Washington, DC

U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Compensation Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code

---

Robert D. Hendler
Classification and Pay Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance


12/10/2015

---

Date

The claimant, who is employed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), requests reimbursement for Federal Employee Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) Option B premiums deducted from his salary by TSA from 2002 through 2008.  The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) received the claim request on May 27, 2015, the agency administrative report on July 20, 2015, and additional information on October 23, 2015, from the District of Columbia (DC) Office of Pay and Retirement Services (OPRS) at our request.  For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is time barred.

The claimant states he was erroneously permitted by TSA at the time of his initial appointment in 2002 “to enroll in Option B coverage with no oversight to ensure this was done correctly,” and that he “had no reason to believe that [he] could not purchase this coverage.”  He challenges application of the statute of limitations cited in TSA’s claim denial and compares the equity of the agency’s denial of reimbursement with how two private sector insurance companies informed him they “would handle the situation; i.e., “reimburse all premiums that were collected.””  He further asserts that “TSA should be responsible for its mistakes” and that he “should not be penalized.”

The agency states the claimant “retired from the US Secret Service on October 23, 1999, subject to the DC Police & Firefighters Retirement System, and returned to Federal employment with TSA on October 6, 2002.”  At that time, the claimant “enrolled in the [FEGLI] program… [and] elected additional coverage under Option A, B and C thereby duplicating the life insurance coverage he had through his annuity from the DC Police & Firefighters Retirement Fund.”  TSA states that under the provisions of this plan combined with his TSA employment, “only Option B of [claimant’s] FEGLI coverage should have been kept with his annuity.  FEGLI Basic, and Options A and C should have been picked up by TSA.”  The agency states when the error was discovered in 2013, it worked with the claimant to correct his FEGLI coverage, the DC Retirement Office refunded premiums for Basic and Options A and C which were “incorrectly withheld from his DC pension since the beginning of his employment with TSA,” and “the only coverage that has remained with his DC pension is his Option B.”

TSA further states that when it corrected the claimant’s FEGLI to remove Option B coverage with TSA, the National Finance Center reimbursed the claimant “for all Option B premiums from pay period 23 of 2008 to the current pay period it was submitted and corrected.”  TSA states the reason the claimant:

…was not reimbursed for Option B coverage from October 6, 2002 up through pay period 23 of 2008, is due to the Comptroller General Decision B-203242 dated March 17, 1982.  This decision states: “life insurance premiums which were erroneously withheld from an employee’s pay could not be reimbursed beyond the 6 year limit impacted by the Act of October 9, 1940, 31 U.S.C. 71a [currently codified at § 3702(b)(1)].”

The agency also states “despite the Comptroller General Decision[1], the DC Retirement Office fully refunded the FEGLI premiums withheld from [claimant’s] annuity check from 2002 to 2012 for BASIC, Option A and Option C due to the [claimant’s] paying dual premiums” and that “[t]he agency takes the position that the Comptroller Decision, which discusses erroneous deductions for life insurance, should not apply in this case and agrees with the DC Retirement Office’s decision to refund all premiums withheld and requests his Option B premiums be refunded similarly and not be subject to the 6 year limitation.”

Chapter 87 of title 5, United States Code, governs the FEGLI Program, and section 8716(a) authorizes OPM to prescribe the regulations necessary to carry out the purposes of Chapter 87.  However, there are no FEGLI provisions relevant to the relief requested in this claim (i.e., there are no FEGLI provisions concerning refunds of erroneously withheld Option B premium payments).  Thus, the claim regarding FEGLI premium overpayments must be treated as a dispute about improperly withheld compensation.

OPM’s authority to adjudicate Federal civilian employee compensation and leave claims under 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(2) is subject to the statute of limitations in 31 U.S.C. § 3702(b)(1), which states every claim against the United States is barred unless such claim is received within six years after the date such claim first accrued.  Consequently, the six-year limitation period included within 31 U.S.C. § 3702(b)(1) applies to the refund of FEGLI premiums at issue in this claim.  See B-203242 (1982); B-201183 (1981); B-203344 (1981).  The Barring Act does not merely establish administrative guidelines, it specifically prescribes the time within which a claim must be received in order for it to be considered on its merits.  OPM does not have any authority to disregard the provisions of the Barring Act, make exceptions to its provisions, or waive the time limitation that it imposes. See Matter of Nguyen Thi Hao, B-253096.3 (August, 11, 1995); Matter of Jackie A. Murphy, B-251301 (April 23, 1993); Matter of Alfred L. Lillie, B-203344 (August 3, 1981); B-209955 (May 31, 1983); OPM File Number S9700855, (May 28, 1998); OPM File Number 003505, (September 9, 1999).

We note the claimant’s assertions that he is without fault in this matter are unavailing due to the aforementioned statutory time bar.  We further note that Federal employees are expected to review their leave and earnings statements (LES) provided by the employing agency and documentation from financial institutions, such as monthly bank statements, to ensure their time and attendance was entered into their agency payroll system correctly and the proper pay was deposited. See B-173565 (October 27, 1971) and B-252830 (June 25, 1993).  A copy of the claimant’s DC government April 1, 2014, annuitant payment stub, provided by OPRS at our request, lists each of his FEGLI deductions separately; i.e., Basic, and Options A, B, and C.  Therefore, the claimant knew or should have known of the duplicative FEGLI deductions upon routine receipt of his Federal LESs and DC annuitant pay stubs from the beginning of his TSA employment in 2002.  Had the claimant acted in a reasonable and prudent manner and reviewed this readily available information, he would have known this potential claim existed shortly after receiving his first TSA leave and earnings statement in 2002.

While the record shows TSA took action to correct the situation in 2013, the record does not show the claimant ever filed a signed, written claim on this matter with TSA.  Therefore, the claimant did not preserve his claim until it was received by OPM on May 27, 2015, more than six years after the claim accrued.  It is well established that employees are charged with constructive knowledge of statutory provisions and of their implementing regulations.  See B-213380 (August 20, 1984).  Thus, we must conclude that the claim to recoup the 2002 to 2008 duplicate FEGLI Option B deductions made by TSA is time barred and may not be allowed.

This settlement is final.  No further administrative review is available within OPM.  Nothing in this settlement limits the claimant’s right to bring an action in an appropriate United States court.

Back to Top