income and expenses.

In a letter dated May 28, 2019, OWCP notified appellant that, based on information 

provided by SSA regarding the amount of her age-related retirement benefits, which were 

attributable to federal service, her FECA wage-loss compensation had been adjusted. It explained 

that she was in receipt of SSA age-related retirement benefits every four weeks amounting to 

$1,737.42. However, appellant’s federal service increased her monthly Social Security payment 

by $847.38, which must be offset by the portion of her SSA retirement benefits attributable to her 

federal service on account of age, resulting in a new net FECA compensation payment of $890.04 

every 28 days.

On May 23, 2019 appellant requested a prerecoupment hearing before a representative of 

OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review, contesting the amount of the overpayment and 

requesting waiver of recovery of the overpayment. In an attached Form OWCP-20, she listed her 

monthly income as consisting of $2,578.00 in SSA benefits and $1,932.00 in FECA benefits, 

noting that the figure for FECA benefits would be reduced by $847.38. Her monthly expenses 

were listed as: $925.00 for rent; $600.00 for food; $200.00 for clothing; $350.00 for utilities;other 

expenses of $1,300.00; and monthly installment payments of $580.00 for a total of $3,955.00 in 

monthly expenses. Her assets included $40.00 in cash on hand; a checking account balance of 

$1,900.00; a savings account balance of $114,196.00; and stocks and bonds with a current value 

of $110,000.00. Appellant submitted supporting financial information for her checking and 

savings accounts. She also noted that she had recently liquidated one of her investment accounts 

as she had entered into a contract to build a house. 

The prerecoupment hearing was held on September 12, 2019.

Appellant submitted an undated letter from SSA noting that her monthly SSA benefits 

before deductions would be $2,557.50 and after deductions $2,422.00, and that she would receive 

this payment on or about January 16, 2019. She submitted another undated letter from SSA noting 

that her monthly SSA benefits beginning March 2018 would be $2,354.00. In another undated 

letter from SSA, it noted that, after January 2018, her monthly SSA benefits before deductions

would be $1,646.00 and after deductions $1,512.00. Appellant also submitted additional 

supporting financial documentation regarding her assets and expenses.

By decision dated December 9, 2019, OWCP’s hearing representative vacated the 

April 26, 2019 preliminary overpayment determination and dated and remanded the case for 

additional development. She found that appellant had submitted evidence warranting clarification 

from SSA regarding the correctness of the information provided to OWCP, as the figures present 
4

in her undated letters from SSA conflicted with the figures provided by SSA in its April 2, 2019 

dual benefits form.

By letters dated December 11, 2019 and January 14, 2020, OWCP requested clarification 

from SSA regarding appellant’s monthly SSA age-related retirement benefits with and without 

FERS.

On June 27, 2020 SSA submitted another dual benefits form, which reported appellant’s 

SSA age-related retirement benefit rates with a FERS offset and without a FERS offset from 

March 2018 through December 2019. Beginning March 2018, the SSA rate with FERS was 

$2,488.80 and without FERS was $1,610.40. Beginning December 2018, the SSA rate with FERS 

was $2,558.40 and without FERS was $1,655.40. Beginning December 2019, the SSA rate with 

FERS was $2,599.30 and without FERS was $1,681.80.

In a letter dated August 13, 2020, appellant disagreed with the figures provided by SSA in 

its June 27, 2020 dual benefits form. She stated that, while she understood that SSA only paid in 

whole dollars and rounded down to the nearest dollar, she felt that the same rounded amount should 

be used when reporting earnings and calculating FERS offset. Appellant stated that the amount 

she was paid by SSA beginning March 2018 was $2,488.00, not $2,488.80; and beginning 

January 2019 was $2,557.50 and not $2,558.40.

On August 25, 2020 OWCP prepared a FERS offset overpayment calculation worksheet 

wherein it noted the calculation of appellant’s SSA offset overpayment from March 1, 2018 

through April 27, 2019. It found that she received an overpayment of compensation in the amount 

of $7,064.24 for the period March 1 through November 30, 2018 and $4,405.85 for the period 

December 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019. The total overpayment was determined to be 

$12,370.09.

In a preliminary overpayment determination dated August 26, 2020, OWCP notified 

appellant that she had received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $12,370.09 

because appellant received SSA age-related retirement benefits based upon her federal service, 

without appropriate offset, at the same time she received FECA wage-loss compensation for the 

period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019. It explained that the overpayment occurred because 

appellant’s compensation was not reduced by the FERS/SSA amount. OWCP found appellant 

without fault in the creation of the overpayment and forwarded an overpayment action request 

form and a Form OWCP-20. It requested that she provide supporting financial documentation 

including income tax returns, bank account statements, bills and cancelled checks, pay slips, and 

any other records to support her reported income and expenses.

On September 23, 2020 appellant requested a prerecoupment hearing before a 

representative of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review. She disputed the amount of the 

overpayment and requested waiver. In an attached letter, appellant again disputed the figures 

supplied by SSA and stated that, as she was found without fault, the overpayment should be 

waived.

The prerecoupment hearing was held on March 11, 2021.
5

By decision dated May 19, 2021, OWCP’s hearing representative finalized the preliminary 

overpayment determination of August 26, 2020, finding that appellant received an overpayment 

of compensation in the amount of $12,370.09 for the period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019

because she concurrently received SSA age-related retirement benefits and FECA wage-loss 

compensation for that period without appropriate offset. She found that appellant’s total monthly 

income was $4,541.50 by herself or $5,408.17 including her son’s income, and total listed monthly 

expenses were $4,316.00. The hearing representative noted that, as appellant used credit to pay 

for food and clothing, the expenses were reduced by $90.00. She further noted that appellant had 

submitted a credit card statement for two months that contained food expenses totaling $2,140.44, 

including charges from a wholesale warehouse and a shared expense with her daughter. Clothing 

expenditures were marked to show a total expenditure of $342.36. By contrast, the hearing 

representative noted that, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average yearly 

expenditure for clothing was $1,883.00 and for food was $8,169.00; whereas appellant’s listed 

expenses were $4,140.00 for clothing and $12,248.00 for food. The hearing representative

observed that appellant provided expenses only for two months and that the large expenditures did 

not clearly indicate that they were solely for food and noted that, even excluding her son’s income, 

appellant’s income and expenses did not support waiver. Furthermore, appellant had $35,000.00 

in savings. As such, the hearing representative found that waiver of recovery of the overpayment 

was not warranted and required repayment at $300.00 per month.

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 1

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

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

duty.4 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.5

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

of compensation by the amount of SSA age-related retirement benefits that are attributable to 

federal service of the employee.6 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.7

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1

The Board finds that appellant received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of 

$12,370.09 for the period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2020 because she concurrently received 

4

5 U.S.C. § 8102(a).

5

Id. at § 8116.

6

20 C.F.R. § 10.421(d); see L.W., Docket No. 19-0787 (issued October 23, 2019); S.M., Docket No. 17-1802 

(issued August 20, 2018).

7 FECA Bulletin No. 97-09 (issued February 3, 1997); see also N.B., Docket No. 18-0795 (issued January 4, 2019).
6

SSA age-related retirement benefits and FECA wage-loss compensation, without appropriate 

offset.

The record indicates that, while appellant was receiving wage-loss compensation under 

FECA, she also received SSA age-related retirement benefits attributable to her federal service 

during the relevant period. A claimant cannot receive both compensation for wage-loss and SSA 

age-related retirement benefits attributable to federal service for the same period. 8 Consequently, 

the fact of the overpayment has been established.

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

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

June 27, 2020 with respect to the specific amount of SSA age-related retirement benefits that were 

attributable to federal service. The SSA provided the SSA rate with FERS and without FERS for 

specific periods from March 2018 through December 2019.

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

period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019 and finds that an overpayment of compensation in 

the amount of $12,370.09 was created.9 

On appeal appellant disputes the overpayment calculation noting that SSA rounded 

compensation calculations; however, she has not submitted evidence that establishes that she 

received less than the benefit rates clarified by SSA. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2

Section 8129 of FECA provides that an overpayment in compensation shall be recovered 

by OWCP unless 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.10 The waiver or refusal to waive an overpayment of compensation by OWCP is a 

matter that rests within OWCP’s discretion pursuant to statutory guidelines.11

The guidelines for determining whether recovery of an overpayment would defeat the 

purpose of FECA or would be against equity and good conscience are set forth in sections 10.436 

to 10.438 of OWCP’s regulations.12 Section 10.436 provides that recovery of an overpayment 

would defeat the purpose of FECA if recovery would cause hardship because the beneficiary needs 

substantially all of his or her income (including compensation benefits) to meet current ordinary 

8

See D.M., Docket No. 19-1369 (issued June 30, 2020).

9

See L.W. supra note 6; L.L., Docket No. 18-1103 (issued March 5, 2019); D.C., Docket No. 17-0559 (issued 

June 21, 2018).

10 5 U.S.C. § 8129.

11 A.C., Docket No. 18-1550 (issued February 21, 2019);see Robert Atchison, 41 ECAB 83, 87 (1989).

12 20 C.F.R. at §§ 10.436-10.438.
7

and necessary living expense, and, also, if the beneficiary’s assets do not exceed a specified amount 

as determined by OWCP from data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 13 

Section 10.437 of OWCP’s implementing regulations provides that 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 attempting to repay the debt; 

and when an individual, in reliance on such payments or on notice that such payments would be 

made, gives up a valuable right or changes his or her position for the worse. 14 OWCP’s procedures 

provide that to establish that a valuable right has been relinquished, an individual must demonstrate 

that the right was in fact valuable, that he or she was unable to get the right back, and that his or 

her action was based primarily or solely on reliance on the payment(s) or on the notice of 

payment.15

Section 10.438 of OWCP’s regulations provides 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. Failure 

to submit the requested information within 30 days of the request shall result in denial of waiver 

and no further request for waiver shall be considered until the requested information is furnished.16

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 2

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

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. 17 It considered her 

financial information, as presented in her completed Form OWCP-20 to determine if recovery of 

the overpayment would defeat the purpose of FECA.

OWCP determined that appellant did not require substantially all of her income to meet 

ordinary living expenses. It found that, after its review of the documents of record, she had total 

current total monthly income of $4,541.50. OWCP found that appellant’s total monthly expenses 

13 Id. at § 10.436. OWCP’s procedures provide that a claimant is deemed to need substantially all of his or her 

current net income to meet current ordinary and necessary living expenses if monthly income does not exceed monthly 

expenses by more than $50.00. Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 --Debt Management, Initial Overpayment 

Determinations, Chapter 6.400.4a(3) (September 2020). OWCP’s procedures further provide that 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. Id. at Chapter 6.400.4a(2).

14 20 C.F.R. § 10.437;see E.H., Docket No. 18-1009 (issued January 29, 2019).

15 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual,supranote 13at Chapter 6.400.4(c)(3) (September 2020).

16 20 C.F.R. § 10.438.

17 Id. at § 10.436.
8

were, at maximum, $4,316.00, although her clothing and food expenses appeared to be excessive. 

As appellant’s monthly income exceeded her ordinary and necessary living expenses by more than 

$50.00, OWCP found that she did not need substantially all of her income for ordinary and 

necessary living expenses.18 The Board also notes that appellant’s listed assets of $35,000.00 

exceed the asset base.

Appellant also did not establish that she was entitled to waiver on the basis that recovery 

of the overpayment would be against equity and good conscience. She did not provide any 

financial information to show that she would experience severe financial hardship in attempting to 

repay the debt or that she gave up a valuable right in reliance on her wage -loss compensation 

benefits. Appellant, therefore, did not establish that recovery of the overpayment was against 

equity and good conscience.19

As appellant failed to establish that recovery of the overpayment of compensation would 

either defeat the purpose of FECA or be against equity and good conscience, the Board finds that 

OWCP did not abuse its discretion in denying waiver of recovery of the overpayment.20

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that appellant received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of 

$12,370.09 during the period March 1, 2018 through April 27, 2019 for which she was without 

fault, as she concurrently received SSA age-related retirement benefits and FECA wage-loss 

compensation benefits, without appropriate offset. The Board further finds that OWCP properly 

denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

18 See M.C., Docket No. 19-0699 (issued February 12, 2020).

19 M.A., Docket No. 18-1666 (issued April26, 2019).

20 See supra note 15.
9

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the May 19, 2021 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: June 2, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board