Washington, DC
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Leave Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code
Lejeune-New River
United States Marine Corps
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
Damon B. Ford
Compensation and Leave Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance
02/08/2023
Date
The claimant occupies the position of Automotive Mechanic, NA-10 with the Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS), Lejeune-New River, a non-appropriated fund (NAF) activity of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. He requests credit for prior Federal civilian service time to be applied towards his service computation date for annual leave accrual (SCD-Leave) purposes. He also requests an adjustment to his annual leave balance. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) received the claim request on October 11, 2022. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is denied for lack of jurisdiction.
The claimant was previously employed as a Heavy Mobile Equipment Mechanic, WG-5803-10 under several term appointments with the Marine Corps Logistics Base (MCLB), USMC in Albany, Georgia. He states that his appointments with the MCLB from December 2009 to December 2013, and from July 2015 to December 2021, amounted to ten years and four months of Federal civilian service employment. Standard Form (SF) 50 submitted by the claimant shows that his last appointment with the MCLB expired and was terminated effective December 1, 2021. Upon termination of his appointment, the claimant was paid out his annual leave. Subsequently, on December 5, 2021, the claimant was appointed to his NAF position with the MCCS.
In a letter dated September 28, 2022, denying the claimant’s request to be credited with a leave balance transferred from his previous employer, MCCS, Lejeune-New River HR office states that because of his break in service of more than three calendar days prior to beginning his appointment with the MCCS, the claimant was not eligible for portability of benefits including leave transfers. The claimant disagrees with the date established by the MCLB as his last day of work and asserts that he did not have a break in service of more than three calendar days.[1] Regardless, the claimant believes that even if his break in service was more than three days, his prior Federal service time of ten years and four months should have been applied towards the computation of his SCD-Leave upon his appointment to his current position, resulting in the accrual of six hours of annual leave instead of four hours of annual leave per pay period. Therefore, he requests that his SCD-Leave be corrected to July 27, 2011 (i.e., SCD-Leave he had prior to his appointment to his current position), and that his annual leave balance be adjusted to include six hours of annual leave per pay period retroactive to December 1, 2021.
Leave claims submitted by NAF employees are not reviewable by OPM and do not fall under the claim provisions of section 3702(a)(2) of title 31, United States Code (U.S.C.), which limits OPM's claims adjudication authority to claims involving Federal civilian employees’ compensation and leave. Title 31 does not define “Federal civilian employee” in association with the claims adjudication authority it grants to OPM in section 3702(a)(2). However, title 5, U.S.C., concerns government organization and employees, and 5 U.S.C. 2105 defines the term “employee” for the purposes of that title. According to section 2105(c)(1)(B), an employee of a Department of Defense NAF activity is “deemed not an employee for the purpose of laws administered by [OPM] except as otherwise specifically provided in [title 5, U.S.C.].” Thus, OPM's jurisdiction to adjudicate claims for compensation and leave does not extend to the claims of employees of NAF activities unless a provision in title 5, U.S.C., specifically authorizes OPM to consider their claims. Accordingly, this claim is denied for lack of jurisdiction.
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.
[1] With respect to this part of his claim, as a procedural matter, the claimant does not provide OPM with a final agency decision from the MCLB as is required under 5 CFR 178.102(a). Because he has not received a final agency decision regarding his separation date from his Federal wage system position, it is not properly before OPM and therefore his disagreement with the date of separation noted on his SF 50 is not subject to review. However, we note that in its September 28, 2022 letter denying his claim for leave, the MCCS states that the MCLB refused to adjust the claimant’s separation date.