5 C.F.R. § 831.109

Initial decision and reconsideration

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Who may file. Except as noted in paragraph (b) of this section any individual or agency whose rights or interests under the Civil Service Retirement System are affected by an initial decision of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) may request OPM to review its initial decision.

(b) Actions covered elsewhere. (1) A request for reconsideration of termination of annuity payments under 5 U.S.C. 8311-22 shall be made in accordance with the procedures set out in subpart K of this part.

(2) A request for reconsideration of a decision to collect a debt will be made in accordance with § 831.1304(b).

(c) Initial decision. A decision shall be considered an initial decision when rendered by OPM in writing and stating the right to reconsideration.

(d) Reconsideration. A request for reconsideration must be in writing, must include the individual's name, address, date of birth and claim number, if applicable, and must state the basis for the request.

(e) Time limits on reconsideration. (1) A request for reconsideration must be received by OPM within 30 calendar days from the date of the original decision.

(2) The representative of the Associate Director for Compensation responsible for reconsiderations may extend the time limit for filing when the individual shows that he/she was not notified of the time limit and was not otherwise aware of it, or that he/she was prevented by circumstances beyond his/her control from making the request within the time limit.

(f) Final decision. (1) After reconsideration, the Associate Director's representative shall issue a final decision which shall be in writing, shall fully set forth the findings and conclusions of the reconsideration, and shall contain notice of the right to request an appeal provided in § 831.110. Copies of the final decision shall be sent to the individual, to any competing claimants and, where applicable, to the agency.

(2) OPM may issue a final decision providing the opportunity to appeal under § 831.110 rather than an opportunity to request reconsideration under paragraph (c) of this section. Such a decision must be in writing and state the right to appeal under § 831.110.

(g) Competing claimants. (1) When a competing claimant files a request for reconsideration under this section, the other competing claimants shall be notified of the request and given an opportunity to submit written substantiation of their claim.

(2) When a determination in favor of one claimant would affect another claimant, all claimants concerned will be notified of that decision and those adversely affected will be given an opportunity to request reconsideration. OPM shall not execute its decision until the time limit for requesting reconsideration has expired. If reconsideration has been requested, OPM shall take no action after the reconsideration decision is rendered until the time limit to appeal has expired.

[45 FR 23632, Apr. 8, 1980, as amended at 49 FR 1330, Jan. 11, 1984; 50 FR 34664, Aug. 27, 1985; 62 FR 22873, Apr. 28, 1997]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 81 cases (19 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: Rodriguez v. United States, 852 F.3d 67 (1st Cir. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rodriguez v. United States, 852 F.3d 67 (1st Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “” Id But such a failure to respond does not amount to a final decision under the applicable regulations, see 5 C.F.R. §§ 831.109 (f), 841.306(e), 841.”

Joann Azarkhish v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 915 F.2d 675 (Fed. Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “” 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (e)(2) (1990). 1 *678 There is no dispute that petitioner was aware of the time limit for filing the request for reconsideration.”

Charles D. Goines v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 258 F.3d 1289 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “” 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (a), (c), (d), (f), § 831.”

Malone v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 590 F. App'x 1002 (Fed. Cir. 2015). “5 C.F.R. § 831.109 . However, an exception to the final decision requirement exists where OPM has constructively denied an individual the opportunity to receive a final decision.”

Elizabeth M. Parker v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 974 F.2d 164 (Fed. Cir. 1992). “, 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (e)(1) (1992) (“A request for reconsideration must be received by OPM within 30 calendar days from the date of the original decision”); id.”

Wigton v. Berry, 949 F. Supp. 2d 616 (W.D. Pa. 2013). “§§ 8311-22 ; 5 C.F.R. §§ 831.109 ; 831.1104. . In this way, OPM's approach-providing recalculation only to those that know to ask-might be viewed as its own version of "double secret probation,” that is, something that would matter greatly to those it affects, but whose effect…”

Ashgar v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 226 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “See 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 . Under 5 U.S.C. § 8347 (d)(1), a final adverse decision of OPM may be appealed to the MSPB.”

Katherine Graham v. United States, 96 F.3d 446 (9th Cir. 1996). “108 (disposition of claims by Office of Personnel Management concerning employees' personal property sent to claimant); 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (disposition of claim for annuity payments by Office of Personnel Management sent to claimant); 5 C.”

Gregorio A. Toquero v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 982 F.2d 520 (Fed. Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “On June 13, 1990 OPM moved to dismiss on the ground that no reconsideration decision had issued, citing 5 CFR § 831.109 (f). This motion contained the first assertion of an obligation upon Mr.”

Keira v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 396 F. App'x 703 (Fed. Cir. 2010). “A “final decision” is a decision that OPM issues after a request for reconsideration of an initial decision, i.”

Ghannam v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 527 F. App'x 862 (Fed. Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (f). Absent an initial decision rendered by OPM in writing and stating the right to appeal to the Board, an appellant must obtain a reconsideration decision in order to appeal to the Board.”

Attmore v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 163 F. App'x 885 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “” 5 C.F.R. § 831.109 (e)(2) (1990); see Azarkhish v.”

Show all 81 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.