Raymond H. Hanrahan (Deceased)

B-262112 Mar 06, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights A Standard Form 1152 designation of beneficiary executed by an employee disposing of his unpaid compensation due at his death was received in the agency field office before the date of his death and sent to agency headquarters. The employee died on the same day the form was received in agency headquarters. Possibly before it was "filed" as specified in subsections 19.1 and 19.3 of title 4. Those instructions are directed at agencies and do not create a requirement that must be met by an employee in addition to that contained in 5 U.S.C. sec. 5582(b). Since the completed designation of beneficiary was timely received in the agency before he died. Contending that he was incompetent to designate because he was heavily sedated during the last few weeks before he died. View Decision Matter of: Raymond H. Hanrahan (Deceased) File: B-262112 Date: March 6, 1996 A Standard Form 1152 designation of beneficiary executed by an employee disposing of his unpaid compensation due at his death was received in the agency field office before the date of his death and sent to agency headquarters. The employee died on the same day the form was received in agency headquarters, but possibly before it was "filed" as specified in subsections 19.1 and 19.3 of title 4, GAO Policy and Procedures Manual for Guidance of Federal Agencies. See 4 C.F.R. sec. 33.5 (1995). Those instructions are directed at agencies and do not create a requirement that must be met by an employee in addition to that contained in 5 U.S.C. sec. 5582(b), that the designation must be "received" by the agency before his death. Since the completed designation of beneficiary was timely received in the agency before he died, it effectively disposes of his unpaid compensation. An employee designated a nonfamily individual to receive his unpaid compensation due at his death. His former wife and a son challenged the validity of that designation following his death, contending that he was incompetent to designate because he was heavily sedated during the last few weeks before he died. The former wife also claims that their divorce decree grants her at least one-half of his unpaid compensation. However, federal law, not state law, controls disposition of unpaid compensation due a federal employee. Since the completed designation form was executed by the employee more than 2 months before he died and was timely received by the agency as required by 5 U.S.C. sec. 5582(b), the individual designated on that form is entitled to be paid the unpaid compensation due. DECISION This decision responds to a request from the General Counsel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of Justice. [1] The issue is whether the Standard Form 1152 (SF 1152), Designation of Beneficiary, executed by Mr. Raymond H. Hanrahan validly passed his unpaid compensation due at his death to the individual named as his beneficiary. Payment may be made to the designated beneficiary for the following reasons. BACKGROUND Mr. Raymond H. Hanrahan, a special agent of the FBI stationed in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, executed an SF 1152, Designation of Beneficiary on November 28, 1994, naming Ms. Barbara Hastings as beneficiary for his unpaid compensation. This form was not forwarded to FBI headquarters by the Milwaukee field office until February 1995, where it was received by the FBI Employee Benefits Unit for filing on February 3, 1995. The Employee Benefits Unit noted its receipt but returned the form to the field office because the form lacked Mr. Hanrahan's home address. The completed form was immediately returned to FBI headquarters and received for filing by the Employee Benefits Unit on February 8, 1995, the date that Mr. Hanrahan died. [2] Mr. Hanrahan's former wife and one of his sons have contested the payment of any benefits to Ms. Hastings. They contend that Mr. Hanrahan's designations of beneficiary for unpaid compensation and life insurance were invalid. They argue that because he was heavily sedated during the last several weeks before he died, he was not competent to effect beneficiary designations. Therefore, Mr. Hanrahan's former wife contends that she is entitled to at least one-half of his unpaid compensation from his employment with the FBI based on the terms of their 1986 Judgement of Divorce and that his children are entitled to the insurance proceeds. [3] In addition, on the issue of the validity of Mr. Hanrahan's designation of beneficiary, the FBI asks whether the "filing" of the beneficiary designation form is necessary to effect a beneficiary change, or whether mere receipt by FBI headquarters or even Mr. Hanrahan's local FBI office is sufficient. The FBI notes that the statute governing designations of beneficiary, 5 U.S.C. sec.