Opinion ID: 6319758
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: In December 1993, Manning retired from the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) after 40 years of service. Manning receives a pension based on her earnings while employed by SSA under the Civil Service Retirement System (“CSRS”). On July 6, 1998, Manning applied for surviving-spouse Social Security benefits. The SSA informed Manning that she was not eligible for Social Security benefits under a law known as the Government Pension Offset (“GPO”), 42 U.S.C. § 402(k)(5), that reduces a surviving spouse’s Social Security entitlement by a percentage of the applicant’s government pension. In December 2015, Manning filed a claim with the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) for surviving spouse benefits. It appears to be agreed that “[e]mployees who became eligible for retirement before December 1, 1982 are exempt from the GPO, even if they did not retire at that time.” MSPB Initial Decision, Dkt. 8, at 23 n.3. Manning argued to OPM that she was entitled to spousal benefits and exempt from the GPO reduction because she would have been eligible for early retirement under the Voluntary Early Retirement Act (“VERA”) in 1979, which provided at the time: “An employee who is separated from the service . . . voluntarily, during a period when the agency . . . is undergoing a major reduction in force . . . and who is serving in such geographic areas as may be designated . . . after completing 25 years of service . . . is entitled to a reduced annuity.” Pub. L. No. 93-39, 87 Stat. 73 Case: 22-1025 Document: 17 Page: 3 Filed: 03/03/2022 MANNING v. US 3 (applicable in 1979, codified as 5 U.S.C. § 8336(d)). In initial and final decisions in January 2016 and February 2017, OPM determined that Manning was ineligible for early retirement under VERA and thus not exempt from the GPO reduction. Manning appealed to the Board. On July 31, 2017, in an initial decision, a Board administrative judge (“AJ”) held that Manning would have been eligible for early retirement under VERA, reversing OPM’s decision. On September 1, 2017, OPM petitioned for review by the full Board. OPM argued that Manning’s claim for Social Security benefits was not an appeal of an administrative action reviewable by the MSPB and that the initial decision of the AJ should be vacated. OPM’s petition is still pending before the full Board because the MSPB has not had a quorum of Board members since the petition was filed. On October 19, 2020, with the petition for review at the MSPB still pending, Manning filed the claim at issue here—a suit in the Court of Federal Claims, where she sought an order enforcing the AJ decision, or an award in the amount of $160,000 for Social Security benefits owed, plus cost of living adjustments and interest. The court dismissed Manning’s complaint, holding it lacked jurisdiction over both of Manning’s claims. Manning appeals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3).