Washington, DC
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Compensation Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code
Landstuhl, Germany
Damon B. Ford
Compensation and Leave Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance
12/26/2017
Date
The claimant is a former Federal civilian employee of the Department of the Army in Landstuhl, Germany. She requests the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) grant her “a policy exception for extenuating circumstances” in regards to the “non-payment of a… relocation allowance.” OPM received the claim request on May 2, 2017. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is denied.
The claimant was reassigned to a Pharmacist, GS-660-12 position in Landstuhl, Germany, effective October 19, 2015. The claimant states “the government obligated a 20% Relocation Allowance as a recruitment incentive.” The claimant reported for duty in Germany on October 20, 2015, still not having received the relocation incentive. After nearly a year of repeated status requests to the agency, the claimant submitted a request to curtail her tour of duty in Landsthul. The claimant departed Germany on October 12, 2016, without ever receiving the relocation incentive.
The agency contends that the claimant’s official job offer did not include an offer for relocation incentive. They further state that a relocation incentive “must be approved by a delegated official and documented on the appropriate paperwork before the employee begins employment at the new duty station,” in accordance with section 575.208(a)(3) of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). However, this did not occur in the claimant’s case.
Chapter 57, subchapter IV, of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.), and 5 CFR part 575, subpart B, establish the conditions for, and authorize the payment of relocation incentives to eligible Federal employees.
5 CFR 575.208(a)(3) states:
(3) The agency must make the determination to pay a relocation incentive before the employee enters on duty in the position to which relocated.
The claimant submitted a copy of a relocation incentive request, dated August 31, 2015. The request was signed by the hiring supervisor and a 2nd level supervisor. However, according to the delegation of agency authorities, and not disputed by the claimant, the request was not signed or approved by the designated agency official authorized to review and approve the request. In accordance with 5 CFR 575. 207(a)(1), an agency must establish a relocation incentive plan, which includes a designation of officials with authority to review and approve payment of the incentive. 5 CFR 575.207 (b)(1) provides that the authorized agency official must have reviewed and approve the relocation incentive request prior to the agency issuing payment to the employee. Memorandums submitted by the agency to OPM revealing the re-delegation of MEDCOM Civilian Human Resources authorities demonstrate that at the time of the claim, the commander of Landstuhl Regional Medical Center was the designated official with authority to approve the relocation incentive. Here, the claimant offers no evidence that the commander approved the relocation incentive request before the claimant entered on duty. Therefore, the claimant has failed to meet her burden of proving that the approval criteria and written determination requirement found in 5 CFR 575.208(a)(3) have been satisfied.
Finally, we’ve interpreted the claimant’s request for a “policy exception” to mean a request to waive 5 CFR 575.208 (a)(3). However, OPM adjudicates compensation claims for certain Federal employees under the authority of section 3702(a)(2) of title 31, United States Code (U.S.C.). The authority in 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(2) is narrow and limited. Section 3702 does not include the authority to waive provisions of 5 CFR 575.208(a)(3). Consequently, OPM does not consider the claimant’s request for a “policy exception” within the context of the claims adjudication function it performs under section 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(2). Therefore, the claimant’s request for a waiver 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.