Alfred H. Varga

B-260909 Dec 17, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The total amount of the debt due the United States on an erroneous salary payment is the gross amount. The agency is advised to promptly take that action. The term "aggregate amount" is defined in 4 C.F.R. DECISION This decision is in response to an appeal from our Settlement Certificate Z-2927984-056. The agency is advised to collect those deductions totalling $445.31 by adjusting its accounts with the parties that received the erroneous withholdings. An agency that was. The gross earnings for this pay period were $3. Was issued to the employee. No explanation has been offered as to why this payment was made. 059.57 to the same account and issued a "Leave and Earnings Statement" showing that this amount was the net salary the employee earned for the pay period ending July 10. View Decision Matter of: Alfred H. Varga File: B-260909 Date: December 17, 1996 The total amount of the debt due the United States on an erroneous salary payment is the gross amount, which includes both the amount the employee receives directly and other amounts disbursed on his behalf for such items as Medicare, health benefits, thrift savings plan, retirement, and federal and state tax withholdings. Nevertheless, the determination of the administrative law judge (ALJ) under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5514 rejecting salary offset as a means of collection for duplicate deductions other than Medicare, federal taxes, and state taxes from the employee precludes the agency from using salary offset to collect these particular deductions. As the ALJ found, the agency has admitted that it can collect these amounts by adjusting its accounts with the parties who received the erroneous withholdings. The agency is advised to promptly take that action. The waiver statute, at 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584(a)(2)(A) (1994), limits the waiver authority of an agency head to claims "in an amount aggregating not more than $1,500." The term "aggregate amount" is defined in 4 C.F.R. Sec. 91.2(j) (1996) to mean "the gross amount of the claim against the employee . . . " Thus, the administrative law judge, acting for the agency head, erred in waiving $500 of the employee's debt since the aggregate amount of the debt totals more than $1,500. DECISION This decision is in response to an appeal from our Settlement Certificate Z-2927984-056, February 24, 1995, which denied the employee's request for waiver in the gross amount of his debt of $3,548 for the overpayment of compensation for the pay period ending July 10, 1993. We sustain our settlement action, except that the duplicate deductions for retirement, health insurance, and thrift savings plan may not be collected by the agency by salary offset. The agency is advised to collect those deductions totalling $445.31 by adjusting its accounts with the parties that received the erroneous withholdings. BACKGROUND The employee, Alfred H. Varga, while stationed in Detroit, Michigan in 1993, served as an administrative law judge in the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA), Social Security Administration (SSA), an agency that was, at that time, within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The problem arose in 1993 when the agency made duplicate salary payments to Mr. Varga for the same period. On July 13, 1993, DHHS erroneously transferred the amount of $2,184.57 to the employee's credit union account as salary for the pay period ending July 10, 1993. The gross earnings for this pay period were $3,548, and the net amount of $2,184.57 resulted after deductions for the employee's health plan, thrift savings account, federal retirement plan, Medicare, and state and federal taxes. No leave and earnings statement, however, was issued to the employee, and no explanation has been offered as to why this payment was made. One week later, on July 20, 1993, DHHS made its regular salary payment to Mr. Varga by transferring the net amount of $2,059.57 to the same account and issued a "Leave and Earnings Statement" showing that this amount was the net salary the employee earned for the pay period ending July 10, 1993. The gross earnings for the pay period were shown as $3,548, and the identical deductions were made, except that an additional $125 deduction was made for savings bonds. Mr. Varga became aware of the possible mistake on July 21, and he asked for verification of the deposits by the credit union which determined that it had received two electronic transfers credited to the employee's account on July 13 and July 20 as the employee's federal salary, both apparently for the same pay period. The employee promptly asked the manager of the Detroit office to contact the OHA payroll staff in Falls Church, Virginia. The manager did so and, after an unexplained delay, on November 23, 1993, the OHA payroll staff forwarded documentation to DHHS to initiate recovery of the net overpayment of $2,184.57.