A.V. and Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, Washington, DC (Board decision, November 9, 2023)

Board dismisses appeal and late reconsideration petition (ECAB 23-0170)

Decision type
Board decision
Dockets
23-0170, 21-0645
Decided
November 9, 2023
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-11

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 2023, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

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 final decision. The Board dismissed A.V.'s appeal in Docket No. 23-0170 because there was no final adverse OWCP decision issued within the 180-day appeal period. It also dismissed as untimely her petition to reconsider the Board's September 26, 2022 decision in Docket No. 21-0645, which became final after 30 days. This order does not decide the merits of her compensation claim. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration of this order within 30 days of issuance unless it specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a). FECA compensation decisions are generally not subject to court review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b).

Plain-English summary

A.V. sought to appeal correspondence from OWCP about an unpaid overpayment and also challenged an earlier Board decision. The Board held that OWCP's November 2022 debt notice was informational, not a final adverse decision that could be appealed. Its last final OWCP decision was more than 180 days before the appeal, so the Board dismissed the new appeal for lack of jurisdiction. It also dismissed the challenge to its September 2022 decision because the reconsideration petition came after the 30-day deadline.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c), 501.3(a), 501.3(e), 501.6(d), 501.7(a).
  • Outcome: Appeal in Docket No. 23-0170 and reconsideration petition in Docket No. 21-0645 dismissed.
  • Key point: An informational debt notice is not an appealable final OWCP decision, and Board reconsideration petitions must meet the applicable deadline.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
A.V., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 23-0170
)
Issued: November 9, 2023
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF )
PRISONS, Washington, DC, Employer )
__________ )

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

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL IN DOCKET NO. 23-0170 AND DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN DOCKET NO. 21-0645

Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On November 15, 2022 appellant sought an appeal from purported September 26 and November 14, 2022 decisions of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned the appeal Docket No. 23-0170.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that its jurisdiction is limited to the review of final adverse OWCP decisions issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA).1 This jurisdiction encompasses any final decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the date appellant filed her appeal.2 As of the filing of the current appeal, the most recent OWCP decision was dated April 19, 2022, more than 180 days from the date appellant filed her November 15, 2022 appeal.

1
5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).
2
20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.” Regarding appellant’s appeal from a purported November 14, 2022 decision, in correspondence of that date OWCP advised her that it had not received payment for an overpayment created during the period February 15, 2019 through October 10, 2020 and informed her that the debt would be considered delinquent within 30 days. This correspondence, however, was informational and does not constitute a final adverse decision of OWCP from which appellant may properly appeal. 3 As there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the filing of this appeal, 4 over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the appeal assigned Docket No. 23-0170 must be dismissed.

To the extent that this appeal may be construed as a petition for reconsideration of the Board’s September 26, 2022 decision in Docket No. 21-0645, the Board notes that, as discussed, its decision became final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of issuance. 5 As appellant did not file her disagreement with the Board’s September 26, 2022 decision until November 15, 2022, this submission may not be deemed as a timely petition for reconsideration as it was filed more than 30 days from the date of issuance. 6 Thus, the petition for reconsideration of the September 26, 2022 Board decision in Docket No. 21-0645 must be dismissed as untimely filed. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0170 is dismissed.

3
See Order Dismissing Appeal, A.L., Docket No. 22-0782 (issued December 5, 2022); Order Dismissing Appeal, E.B., Docket No. 21-1281 (issued April 5, 2022) (correspondence that is purely informational in nature does not constitute a final adverse decision of OWCP from which appellant may properly appeal). Id. at §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a). 4 Supra note 2.
5
20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d); see also Order Dismissing Appeal and Denying Request for Oral Argument, J.C., Docket No. 21-0511 (issued September 10, 2021). See also Order Dismissing Appeal, R.N., Docket Nos. 23-0015 and 21-0573 (issued December 27, 2022). 6 See supra note 2 at § 501.7(a).

2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the petition for reconsideration in Docket No. 21-0645 is dismissed as untimely filed.

Issued: November 9, 2023
Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3

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.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • 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