United States Office of Personnel Management
|
|
Matter of: [claimant]
Date: February 20, 2001 File Number: 002978 OPM Contact: Jo-Ann Chabot A federal agency requested that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) determine the appropriate payee to receive the unpaid compensation of a deceased agency employee. The agency wants to know whether the deceased employees unpaid compensation may be distributed according to a designation of beneficiary signed by the employees cousin, pursuant to his appointment as the decedents attorney-in-fact. For the reasons stated below, we conclude that the designation of beneficiary in this case is not valid and that the decedents surviving spouse should receive his unpaid compensation. The agency reported that it received two claims for the decedents unpaid compensation. The decedents widow filed a claim on behalf of herself and her children. She also submitted a certified copy of Letters of Administration, dated July 2, 1998, and showing her appointment as the General Personal Representative of the decedents estate. The decedents cousin, acting as the Trustee of a trust established in the decedents name (the Trust), filed a claim on behalf of the Trust. He submitted a certified copy of Letters Testamentary, dated November 4, 1998, and showing his appointment as successor Personal Representative of the decedents estate. The agency reports that the following events occurred on June 23, 1998:
The agency reports that the decedent passed away on June 24, 1998. It also notes that the original SF 1152 was identical to the facsimile and was received at agency headquarters on June 30, 1998. The decedents widow indicated on her claim that the decedent had named her as the beneficiary for payment of his unpaid compensation. However, the agency reports that the SF 1152 of June 23, 1998, which identifies the Trust as the beneficiary, is the only designation in its files.2 The agency reports that, according to its records, the decedent had not previously designated a beneficiary for his unpaid compensation. Although the agency invited each claimant to submit to OPM their views concerning these matters, OPM has not received any correspondence from either claimant. Disposition of unpaid compensation payable under federal law is governed exclusively by federal statute and regulation, and not by the laws and courts of the state of domicile or other jurisdiction. Raymond H. Hanrahan (Deceased), B-262112 (March 6, 1996); Cornell D. Cooper (Deceased) and Dorothy P. Fouts (Deceased), B-254921 (March 11, 1994); Richard A. Davenport (Deceased); David H. Lambert (Deceased), B-244826 (December 12, 1991); Chester F. Dean (Deceased), B-227728 (March 23, 1988). Section 5582 of title 5, United States Code, and OPM regulations thereunder, at 5 CFR Part 178, govern settlement of the accounts of deceased employees of the federal government. They specify requirements for designating beneficiaries and a statutory order of precedence for disposition of a deceased employees unpaid compensation. Section 5582 provides in part:
Section 5582 thereafter identifies the following individuals in order of precedence: the employees widow or widower, child or children and descendants of deceased children by representation, parents or the survivor of them, the duly appointed legal representative of the employees estate, and finally, the person or persons entitled under the laws of the employees domicile at the time of his death. OPM regulations, at 5 CFR 178.203(a) and 178.204, track 5 U.S.C. 5582. Moreover, 5 CFR 178.203(d) states the requirements for executing and filing a designation of beneficiary form, specifying that:
Interpretation of a statute begins with "the language of the statute itself" and, "[a]bsent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, that language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive." Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Bonjorno, 494 U.S. 827, 835, 110 S. Ct. 1570, 1575 (1990), citing Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 U.S. 102, 108, 100 S. Ct. 2051, 2056 (1980). It is clear from the language in 5 U.S.C. 5582(b) that Congress intended to establish a simple and straightforward method for distributing a deceased employees unpaid compensation. According to the statute, and corresponding regulations (5 CFR 178.203(a) and 178.204), employees must designate their beneficiaries in a writing received in the employing agency before the employees death. Thus, the statute authorizes employees to designate beneficiaries for their unpaid compensation, does not provide for an individual other than the employee to designate his or her beneficiaries, and provides for distribution according to a specified order of precedence in the absence of such a designation. Moreover, 5 CFR 178.203(d) specifies that employees must execute, or sign, the designation form (SF 1152). The pertinent legislative history shows that Congress enacted the provision that became 5 U.S.C. 5582 to "simplify and improve the method of settling and adjusting the accounts of deceased civilian employees." S. Rep. No. 1933 (1950), reprinted in 1950 U.S.C.C.S. 2866. Congress noted that S. 3652, the bill that became 5 U.S.C. 5582,
The legislative history does not show that Congress authorized, or intended to authorize, any individual other than the employee to designate a beneficiary for his or her unpaid compensation. In settling claims for deceased employees unpaid compensation, the General Accounting Office (GAO) construed the statute and accompanying regulations narrowly. In Cornell D. Cooper (Deceased) and Dorothy P. Fouts (Deceased), B-254921 (March 11, 1994), an employee personally filled out the SF 1152, designated his grandmother as the beneficiary to receive his unpaid compensation, and secured two witnesses who signed the SF 1152. However, the employee did not sign or date the form. Id. Noting that its regulation required the employee to execute, i.e., sign, the SF 1152, the GAO concluded that the designation was not legally valid and the unpaid compensation should be given to the person or persons in the next highest order of precedence under the statute.3 Id. In another decision, the GAO concluded that the statute required unpaid compensation to be distributed according to the previously executed SF 1152 in the employing agencys files, when the employees newly executed SF 1152, changing the beneficiary, was not received in agency before employees death. Katharina Walters, B-157353 (August 12, 1965). The GAO noted in reaching this conclusion that it did not have the authority to waive any of the statutory provisions governing the disposition of a deceased employees unpaid compensation. Id. The statute and regulations require that the employee designate the beneficiary or beneficiaries for his or her unpaid compensation, and do not permit other individuals to perform this function. Therefore, the designation of beneficiary that the decedents cousin executed as the decedents attorney-in-fact is not valid. The decedents unpaid compensation should be paid to the next person in the statutory order of precedence the decedents surviving spouse.4
1 These designations, and payment of the proceeds from these
funds, are not under review here. |
|
|