Tyson v. Dep't of Labor
| Decision Date | 07 December 2021 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 20-cv-147 (FYP) |
| Parties | HOWARD T. TYSON, SR., Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Plaintiff Howard T. Tyson, Sr., filed this action, pro se and in forma pauperis, against the United States Department of Labor; the Department of Labor's Chief Evaluation Officer, Christina Yancey; the Department of the Treasury; and the Department of the Treasury's Commissioner of the Bureau of Fiscal Service (“Fiscal Service”), Timothy Gribben. See ECF No. 1 (Complaint), at 2, 4. Tyson alleges that Defendants have all participated in wrongfully deducting - or “offsetting” - funds from his Social Security and federal annuity payments, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) see 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., and other statutes. Id. at 4-5. Tyson seeks an order directing Defendants to stop offsetting his benefits payments and to return the funds collected from previous offsets. Id. at 5.
Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment see ECF No. 17 (Defendants' Motion), and a Memorandum in Support, see ECF No. 17-1 (Defendants' Memorandum). In response, Tyson has filed an Opposition. See ECF No. 21 (Plaintiff's Opposition).
For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as to (1) any challenges to the Labor Department's decision that Tyson received an overpayment of benefits, and (2) all claims against the Treasury Department and Gribben based on their administration of the offsets. It will further grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment as to (1) any claims that the offset amounts exceeded statutory limits, and (2) any claims that the Labor Department or Yancey failed to adhere to constitutional or statutory due-process requirements.
Howard Tyson previously worked as a mail handler for the United States Postal Service (“USPS”). See ECF No. 17-4 (Declaration of Jennifer Valdivieso), ¶ 2. On October 20, 2012, he filed a claim under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (“FECA”) with the Labor Department's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (“OWCP”), seeking compensation for work-related lower-back injuries. Id. .[1] OWCP accepted Tyson's claim for (1) sprain of back, lumbar region; (2) aggravation of lumbar stenosis; and (3) displacement of lumbar intervertebral disc without myelopathy. See Id. ). From December 2012 to June 2015, Tyson received medical and wage loss benefits under FECA for his injuries. Id., ¶ 3; Valdivieso Ex. B, at ECF pp. 9-14.
Tyson also filed a FECA claim on February 11, 2014, for a “schedule award, ” which provides compensation for “permanent disabilit[ies]” involving partial or total loss of the use of certain body parts. See 5 U.S.C. § 8107; 20 C.F.R. § 10.404; Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 4 & n.1 (citing Valdivieso Ex. C, at ECF pp. 18-19). OWCP granted a schedule award to Tyson for a 4% impairment of his lower left extremity from November 19, 2014, to February 7, 2015, which amounted to $8, 550.72. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 4 (citing Valdivieso Ex. C, at ECF pp. 20-22).
Tyson appealed this determination to the OWCP Branch of Hearings and Review, which resulted in the case being remanded for further factual development on November 16, 2015. Id., ¶ 5; Valdivieso Ex. D, at ECF pp. 26-31. New evidence presented on remand led OWCP on May 5, 2016, to issue a revised determination that granted Tyson a modified schedule award for an additional 2% impairment of his lower left extremity. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 5; Valdivieso Ex. D, at ECF pp. 32-34. The modified award entitled him to $3, 951.07 for the period from March 25, 2016, to April 30, 2016, and $2, 990 for every month thereafter until June 13, 2016. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 5 (citing Valdivieso Ex. D, at ECF p. 32). OWCP noted in its decision that it had previously paid Tyson a schedule award for 4% impairment. See Valdivieso Ex. D, at ECF p. 32.
Tyson once again appealed. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 6. On November 10, 2016, the OWCP Branch of Hearings and Review affirmed OWCP's May 5, 2016, determination and remanded the case to OWCP to clarify the benefits amounts paid to Tyson, as the hearing examiner suspected that OWCP “might have overpaid.” Id. (citing Valdivieso Ex. E, at ECF pp. 38-43). Reviewing records from June 13, 2015, to May 3, 2016, the hearing examiner noted that OWCP might have initially overpaid Tyson, as his payments were calculated based on the previous 4% impairment rating and “a second award for possibly 4% impairment . . . rather than an additional 2% impairment that should have been paid.” Valdivieso Ex. E, at ECF pp. 42-43 (emphasis in original); Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 6.
On March 16, 2017, OWCP issued a preliminary determination that it had, in fact, overpaid Tyson by $4, 233.16. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 7 (citing Valdivieso Ex. F at ECF pp. 4547). OWCP found that it had erroneously paid Tyson for an additional 4% impairment, when he was entitled only to additional payments for a 2% impairment. Id. The decision noted that Tyson was “without fault, ” and that he had thirty days to contest the determination or to request a waiver of recovery of the overpayment through: (1) a telephone conference with the district office; (2) the submission of written evidence; or (3) a pre-recoupment hearing. See Valdivieso Ex. F, at ECF pp. 45-47. The decision also informed Tyson of his right to inspect and copy OWCP's records, and stated that if he were unable to pay back the money in full, OWCP would “determine a fair repayment method.” Id. at ECF p. 45. Tyson did not respond to the preliminary determination letter. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 7; Valdivieso Ex. F., at ECF p. 55 ().
With no response from Tyson, OWCP finalized its March 16, 2017, determination and issued a final decision on July 10, 2017. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 8; Valdivieso Ex. F, at ECF pp. 51-52. In its final decision, OWCP stated that although Tyson was without fault, the circumstances of his case did not warrant waiver of recovery of the overpayment. See Valdivieso Ex. F., at ECF p. 51. The final decision letter instructed Tyson to forward payment of the full amount of $4, 233.16 within thirty days, or to contact OWCP to arrange an installment plan. Id. at ECF p. 53. It also informed Tyson that his debt might be referred to the Treasury Department for administrative offset against any federal payments that he was due, including his retirement annuity, id.;[2] the letter further notified him of his right to appeal. Id. at ECF p. 54.
Tyson appealed the decision to the Employment Compensation Appeals Board (“ECAB”). See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 9; Valdivieso Ex. G, at ECF p. 58. While his appeal was pending, he did not pay the debt, see Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 11, leading OWCP to send him demand letters on September 19, 2017, and October 25, 2017, id., ¶ 12 (citing Valdivieso Ex. I, at ECF pp. 80-83). The letters explained that OWCP could collect the debt even if he did not pay it, as OWCP could refer the debt to the Department of the Treasury to be administratively offset against Tyson's federal salary or benefits. Id., ¶ 13 (citing Valdivieso Ex. I, at ECF pp. 80, 82). The demand letters also informed Tyson that if he did not pay, interest and administrative charges would be added to the debt. See Valdivieso Ex. I, at ECF pp. 80, 82. Tyson did not respond to the demand letters. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 13.
On December 15, 2017, OWCP referred Tyson's debt to the Treasury Department for collection. Id., ¶ 14.[3] The referral listed the account number for his debt, 7288510, and mistakenly referred to him as “Howard Johnson.” Id., ¶ 15 (citing Valdivieso Ex. I, at ECF p. 85); ECF No. 17-6 (Declaration of Jennifer Plant), ¶¶ 7, 7(a) (citing ECF No. 17-7 (Plant Exhibits), at ECF p. 2).
On March 6, 2018, ECAB affirmed the overpayment and declined to waive recovery of the debt. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 9 (citing Valdivieso Ex. G, ECF pp. 58-63). Tyson sought reconsideration of the decision, which ECAB denied on September 13, 2018. Id., ¶ 10 (citing Valdivieso Ex. G, at ECF pp. 64-66). Seeking other recourse, Tyson filed another claim for an increased schedule award, which OWCP denied on November 14, 2018. Id., ¶ 12. Undeterred, Tyson filed five appeals, all of which were denied by OWCP. Id. One of those denials was appealed to ECAB, where it remained pending when the instant case was filed. Id. (Valdivieso Ex. H, at ECF pp. 68-78)
Meanwhile, the Treasury Department began deducting funds from Tyson's Social Security disability benefit payments and from his annuity payments from the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”).[4] See Plant Decl., ¶ 10. Offsets against Tyson's benefits payments commenced on December 2, 2019, when an annuity payment from OPM of $1, 038.38 was offset by $259.60. Id., ¶ 10. Before initiating the offset of Tyson's OPM annuity payments, the Fiscal Service sent separate 30-day and 60-day demand/warning letters on October 1, 2019, and November 1, 2019. Id., ¶ 7(d) (citing Plant Ex. D, at ECF pp. 12-13). Similarly, before any payments were offset from Tyson's Social Security benefits, the Fiscal Service sent 30-day and 60-day demand/warning letters on December 24, 2019, and January 22, 2020. Id., ¶ 7(c) (citing Plant Ex. C, at ECF pp. 9-10).
In July 2020, Tyson informed the Treasury Department that OWCP had misidentified him as “Howard Johnson” on its paperwork. See Valdivieso Decl., ¶ 15; Plant Decl., ¶ 7(b). OWCP recalled the debt, corrected his name to “Howard Tyson,...
To continue reading
Request your trial