Washington, DC
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Compensation Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
Robert D. Hendler
Classification and Pay Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance
09/29/2015
Date
This claim was forwarded to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on behalf of the claimant by his congressional representative. The claimant, a civilian Federal employee of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), seeks to have 16 unnegotiated payroll checks, initially issued to him from October 1, 1999, through December 8, 2000, totaling $12,745.34, reissued. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is time barred.
In his request for congressional assistance, the claimant states he “inadvertently misplaced and forgot that [he] did not cash the referenced checks” which he found in February 2015. He describes his contacts with various DLA staff to have the stale checks reissued, leading to his March 22, 2015, letter to the Defense Finance Accounting Service (DFAS), DLA’s servicing disbursing office with final authority over check issuance, seeking to have the 16 checks reissued. In an April 9, 2015, letter, DFAS-Cleveland advised the claimant that:
Unfortunately, these checks and their underlying obligation, referenced in your correspondence have expired based on U.S. Code 31 pertaining to a six year Statute of Limitations and can no longer be repaid without further action on your part.
You may request a waiver of the six-year Statute of Limitations by applying in writing to:
[Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA)].
* * * * * *
Please reference 31 U.S.C. Section 3702(b)(1) and (e) in your request for waiver of the six year Statute of Limitations.
The record includes an April 23, 2015, letter from the claimant to DOHA requesting the aforementioned waiver, and a copy of a May 5, 2015, letter from DFAS-Cleveland to the claimant stating the “address that you sent your request to earlier is no longer valid” and that it should be submitted to OPM’s “Financial Management and Comptroller.” The claimant describes his contact, through his sister, with OPM’s Retirement Operations Center in Boyers, Pennsylvania, to which his letter to OPM appears to have been routed, which advised that their office “was not the one to deal with [his] concern," and his subsequent decision to seek the assistance of his congressional representative.
DFAS’s suggestion that the claimant seek a waiver of the statute of limitations in the Barring Act at 31 U.S.C. § 3702(b), under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. § 3702(e), is erroneous. Under 31 U.S.C. § 3702(e), waiver authority is vested in the Secretary of Defense for uniformed service member claims brought against the United States under 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(1)(a). Thus, 31 U.S.C. § 3702(e) does not apply to Federal civilian employee claims brought under 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(2) and which fall under the jurisdiction of OPM.
The Barring Act specifies that claims against the United States must be presented to the appropriate official or agency within six years after the claim accrues. Matter of Robert O. Schultz, B-261461 (November 27, 1995). 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. Matter of Nguyen Thi Hao, B-253096, (August 11, 1995). The underlying obligation liquidated by a Treasury check is subject to the six-year limitation imposed by the Barring Act. See Payment of Unpaid Treasury Checks More Than 6 Years Old, B-244431 and B-244431.2, September 13, 1994; OPM Case Number S9601661; OPM file number 07-0055, January 29, 2008. Unless an individual submits a claim to the appropriate agency before the six-year period elapses, the claim on the obligation is barred. 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, supra; Matter of Jackie A. Murphy, B-251301 (April 23, 1993); Matter of Alfred L. Lillie, B-209955, May 31, 1983.
OPM does not conduct adversary hearings, but settles claims on the basis of the evidence submitted by the claimant and the written record submitted by the Government agency involved in the claim. 5 CFR 178.105; Matter of John B. Tucker, B-215346, March 29, 1985. Moreover, the burden of proof is on the claimant to prove the liability of the Government and his or her right to payment. 5 CFR 178.105; Matter of Jones and Short, B-205282, June 15, 1982. We are required to settle claims in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations, and we cannot waive or modify their provisions in individual cases. Therefore, we concur with the agency’s decision this claim is time barred and must be denied.
This settlement is final. No further administrative review is available within OPM. Nothing in this settlement limits the employee’s right to bring an action in an appropriate United States court.