(a) Who may file. Except as noted in paragraph (b) of this section, any individual whose rights or interests under FERS are affected by an OPM decision (under § 841.305) stating the right to request reconsideration 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 through 22 will be made in accordance with the procedures set out in subpart K of part 831 of this chapter.
(2) A request for reconsideration of a decision to collect a debt will be made in accordance with § 845.204(b).
(3) A decision on court orders affecting FERS benefits will be made in accordance with subpart I of this part.
(c) Reconsideration. A request for reconsideration, when applicable, must be in writing, must include the applicant's name, address, date of birth and claim number, if applicable, and must state the basis for the request.
(d) Time limits on reconsideration. (1) A request for reconsideration must be received by OPM within 30 calendar days from the date of the initial decision.
(2) The Associate Director's representative responsible for reconsiderations may extend the time limit for filing when the requestor shows that he or she was not notified of the time limit and was not otherwise aware of it, or that he or she was prevented by circumstances beyond his or her control from making the request within the time limit.
(e) Final decision. After any applicable reconsideration, the Associate Director's representative will issue a final decision that must be in writing, must fully set forth the findings and conclusions of the reconsideration, and must contain notice of the right to request an appeal provided in § 841.308. Copies of the final decision must be sent to the individual, to any competing claimants and, where applicable, to the agency.
Notes of Decisions
Katherine Graham v. United States, 96 F.3d 446 (9th Cir. 1996).
“109 (disposition of claim for annuity payments by Office of Personnel Management sent to claimant); 5 C.F.R. § 841.306 (final ap-pealable decision of Office of Personnel Management on Federal Employees Retirement System benefits sent to claimant); 12 C.”
Stillwell v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 629 F. App'x 998 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
“Ordinarily, this means the Board can assume jurisdiction over a FERS appeal from OPM only after OPM has issued either a reconsideration decision under 5 C.F.R. § 841.306 , or an initial decision without reconsideration rights under 5 C.”
Jeffrey Friend v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2024).
· cites it 6× “ause the administrative judge found that the appellant failed to show that he was not notified of the time limit for requesting reconsideration or prevented by circumstances beyond his control from making such a request, the administrative judge found that the appellant did not…”
Shawn M. Drago v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016).
· cites it 5× “However, when OPM submitted the agency file in the appellant’s Board appeal, it clarified that it had intended to cite 5 C.F.R. § 841.306 (d), which addresses requests for reconsideration of initial decisions involving rights or interests under FERS, but is otherwise…”
Anne M. Kent v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 2015 MSPB 66 (MSPB 2015).
· cites it 5× “5 C.F.R. § 841.306 (d)(1). OPM’s regulations provide that OPM may extend the time limit when the individual shows either that: (1) she was not notified of the time limit and was not otherwise aware of it; or (2) she was prevented by circumstances beyond her control from making…”
Anne M. Kent v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016).
· cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 841.306 (d)(1). When OPM dismisses an individual’s request for reconsideration of an initial decision as untimely filed, the Board has jurisdiction over an appeal concerning the timeliness determination.”
Sparks v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 679 F. App'x 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2017).
· cites it 2× “to take into account any facts; (2) the Board applied the correct law—namely, that a waiver of OPM’s 30-day deadline could be granted only when an individual shows that “he or she was not notified of the time limit and was not otherwise aware of it, or that he or she was…”
Anne M. Kent v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016).
· cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 841.306 (d)(1). When OPM dismisses an individual’s request for reconsideration of an initial decision as untimely filed, the Board has jurisdiction over an appeal concerning the timeliness determination.”
Daniel Downing v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2023).
· cites it 2× “The Board has recognized the following three situations in which OPM is deemed to have issued an appealable decision under the statute: (1) when OPM issues a reconsideration decision under 5 C.F.R. § 841.306 ; (2) when OPM issues an initial decision 3 With this petition for…”
Denise Schultz v. Dep't of Def. (MSPB 2025).
· cites it 2× “The Board has recognized the following three situations in which the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is deemed to have issued an appealable decision under the statute: (1) when OPM issues a reconsideration decision under 5 C.F.R. § 841.306 ; (2) when OPM issues an initial…”
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.