Opinion ID: 3162617
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Proceedings in front of the OPM.

Text: Ms. Richardson asserted to OPM that her annuity computation should include service with the Department of Labor from January 24, 1983 1 to March 10, 1984 (“DOL service”), and include further service with the Veterans Administration from August 21, 2000 to March 10, 2001 1 There appears to be some confusion in the record as to the precise starting date of Ms. Richardson’s Department of Labor service. However, because Ms. Richardson took a refund of the retirement contributions for that time, the precise starting date is of no import. We therefore use the date relied on by OPM and the Board in the proceedings below. RICHARDSON v. OPM 3 (“VA service”). OPM explained in its July 25, 2014 final decision that, with regard to the first asserted period of service, Ms. Richardson had taken a refund of the retirement contributions for that time. When offered the opportunity to repay the necessary deposit, Mrs. Richardson declined. In electing not to repay the deposit, Ms. Richardson voided all annuity rights to that period of service. With regard to the second period of service, OPM explained that she served in that specific time under a temporary appointment pursuant to which no retirement deductions were taken from her salary, and the law does not permit after-the-fact deposits to be made for service performed on or after January 1, 1989. Thus, as with the previous period of service, Ms. Richardson could point to no deposits that would entitle her to credit for that time in her annuity computation. Consequently, because the law did not permit OPM to treat either of the two specified periods of service as qualifying for inclusion in computation of a retirement annuity, OPM rejected Ms. Richardson’s request for recomputation of her retirement annuity.