The Theft Protection

Myths and Facts About Identity Theft


>>Good afternoon. My name is Matthew MacIsaac
(ph). I’m the manager of the Benefits Officers
Liaison and Development branch here at O.P.M.
I want to thank you for attending today and
for attending all of our training and events
whether they’re live or in-person. Our mission
here is to support the agency benefits officers
and H.R. professionals throughout the government.
As convenient as these webinars and virtual
events are, we would like to start offering
some live, in-person conferences. Planning
a conference takes at least a year and it
is very expensive. In the next couple of days,
I will be sending out a message to our listserv
asking if there’s any interest in attending
a live conference in the fall of 2016. Please
respond to this message and let us know of
your level of interest. If there is enough
interest in this, it’s something we will definitely
explore for next year. For this year, on November
18th and 19th, O.P.M. will be hosting a virtual
conference so please mark your calendar. Thank
you again for attending today. As always,
if you have questions, please feel free to
contact us. Now, I will turn it over to my
colleague, Mike Evans to begin the presentation.
Thank you very much.
>>Good afternoon, everyone. My name’s Mike
Evans, for those of you who do not know me,
although most of you do, I’ve seen you at
these meetings before. A couple of things
that we want to talk about today, there are
a couple new B.A.L.s that are coming out and
one of the B.A.L.s that’s coming out is financial
literacy B.A.L., as you know, you guys generally
submit these financial education plans to
us on a yearly basis. I’ve taken those. I’ve
analyzed them and compiled a report summarizing
some of the details. Now, that B.A.L. is either
already published or is on its way to be published
soon but I wanted to extract a couple of the
highlights so that we could talk about that.
As you know, Benefits Administration Letter
or B.A.L. 07102, provide guidance to agencies
on developing their financial education plan
for employees. This year, we got, like, about
40 of the plans so that’s–or 40 agencies
reporting which is really good, it doesn’t
sound like a lot but when you keep in mind,
for example, DOD has all of the components,
for example, Army, Navy, and sort of other
components that 40 is actually quite a good
number. Now, why do we need to submit those
plans? Well, this is all due to Public Law
108-469 which was the Thrift Savings Plan,
open elections act of 2004. It required O.P.M.
basically to implement a financial education
literacy and education strategy for agent–for
employees as part of their–as part of our,
like, retirement training offered under 5
USC 8350. Our plan basically was to designate
that to the agencies to have agencies submit
this financial education and literacy plan
so we would know what the various agencies
were doing and we could then evaluate it from
there, and give you guys feedback, okay? So,
again, as I said, we receive 40 education
plans for fiscal year 2015, again, we reviewed
the data and analyzed to identify trends.
Now, as far as this whole analysis process
goes, it was a little bit interesting in that,
you know, we really try not to be too dictative
about how you put your plan together which
is great, it just created some real challenges
as far as analysis goes, okay? So, for example,
we had some agencies–most agencies understood
what content was but different agencies had
a different interpretation of what was delivery
versus what was evaluation versus what was
sustainability. So a lot of times, I would
find information that may relate to, for example,
evaluation and what another agency would consider
a sustainability category, and sometimes it
wasn’t even broken down that way. So, the
challenges to analysis got to be–got to be
kind of intense. So, this first shot at, like,
breaking down this–all these financial education
plans and putting them into a report, is not
an–the end-all to be-all, okay? This isn’t,
you know, we’re not holding anybody’s feet
to the fire here and saying, you know, that
this is–this is completely accurate, I mean,
I really did my best, I read through every
agency’s plan and tried to extract and basically
the way I did it was I looked at the way agencies
reported if you were very clear and that you
were doing something, I caught–captured that,
if you insinuated that you were doing something,
I captured that as implied that you were doing
it and then there were some things where there
was no implication, whatsoever and I wasn’t
sure at all if something was being done. I
extracted some of the major categories, for
example, like C.S.R.S. and F.E.R.S. Benefit,
Social Security, Medicare, as far as content
and what agencies are reviewing. Now, as I
said, again, you know, it’s a challenge for
analysis. So, as part of a possible solution,
it’ll work out for us in the future, I developed
a summary financial education plan data element
sheet that I’m–I’ve included with the B.A.L.
and it’s also an attachment. Now this isn’t
to take the place of a financial education
plan that you guys would be submitting. Some
agencies really submitted a lot of detail
which is fantastic, it really gives us a lot
of insight. The summary is basically a way
to capture the–to do the analysis. It’s really,
kind of, like, your check sheet at the end
to say, you know, “Did I cover this topic?
Do we cover this topic?” And it also gives
you an opportunity, there’s a space where
you can include something you’re doing that
isn’t in the major subject areas or topics
that I’ve listed. Here’s an example of one
from delivery, and if you see what I did was
I pulled the subject matter that is–that
I saw in most financial education plans and
from some of the larger agencies, and basically,
in completing the summary sheet, what you
would do is either check yes or no as to whether
or not you actually covered that and then
if there was something special that you were
doing as an agency, that maybe wasn’t captured
there, you might want to list it in the other
delivery methods so that–so that we actually
are able to–those things jump out at us because,
for example, you know, if an agency is doing
something really innovative, we want to know
that so that we can share that with other
agencies, they may want to get onboard, we
may even want to call a representative from
your agency to a possible Benefits Officers
Network meeting to discuss, like, you know,
how you’ve implemented this, you know, whatever
it is in your plan, whether it falls under
content development and sustainability evaluation.
Now, a lot of agencies, as I said, really
spoke to the general benefits like for example,
C.S.R.S., F.E.R.S., F.E.G.L.I., F.E.H.B.,
most agencies are covering those topics, most
agencies are also covering T.S.P. investment
and coming up with ways to get employees engaged
and participate more in Thrift Savings Plan.
Areas that I found that–for lack of a better
word, where we can actually increase awareness
and participation because these areas where
a lot of agencies aren’t–these–with their
report are not doing. 32%–32.5% actually
of agencies mention specifics–I can’t talk,
specific trading for H.R. specialists, okay?
So I know some agencies are doing it, for
example again, because DOD is one of the agencies
that I’m the liaison for, I know they developed
a specific training for H.R. specialist, they
have it done in modules. So, I know for a
fact that they’re doing it. I know a lot of
agencies are, it may be something that agencies
are just assuming is happening when they–when
they do the performance appraisals for H.R.
specialists. However, it really wasn’t mentioned
in plan. So if your agency is not doing specific
training for H.R. specialist, it maybe something
you want to consider. If you’re interested
in that, let us know, I mean, we actually
do have, of course, our own classes that we
offer but there are other ways to deal with
that. Probably one of the biggest areas that
I think–that came out of this, that I think
can actually increase awareness and participation
is the fact that only 7.5% of agencies reported
specifically working with labor organizations
such as unions or employee groups such as
Blacks in Government or Gays or Lesbian or
Bisexual Employees, Federal GLOBE, other organizations
like that. And it seems like a real missed
opportunity if agencies aren’t actually doing
that because you have an entire group that’s
participating in unions, union membership,
unions have their own email lists, they can
reach out to people, the same thing for employee
organizations. Also, there are specific needs
within specific employee groups. So that might
be something that would lend itself towards
maybe some training or some outreach as far
as financial education and literacy. Additionally,
15% of agencies report that they require refresher
training for their benefits practitioners.
As you know, and as we’re going to find out
in the next B.A.L. that we’re going to talk
about, you know, things change, we just had
recently F.E.R.S.-R.A.E. and F.E.R.S.-F.R.A.E.,
so refresher training for benefits and H.R.
practitioners is critical because laws are
always changing, we always have court cases
coming in that may affect the way we treat
things. So it’s really important to have that
kind of refresher training. And so that again
could help with your financial education and
literacy plan. Before we go on, are there
any questions regarding the financial education
and literacy B.A.L. and the report that’s
coming out? Nope? We have no questions so
far? Awesome. Okay. We will move on then.
I have a feeling we will get a few questions
on this next B.A.L. which we’re going to be
talking about. It’s regarding belated military
deposits. I know I get lots of questions on
this. Initially we issued a Benefits Administration
Letter 13103, that was developed to remind
agencies of the fact that generally military
deposits have to be paid in full before separation.
There is an exception to that, of course,
which is that it makes it clear that if there’s
an administrative error on the part of the
agency that the individual would have an opportunity
to make or complete a military deposit after
separation. Now, what this B.A.L. is doing,
we got lots of questions on B.A.L. on the
prior B.A.L.s. So, for example, people thought
that it was going to change the reporting
requirements as far as documentation to establish
what define creditable military service, that
somehow agencies were responsible for requesting
a waver if they determined–if they themselves
determined that they caused an administrative
error, there were–there was all kinds of
confusion with that B.A.L.. So this B.A.L.
that’s coming out is actually going to clarify
all that. What it does is it defines what
constitutes an administrative error per the
regulations. It notifies the human resource
specialist of the procedures that have to
be followed by a former employee if the former
employee believes that administrative error
occurred and prevented them from being able
to make or complete the military deposit before
separation from federal server–service. It
also provides links to and gives you some
analysis on some recent decisions that have
affected the treatment of military deposits,
these are M.S.P.B. and court decisions. Now,
what it does not do? And this is important
too. Is it does not change any existing law
or regulations, it does not change any documentation
necessary to determine the credibility of
military service. And I know you guys are
probably going to laugh when I say this so
this means that, no, this does not suddenly
mean that O.P.M. is going to accept the points
record for military deposits, okay? That’s
still a no-no for us. It provides any agency
inability–it does not provide any agency
the ability to grant a waiver of the–of the
necessity to complete the military deposit
prior to separation. Okay. Now, basically
what we’re going to do, we’re going to talk
about who’s responsible for what here. As
you’re going to see, the employee is going
to be responsible for the vast majority of
this, I mean, it’s–the owners have–all of
this is really going to fall on the employee
to request all of this, okay? The employee
needs to seek counseling about the Post-56
Military Deposit requirements. So once an
employee returns from federal service or returns
from active duty in military and returns to
federal service, they need to seek counseling
about making their Post-56 Military Deposit.
Now, relating back a little bit when we were
talking about the financial education plans,
I know a lot of agencies are doing immediate
outreach to employees when they come back
from active duty and actually contacting those
employees and saying “Hey, you just performed
a period of active duty in military service,
please come to the H.R. office so we can discuss
the potential for you making a military deposit.”
So I know a lot of agencies are already doing
that but inevitably, it is the employee’s
responsibility to seek counseling about making
that Post-56 Military Deposit, okay? Also,
it’s in the employee’s responsibility to assemble
the pertinent supporting documentation of
the creditable act of honorable military service.
I know agencies, again, a lot of times will
help employees with this, particularly in
the next pull up where we talk about the actually
or estimated earnings for a given period of
service from the military. It’s the employee’s
responsibility to obtain that information.
I know a lot of agencies actually will send
out the form and request the estimated earnings
for an employee. That’s great that you’re
doing that. That’s fantastic. That’s really
good customer service. However, in the–at
the end of the day, the employee is the person
who is responsible for that. It’s also the
employee’s responsibility to ensure that his
or her military deposit is paid in full by
the final separation date. Now, again, the
agency can assist in obtaining the actual
or estimated earnings. They’re not obligated
to do that but a lot of agencies do that.
So, the agency’s responsibility is to help
with the–on that particular when they’re
not obligated to but they can help. The agency
though must have in place a system to counsel,
calculate, collect, and post payments related
to military deposit service. That is definitely
the responsibility of the agency. You–if
a person requests counseling, you must be
able to provide them accurate information.
If requested by the employee, the agency’s
counseling must be accurate and complete including
ensuring the creditability of military service
involved. So again, you have to be well-versed
on whether the military service is creditable
or not and you have to be able to provide
that person with the appropriate and correct
information. For example, the correct interest
accrual date, the amount of the military deposit
owed, things like that. For deposits involving
U.S.E.R.R.A., the agency has to calculate
the version of the deposit based on the civilian
rates of pay in the retirement contributions
and do a comparison with the calculation using
the military earnings because, you know, with
U.S.E.R.R.A., when they’re–when they’re on
leave without pay, you ask them, U.S.E.R.R.A.
rules apply. You have to do this alternative
comparison and give the employee which–let
the–give the employee whichever is to their
advantage. Okay. Again, then you have to advise
employees that not having enough time to complete
the military deposit based upon a voluntary
separation does not constitute an administrative
error and these employees may want to consider
changing their retirement date. So, if you
have an employee who comes to you a week before
they’re ready to retire and saying, “Oh, by
the way, I want to complete my military deposit
now,” and they haven’t even requested their
military earnings, and this is a voluntary
retirement, they’re not going to have the
time to complete that military deposit. That
is not going to probably get turned around
within a week. And that person will not be
able to get credit for that military deposit
because they won’t have had enough time to
complete that military deposit prior to separation.
Okay. So, that’s a big counseling point that’s
really coming out of this whole B.A.L. is
to advise employees, especially if it’s a
voluntary retirement that they have to complete
the military deposit before retirement. And
if they don’t–if they’re not going to be
able to, then they need to consider changing
their retirement date. Now, as far as requesting
a finding of administrative error, this is,
again, one of those issues where we’ve gotten
lots of questions. If an employee didn’t complete
the payment of their military deposit and
believes that the reason was because of administrative
error, the employee retiree may request finding
of administrative error. And as I said, the
employee may request a finding of administrative
error. The agency really has no part in this
at this point. The request should come from
the employee. Under no circumstances should
the retirement package be delayed while waiting
an O.P.M. decision. If a person claims, when
they’re preparing to retire, that this is
an administrative error and they’re insisting
upon separating, you’re not going to hold
the retirement case waiting for a finding
of administrative error. You should send that
case forward. We have a lot of agencies currently
who are saying, “Oh, well, we know there is
administrative error so we’re not going to
send the retirement case to O.P.M. We’re waiting
on a letter.” No. You need to send the retirement
case forward because we’re going to evaluate
all the information in the retirement case
and O.P.M. will make the find–the determination
as to whether or not an administrative error
occurred. Now, the employee may submit the
request with the retirement package if it’s
been identified at that time. A separated
employee can submit their request directly
to O.P.M. In those cases, the employee should
be instructed to wait until O.P.M. claim number
is received so it can be included with the
request because, of course, you know, that’s
how we identify the cases, is by the claim
number, the CSA number. The request should
be sent and you guys are probably all familiar
with this address because that’s where most
of the–your paperwork goes, O.P.M. Retirement
Operations Center, PO Box 45, Boyers, Pennsylvania
16017. Okay. So send the request to Boyers,
a separate employee can send that request
there. Now, as far as what O.P.M. is going
to do in a case like this, it’s only O.P.M.
who makes the finding of administrative error.
It’s not the agency. The employee can claim
that they think there’s an administrative
error, they can write to us but it’s O.P.M.
who is going to make that determination. O.P.M.
Retirement Operations Center–or Retirement
Operations is going to carefully evaluate
an allegation of administrative error, and
there are two potential actions that the legal
administrative specialist, the person who’s
actually evaluating that can take. They could
approve a belated deposit or they could deny
a belated deposit. If a–if a belated deposit
for military deposit is approved, O.P.M.’s
going to notify the employee or the applicant
for retirement of the specific time period
granted or exercise the belated deposit option,
and for the agency to complete its actions.
O.P.M. is also going to send a letter to the
last employing agency. Okay. This is the letter
that you’re going to get. O.P.M. is going
to send that out to you once we make the determination.
If a belated deposit is denied, then we’re
going to notify the employee. The employee
must be given an initial O.P.M. decision and
then at that point, if they disagree with
it, they can request reconsideration rights
and a copy of the denial letter is going to
be forward–forwarded to the benefits officer
at the last employing agency as well. So the
agency is going to know as well that we’ve
denied their belated military deposit. We’ve
made a determination that an administrative
error did not occur. Any belated deposit has
to be administered by the agency’s payroll
provider if it’s approved. Okay. And military
deposits, they have to be paid in full and
submitted on or before the time limit O.P.M.
defines in their formal letter approving the
belated deposit. Okay. Again, these have to
be paid in full. They have to be submitted
to the agency. The agency has to–the agency
payroll office is going to have to accept
that military deposit and it’s going to have
to be completed in the timeframe that O.P.M.
allots. Now, are there any questions regarding
the belated military deposits? I knew we were
going to have some.
>>Well, this first one is one of the national
guard–I mean, on the guard reserve stuff.
Regarding the points form, our employees have
difficulty getting appropriate documentation
from the reserve centers in lieu of the D.A.R.P.
Form. They’re being told that they can only
get the D.A.R.P. Form. Would O.P.M. be able
to engage the reserve service centers and
explain what is required and why?
>>Nothing has changed with regard to this.
I mean, the employees can always get a transcript
of that reserve time. We’ve laid that out.
That has been in existence for a very long
time, actually, since before the last handbook
update, which was–you know, we’re in the
process of updating the handbook now, but
the last update was in the 1990s and–for
some of these chapters, and that guidance
has been out there ever since so everybody
should already be familiar with that. Basically,
we need that transcript of service. We cannot
accept a point summary. We get that question
all the time and it’s just not going to be
acceptable. If the employee cannot provide
their appropriate documentation, the military
service will not be creditable. We’ve asked
policy to weigh in on this several times and
they basically said exactly that, that we
will not accept anything that is not the appropriate
documentation, unfortunately.
>>Next question is, what if the employee
is not eligible to retire without the military
deposit?
>>Then they may want to consider changing
their retirement date, and if that is the
case, you know, because it–again, it does
have to be completed prior to separation,
they’re actually not eligible. If they insist
on retiring on that date, you can advise the
employee that they may not be eligible for
retirement because O.P.M. may come back with
the finding that this is a–not an administrative
error, you should, I would say for the agency’s
perspective, because we do have people who,
on occasion, will insist on retiring on a
specific date even though an agency counselor
will advise the employee that they are not
eligible on that date, to have the employee
sign a statement stating that they’ve been
counseled that they are not eligible at that
time if they separate and that military service
is not creditable, so that the agency really
is in on the hook for an erroneous separation.
>>Next. What if the separation is involuntary
regarding the military deposits?
>>Well, for involuntary separations, I guess
we need to really look at that. I mean, there’s–with
involuntary separations, clearly, the employee
doesn’t have as much as control. We’re going
to look at, again, the totality of the evidence
here and be as flexible as possible, but if
an employee is counseled at some point upon
returning from active duty military service
and advised that they need to complete the
military deposit, clearly, they have, in most
cases, had plenty of time and been advised
that they can complete this military deposit.
So we’re going to have to look at those on
a case-by-case basis, but in general, again,
the military service has to be completed prior
to separation.
>>Next question is, if we are unable to put–to
obtain accurate dates on the estimated earnings
and therefore cannot proceed with the military
deposit, is that considered administrative
error?
>>Again, we’re going to look at this on a
case-by-case basis. If the employee–you have
to give accurate counseling based on the information
that you have. If the employee–if for some
reason you find a discrepancy in the information
that you’re getting, or a conflict–for example,
let’s say you’ve got a DD 214 that shows active
military service from one specific period
of time to another specific period of time,
and then you get estimated earnings, and those
estimated earnings are not lining up, the
dates are not lining up, something is wrong
and you know that there is something wrong.
And again, it’s the employee’s responsibility
to get the estimated earnings or to provide
all their leave and earning statements for
that period of time with the military service.
Then it’s, again, the employee’s responsibility
to make sure they have all the appropriate
documentation before they separate. If they’re
thinking of separating and this is a voluntary
separation, they–again, if they don’t have
the appropriate information, they may want
to consider changing their retirement date
until such times they get that all worked
out. This kind of goes back to something that
I talked about probably some years ago whenever
we did an overview of the C.S.R.S. and F.E.R.S.
retirement benefits, and kind of a–sort of
a pre-retirement seminar for agencies, we
always say that people should start planning
and applying–planning to retire five years
immediately preceding retirement, and one
of the things that we always mention is the
five-year rule for F.E.H.B. and F.E.G.L.I.
But another big thing is the military service.
I mean, that’s another thing that you have
to work out. There’s paperwork involved that
you need to get appropriate documentation.
You may need to get–you may run into a situation
where you’re getting conflicting information
and that five years immediately preceding
retirement gives you that–the buffer, the
leeway, the amount of time to be able to work
that and–work that out and get the correct
information.
>>Does O.P.M. request information from the
agency before approving or denying a belated
deposit request?
>>No. That is the responsibility of the employee
to provide all that documentation. I’m going
to go back. Let’s see. To employee–the employee
can submit the request with the retirement
package, and again, the agency has to–you
know, we’re going to have information from
the agency on what they did as far as, you
know, if the employee requested, for example,
to make a military deposit. We’re going to,
ideally, have the military deposit worksheet
so we’re going to be able to review that,
possibly. We should have the estimated earnings.
We should have the DD 214. But again, all
this–the entire responsibility for this is
going to fall on the employee if they’re claiming
an administrative error. They have to have–they
have to have the paperwork to back it up.
We’re just not going to accept, “Oh, my agency
screwed up,” and expect O.P.M. to make a finding
of administrative error. There’s going to
have to be documentation there to show that
an administrative error actually occurred.
>>Military check returns from U.S.E.R.R.A.
and gets involuntarily separated, there’s
not enough time to get estimated earnings
and military deposit completed. Can the agency
do a letter before they separate?
>>The agency can submit–the employee is
actually going to have to claim a finding
of administrative error. And if the–and the
employee, of course, can request for the agency
provide a letter to them stating that they–there
wasn’t enough time to do this, you know, and
we can look at the dates. And that’s really
what the legal administrative specialist,
the L.A.S. is going to evaluate. So if we
do have a letter from the agency supporting
the employee’s statement that they did not
have enough time to complete it and it was
an involuntary separation, that’s all going
to be weighed together, and yes, that is something
that the L.A.S. would consider in making a
finding of administrative error. But again,
O.P.M. is going to be the final arbiter in
determining what constitutes an administrative
error.
>>Next question, why did O.P.M. discontinue
the use of 1515?
>>Because that question is at–now actually
included on the retirement application. So
if the employee accurately and completely
fills out their application for retirement,
that information is going to be on the application.
So that’s why we discontinued the use of that.
>>This question is, is the employee placed
in an interim status while O.P.M. considers
an administrative error?
>>It’s really, again, going to depend if
the–if you have a situation–in most cases,
yes, because most people are not going to
need the military deposit for eligibility
to retire. Again, that’s one of the counseling
points for you guys, if an employee is actually
going to make a claim with administrative
error and you know this going forward, or
they haven’t completed the military deposit
before separation, as we talked about one
of the prior bullets, if this is a–particularly,
if this is a voluntary, you may when it counsel
the employee that they’re going to want to
complete that military deposit before separation
and consider changing their retirement date.
If they have not done this and they insist
on separating and you’ve counseled the employee
that, you know, they may not be eligible,
if there’s a question of title, we generally
do not put people in interim pay, if there
is a question as to whether or not they’re
actually eligible to retire. So that’s another
really big thing to advise an employee on,
is that if you are not–if there’s–if the
military service is going to affect whether
or not you’re eligible to retire, you may
not be getting interim pay during that period
of time because, why would we pay you if you’re
not going to be eligible for retirement?
>>Next question, what about when military
deposit is paid for–paid over 10 to 15 years
ago, paid in full, was received, and the employee
is now retiring and the documentation for
the military was points records?
>>Well, you probably shouldn’t have accepted
that, but, I mean, we–if the–if you already
know this, then there is–you have a–the
opportunity to get that–or the employee actually
has the opportunity to get that subsequent
documentation to complete the military deposit,
to complete the–I mean, they may have already
paid the military deposit in full, but in
order for O.P.M. to determine that, that military
service is actually creditable, I mean, it’s
in question at this point. If the only thing
that we have is the points record and that’s
it, then it’s questionable as to whether or
not that military service is actually creditable.
We’ve seen many instances where an employee
has made a military deposit and they’ve made
deposits for periods of time that were under
Title 32 that were not creditable, and O.P.M.
has had to basically inform the employee that
this period of military service is not creditable.
If that’s the case and that person needed
it for eligibility and the agency never bothered
to have counsel or advise the employee that
that period of service does not appear to
be creditable or may be questionable, at that
point, there may be–that may actually constitute
an erroneous separation on the part of the
agency because you haven’t done your due diligence
in counseling the employee, because that–his
service will never be creditable. So again,
we’re going to have to look at these things
on a case-by-case basis. That’s just one example
for that.
>>That’s all we have right now.
>>Okay. Great. I’m going to turn it over
to Phil Gardner now and he’s going to talk
about part-time reemployment of annuitants
without salary offset.
>>Hi, Phil Gardner. I’m with Benefit Officers
Training and Development. We’re going to talk
today about part-time reemployment with salary
offset. Now these provisions have been in
place for over five years, and essentially,
what we’re going to–we’re going to review
the provisions and then we are going to just
talk about the extension of the–of these
provisions. So this is sort of a review, Section
1122 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for fiscal year 2010 allowed reemployment
of annuitants in executive, judicial, and
legislative branch agencies on a limited basis
without offset of salary for annuity. This
was effective October 28, 2009. D.O.D. employees
and G.A.O. employees were excluded from this
provision. Technically, this provision expired
on October 27, 2014. The section amended 5
U.S.C. 8344 L and 5 U.S.C. 8468 I to provide
for part-time reemployment without salary
offset. So the–so now, Section 1107 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of fiscal
year 2015 affectionately referred to as the
Carl Levin and Howard P. Buck McKeon National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year
2015 extended this authority through December
31, 2019. I did–early this year, I got a
lot of questions about this, whether this
had actually been done. I answered a lot of
inquiries. There was a memorandum sent to
the heads of executive departments and agencies.
Why is it always the Redskins? Okay. So it
amended 80–it amended 80–5 U.S.C. 8344 L7–added
7, and 5 U.S.C. 8468 I7 to extend through
December 31. And again, a memorandum was sent
to the heads of executive departments and
agencies on July 10th, 2015, signed by former
director, Archuleta. So the use of this authority,
it’s very similar to most salary offset waiver
provisions and that it’s to provide for special
circumstances. It’s not quite as restrictive
as a–as a regular salary offset waiver requested
from O.P.M., but it may be used to–when it’s
necessary to fulfill a mission-critical position,
assist an implementation or oversight of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 or Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.
If to assist in the development, management,
or oversight of agency procurement, to assist
the agency I.G. in the performance of their
mission. You–and to promote appropriate training
or mentoring programs of employees, and as
we’ll see in a moment, there is an actual
mentoring provision that can be used in this
to provide some excess hours as allowable.
It can be used to assist in the recruitment
of retention of employees, or respond to an
emergency involving a–involving direct threat
to life, property, or other unusual circumstances.
I just kind of like the note that the majority
of the provisions that have to do with this
reemployment are technically staffing provisions,
and really, there’s a small benefits piece,
which we will get to, but again, we just want
to cover the entire provisions. So appointments
are limited to one year or less–temporary
appointments, limited to one year or less.
The hours worked by a reemployed annuitant
under these provisions are limited to, and
there’s a series of these, 520 hours during
the first 6 months of retirement, or–and
then 10,000, 40 hour–1,000, 40 hours during
any 12-month period, and that’s just any calendar
period from today until one year from today–tomorrow
until one year from today, and then a total
of 3,120 hours under this provision. There
is also an additional 520 additional hours
allowed for mentoring and training activities.
So one thing, the agencies now cannot exceed
the time restrictions of such by–made by
Section 1122 under the–this–again, through
1107, all it did was extend the provisions.
So meaning, if someone already has 3,120 hours
prior to the expiration of the provision,
they don’t get another 3,120 hours. They’ve
already exceeded that or if they’ve already
exceeded the–if they’ve already had 3,120
and 520 hours from mentoring. They can’t–they
essentially could not work again. If they
have some hours left, then they could come
back and work a few more hours under the provision.
One thing, they–and then the annuitants reemployed
under this provision are limited to 2.5% of
the full-time workforce at any time. So then
if your organization had 200 full-time employees,
essentially, only 5 employees could be reemployed
under this provision. O.P.M. did have a reporting
requirement in the original provision. This
has been suspended. However, if you were to
exceed the limit, the 2.5% limit, or any of
the hourly limits for someone, you would still
have to report to congress about exceeding
the percentage cap. So what does this do for
benefits? Again, we are generally a benefits
organization. We are talking about some employment
provisions, but we want to talk about the
status of a reemployed annuitant while the
dual comp waiver is in effect. So they’re
not considered an employee for the purposes
of Chapter 83 and Chapter 84 of Title 5, United
States Code. This means C.S.R.S. for 83 and
F.E.R.S. for 84. As we know, their salary’s
not going to be offset for annuity. They may
not elect to have retirement deductions with
health–their pay if there are C.S.R.S. or
C.S.R.S. offset employee, cannot elect F.E.R.S.
coverage, F.E.R.S. deductions will not apply
for a F.E.R.S. retiree, and the service cannot
be credited toward a supplemental or redetermined
annuity. Now, if an employee is subsequently
reemployed under a regular offset–salary
offset reemployed annuity position, that C.S.R.S.
can be creditable, but the service performed
under the dual comp can never be credited.
If they can’t be in the retirement system,
they can also not be in T.S.P., so they cannot
participate in T.S.P. and even a full C.S.R.S.
employee covered under this provision will
be covered by F.I.C.A. only. Again, this position
is outside of the retirement provisions, so
anyone employed under this provision will
be F.I.C.A. only. We’ll talk about the–some
other benefits provisions. F.E.G.L.I., the
waiver is in effect, they may reacquire life
insurance in the same manner as any other
reemployed annuitant, meaning if they’re reemployed
in a position not excluded from coverage,
which generally, a part-time position like
this–or excuse me, a temporary appointment
like this, not to exceed one year, would be
excluded. However, they could still be covered
with the continuity in coverage rule so that
if they were reemployed with a three-day or
less break in service, they could reacquire
F.E.G.L.I. In event of a death in service
by on–by a reemployed annuitant under salary
offset waiver, the benefits are payable, the
same as any reemployed annuitant who dies
in service, meaning they’re going–their beneficiaries
are going to receive the greater of their
reemployment-acquired coverage or their suspended
annuitant coverage. But upon separation, they
will not be eligible to continue the reemployment-acquired
coverage because they’re not eligible for
a supplemental or redetermined annuity. F.E.H.B.
while the waiver is in effect. If the reemployment
is not excluded from F.E.H.B. coverage, then
the individual is eligible for premium conversion.
Now, think about this. If it’s reemployed
one year or less, they’re generally not eligible
for F.E.H.B. coverage. However, if they were
to be reemployed with a three-day or less
break in service, they would be eligible under
continuity of coverage. So in that instance,
the agency transfer in the F.E.H.B. enrollment,
and then if the individual subsequently waives
their premium conversion, notify O.P.M. to
transfer in the enrollment. Of course, the
employee would be eligible for premium conversion,
but they’re going to play a little more for
their coverage because they’re a part-time
employee. And with that, that’s all I have,
and I would like to open it up for questions.
>>At the moment, we have just one question.
Since someone under N.D.A.A. is part-time,
won’t that mean that the higher part-time
premium rates for F.E.H.B. would be in effect,
and if so, it seems like they would be better
off leaving their F.E.H.B. at O.P.M.
>>Yeah, that’s a good point, and that’s–I
did point out that while the employee is eligible
for premium conversion, he can have the tax
advantages of that. They are part-time and
they are going to owe more for their coverage
than they would as annuitants, so I would
think that’s a good counseling point. A lot
of employees may realize, “No, I don’t want–and
I don’t want the coverage and I will remain
covered as an annuitant and waive premium
conversion.”
>>That’s all we had.
>>Well, thank you very much for enjoying–for
joining us this afternoon. If there’s no more
questions, that’s all we have. Thank you very
much.

Leave comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *.