United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

S.C., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, SECURITY BRANCH 

POST OFFICE, Colorado Springs, CO, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0308

Issued: January 11, 2024

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On December 27, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a November 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

ISSUES

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

amount of $3,803.11 for the period February 28 through March 27, 2021, for which she was 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that, followingthe November 29, 2021 decision, OWCP received 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

without fault, because she received an improper schedule award payment; and (2) whether OWCP 

properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 26, 2015 appellant, then a 58-year-old city carrier, filed an occupational disease 

claim (Form CA-2) that her left ankle osteoarthritic degeneration had been aggravated by her 

employment duties. She noted that she first became aware of her condition andrealized its relation 

to her federal employment on March 29, 2013. Appellant did not stop work. By decision dated 

August 15, 2016, OWCP accepted the claim for permanent aggravation of left ankle osteoarthritis.

By decision dated July 8, 2020, OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for 31 percent 

permanent impairment of the left lower extremity. Appellant was to receive 63.55 weeks of 

compensation for the period December 23, 2019 through March 11, 2021.

3

OWCP accordingly paid appellant schedule award compensation in the net amount of 

$24,254.84 for the period December 23, 2019 through June 20, 2020. It thereafter paid her 

schedule award compensation in the net amount of $3,752.13every four weeks from June 21, 2020 

through February 27, 2021.4 On March 26, 2021 OWCP paid appellant schedule award 

compensation in the net amount of $1,610.30 for the period February 28 through March 11, 2021. 

Its records, however, indicate that on March 27, 2021 appellant received an extra schedule award 

payment for the period February 28 to March 27, 2021 in the amount of $3,803.11. 

In a preliminary overpayment determination dated April 16, 2021, OWCP notified 

appellant that she had received an overpayment of compensation in the amount of $3,803.11 for 

the period February 28 through March 27, 2021 because OWCP had issued an extra schedule 

award payment. It determined that she was without fault in the creation of the overpayment.

OWCP requested that appellant submit a completed overpayment recovery questionnaire (Form 

OWCP-20) to determine a reasonable payment method and advised her that she could request 

waiver of recovery of the overpayment. It further requested that she provide supporting financial 

documentation, including copies of income tax returns, bank account statements, bills and canceled 

checks, pay slips, and any other records that support income and expenses. Additionally, OWCP 

further provided an overpayment action request form and notified appellant that, within 30 days 

of the date of the letter, she could request a final decision based on the written evidence or a 

prerecoupment hearing.

On May 17, 2021 OWCP received appellant’s April 12, 2021 request for a prerecoupment 

hearing and waiver of recovery of the overpayment. Appellant contended that she regularly

received payments in the amount of $3,752.13 every four weeks and did not know when her 

payments were to end. She explained that when she received the extra schedule award payment 

of $3,803.11, she believed it was her final payment since it neither matched the prior payments 

3 OWCP noted the period of the award as December 23, 2019 to June 20, 2020. However, this was a typographical 

error as 63.55 weeks covers the period December 23, 2019 to March 11, 2021. 

4

In a financial disclosure statement (Form EN-1032) dated December 27, 2020, appellant indicated that she was 

married. 
3

nor the amount listed on her award. Appellant provided a completed Form OWCP-20, notingtotal 

monthly income of $4,746.27, total monthly expenses of $4,967.32, and total assets of $66,746.07. 

She also submitted supporting financial documentation. 

An oral hearing was held on September 14, 2021.

By decision dated November 29, 2021, OWCP’s hearing representative finalized the 

preliminary overpayment determination, finding that appellant received an overpayment of 

compensation in the amount of $3,803.11 for the period February 28 through March 27, 2021 

because she received an extra schedule award payment to which she was not entitled. The hearing 

representative found appellant without fault in the creation of the overpayment, but denied waiver 

of recovery of the overpayment. She instructed that the overpayment be recovered in full. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 1

The schedule award provisions of FECA5 and its implementing regulations

6 set forth the 

number of weeks of compensation payable to employees sustaining permanent impairment from 

loss or loss of use, of scheduled members or functions of the body. Section 10.404 of the 

regulations provides that compensation is provided for specified periods of time for the permanent 

loss or loss of use of certain members.

7

 FECA provides for 288 weeks of compensation for 100 

percent loss or loss of use of a lower extremity and the implementing regulations provides that 

compensation for proportionate periods of time is payable for partial loss.

OWCP’s procedures provide that an overpayment is created when a schedule award 

expires, but compensation continues to be paid.8

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1

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

of compensation in the amount of $3,803.11 for the period February 28 through March 27, 2021, 

for which she was without fault, because she received an improper schedule award payment.

OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for 31 percent permanent impairment of the left 

lower extremity. Appellant was to receive 63.55 weeks of compensation for the period 

December 23, 2019 through March 11, 2021. OWCP accordingly paid her $24,254.84 for the 

period December 23, 2019 through June 20, 2020 and continuing payments every four weeks in 

the amount of $3,752.13. Appellant was only entitled to receive compensation through 

March 11, 2021 and, on March 26, 2021, she received a final schedule award payment in the 

amount of $1,745.06 covering the period February 28 through March 11, 2021. However, on 

March 27, 2021, OWCP improperly issued an extra payment in the amount of $3,803.11 for the 

5

5 U.S.C. § 8107.

6

20 C.F.R. § 10.404.

7

Id.

8

5 U.S.C. § 8107(c)(2).
4

period February 28 through March 27, 2021. As appellant received an extra schedule award 

payment in the amount of $3,803.11 to which she was not entitled, the Board finds that this 

payment constituted an overpayment of schedule award compensation.9

The Board thus finds that OWCP properly determined the fact and amount of the 

overpayment. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2

Section 8129 of FECA10 provides that an overpayment must be recovered 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. Thus, a 

finding that appellant was without fault does not automatically result in waiver of the overpayment. 

OWCP must exercise its discretion to determine whether recovery of the overpayment would 

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

11

According to 20 C.F.R. § 10.436, 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 and necessary living 

expenses, 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.

12

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. 13 OWCP considered 

appellant’s financial information, as reported, to determine if recovery of the overpayment would 

defeat the purpose of FECA or if recovery would be against equity and good conscience.

9

Id.

10 Supra note 1.

11 A.R., Docket No. 21-1000 (issued March 25, 2022); J.T.,Docket No. 21-0010 (issued September 30, 2021); G.L., 

Docket No. 19-0297 (issued October 23, 2019).

12 20 C.F.R. § 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. Its 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. Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 6 -- Debt Management, Final Overpayment Determinations, 

Chapter 6.400.4a(2) and (3) (September 2020).

13 Id. at § 10.436.
5

The Board finds that as appellant reported on her completed Form OWCP-20 assets totaling

$66,746.07, she has not met the standard for waiver of recovery of the overpayment because her 

assets exceed the allowable resource base of $10,300.00 for an individual with a spouse, such as 

appellant. Because she has not met the second prong of the two-prong test of whether recovery of 

the overpayment would defeat the purpose of FECA, it is not necessary for OWCP to consider the 

first prong of the test, i.e., whether she needs substantially all of her current income to meet 

ordinary and necessary living expenses.14 The Board thus finds that appellant has not established 

that she was entitled to waiver on the basis of defeating the purpose of FECA. 15

Additionally, the evidence does not demonstrate that recovery of the overpayment would 

be against equity and good conscience. Appellant did not submit evidence to substantiate that she 

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

such payment she gave up a valuable right or changed her 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.16

As such, the Board finds that OWCP properly denied waiver of recovery of the 

overpayment.17

CONCLUSION

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

$3,803.11, for which she was without fault, for the period February 28 through March 27, 2021

because she received an improper schedule award payment. The Board further finds that OWCP 

properly denied waiver of recovery of the overpayment.

14 J.H., Docket No. 22-1375 (issued May 16, 2023); S.W., Docket No. 20-0363 (issued November 23, 2020); M.H., 

Docket No. 19-1497 (issued September 9, 2020).

15 J.H., id.; P.M., Docket No. 21-0915 (issued December 14, 2021); R.D., Docket No. 19-1598 (issued April17, 

2020); R.C., Docket No. 19-0845 (issued February 3, 2020).

16 N.J., Docket No. 19-1170 (issued January 10, 2020); V.T., Docket No. 18-0628 (issued October 25, 2018).

17 20 C.F.R. § 10.441(a); A.F.,Docket No. 19-0054 (issued June12, 2019); DonaldR. Schueler, 39 ECAB 1056, 

1062 (1988).
6

ORDER

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

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: January 11, 2024

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board