In the Matter of the Petition by	)  August 22, 1996
					)
RICHARD ROJAS				)
14527 Watkins Drive			)
					)
        at				)
					)
La Mirada, CA 90638-4145		)  P.S. Docket No. DCA 96-164


APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:		Richard Rojas
					14527 Watkins Drive
					La Mirada, CA 90638-4145

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:		J. C. Andrews, Jr.
					Labor Relations Specialist
					U. S. Postal Service
					5800 Century Boulevard, Room 247A
					Los Angeles, CA 90009-8901

FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982

Petitioner, Richard Rojas, has filed a petition as a result of a notice issued to him on or about April 26, 1996, informing him that he was indebted to Respondent in the amount of $39.90 and informing him that failure to pay that amount within 15 days would result in the implementation of an involuntary payroll deduction. The claimed indebtedness was based on Petitioner's alleged failure to pay the employee's share of premiums under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).

1. Petitioner, Richard Rojas, was apparently unable to work and was certified as unable to return to work for medical reasons from December 28, 1995, through July 1, 1996. (Petition, Exhibit E).

2. For the period including 1996 pay periods 3-7, Petitioner received no gross or net pay. Therefore, during those pay periods, no deductions were made for Petitioner's share of the premiums for coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). (Respondent's Exhibits 1-3).

3. On April 27, 1996, Petitioner received a letter of demand from Respondent, enclosing an invoice for $39.90 covering health insurance premiums for pay periods 3-7, and informing Petitioner that if he failed to make payment within 15 days, involuntary payroll deductions would be made to cover that amount. An enclosure to that letter informed Petitioner of his right to a hearing under the Debt Collection Act. (Petition, Exhibit A).

As stated in earlier Orders issued in connection with this matter, it is apparent that there are other, significant ongoing personnel disputes between Petitioner and Respondent. However, as also stated earlier, this matter deals only with the invoice for allegedly unpaid FEHBP premiums received by Petitioner on April 27, 1996. This decision is not intended to have any bearing on the other disputes between the parties.

Under 5 C.F.R. §890.502(b)(1) and (3), an employee is deemed to incur an indebtedness to the United States in any pay period during which enrollment in the FEHBP continues but a deduction for, or direct payment of, the employee's share of the premium is not made. Further, under the regulations, an individual who incurs such an indebtedness is deemed to consent to have the full amount of such indebtedness withheld from future salary or from any other monies owed to the employee by the federal government.¹   Based on these regulations, it appears that the only issues before me in this matter are whether Petitioner was enrolled in the FEHBP during pay periods 3-7 in 1996 and, if so, whether the required premiums were deducted from his pay.

In its answer to the petition, Respondent asserts that it paid the employer's share of the health insurance premiums for the periods in question. Although Respondent has not provided any direct evidence supporting that statement, Petitioner has not argued that it is untrue. Based on that statement, I conclude that Petitioner was enrolled in the FEHBP during the pay periods in question. As indicated above, I have also concluded that, since Petitioner received no pay during those pay periods, no deductions were made for the employee's share of the premiums. There is also no evidence that Petitioner made direct payment of his share of the premiums.

Since Petitioner was enrolled in the FEHBP but did not have his share of the premiums deducted from his pay or pay his share directly, based on the regulations at 5 C.F.R. §890.502(b)(1) and (3), Respondent properly issued an invoice seeking payment of the premiums directly from Petitioner. Petitioner has offered no evidence or arguments challenging the amount sought by Respondent. Accordingly, Respondent may recover $39.90 from Petitioner.

The petition is denied. Respondent may collect $39.90 from Petitioner by involuntary administrative salary offset.

					David I. Brochstein
					Administrative Judge