T.A., claiming as widow of D.A., and U.S. Postal Service, Post Office, Chicago, IL (Board decision, December 16, 2014)

T.A., widow of D.A., and U.S. Postal Service (ECAB 14-0629): Overpayment decision returned for explanation

Decision type
Board decision
Docket
14-0629
Decided
December 16, 2014
Outcome
Remanded
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-27

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 2014, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2014
The statutes and regulations the Board applies may have been amended, and later Board or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official ECAB release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (dol.gov)

ECAB remand decision. The Board set aside OWCP’s December 23, 2013 overpayment decision and sent the matter back for an explanation of the alleged amount. Whether T.A. owes an overpayment remains unresolved. Under 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d), this Board order becomes final 30 days after issuance. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days unless this order specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a).

Plain-English summary

T.A., the widow of a postal employee, appealed an OWCP decision finding a $66,562.58 overpayment involving a Social Security offset. The preliminary notice listed two deduction figures, but the final decision did not explain the factual basis or calculation of the overpayment. The Board held that OWCP must provide a clear account of how an overpayment was calculated. It set aside the decision and remanded the matter for further action.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: Explanation of OWCP decisions under 20 C.F.R. § 10.126.
  • Outcome: December 23, 2013 overpayment decision set aside and remanded.
  • Key point: The final decision had to explain the fact and amount of the alleged overpayment.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
T.A., claiming as widow of D.A., Appellant, ) )
and ) Docket No. 14-629
) Issued: December 16, 2014
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,
)
Chicago, IL, Employer
)
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Appellant, pro se
Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge
MICHAEL E. GROOM, Alternate Judge
JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge

On January 17, 2014 appellant filed an appeal for review of a December 23, 2013 overpayment decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The appeal was docketed as No. 14-629.

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that the December 23, 2013 overpayment decision by OWCP made insufficient findings of fact and statement of reasons pertaining to the overpayment found of $66,562.58.1 Appellant, the employee’s widow, filed a claim for survivor benefits. The basis for fact of injury, as stated in the November 4, 2013 preliminary overpayment, was “we deducted a total of $60,982.41 for Social Security offset. We were supposed to deduct $125,970.23.” Appellant was advised to refer to enclosed financial worksheets. The final overpayment decision did not further clarify the factual basis for the determination or the amount.

The Board has noted that, in overpayment situations, it is essential that OWCP provide the recipient of compensation with a clear statement showing how the overpayment was calculated.2 The Board finds that OWCP did not adequately explain how fact and amount of the 1 See 20 C.F.R. § 10.126; P.G., Docket No. 14-430 (issued August 1, 2014).
2
See Teresa A. Ripley, 56 ECAB 528 (2005). overpayment were determined. For this reason, the December 23, 2013 decision will be set aside and the case remanded for further action consistent with this order.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the December 23, 2013 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside. The case is remanded for further action conforming to this order.

Issued: December 16, 2014
Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge
Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

Michael E. Groom, Alternate Judge
Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge
Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

2

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Try Ezel Pro free for 7 days. Cancel anytime before the trial ends and you pay nothing.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace