Ebony Akpo, ALJ Ruling 2026-38 (HHS CRD September 18 2026)

DISMISSAL

Petitioner, Ebony Akpo, requested a hearing in connection with a debt notification letter issued by her employer, the Social Security Administration (SSA or Respondent).  As explained below, I find that Petitioner waived her right to a hearing by failing to timely request a hearing and therefore Petitioner’s request for hearing is DISMISSED.

I.  Background

In a letter dated June 22, 2026, SSA informed Petitioner, Ebony Akpo, that she owed a net total debt of $480.05 due to an alleged overpayment.  Civil Remedies Division (CRD) Docket (Dkt.) Entry Number (No.) 1a at 1, 9.  The letter informed Petitioner that if the full amount demanded was not paid within thirty days from the date of the letter, then interest of 4.00% per annum, and a late penalty of 6.00% per annum would accrue until the alleged debt is paid in full. Id. at 1.

SSA’s letter also informed Petitioner that she could request a hearing to dispute the existence of the debt or the amount of the debt by submitting, within 15 days of the date

Page 2

on the debt letter, a written request for hearing to the Director of the Division of Reimbursable and Administrative Collections (DRAC, Social Security Administration) at PO Box 17042, Baltimore, MD 21235, or emailing OF.Debt.Management.Team@ssa.gov.  Id. at 8.

Based on SSA’s letter, dated June 22, 2026, the deadline for Petitioner to file a timely request for hearing was July 7, 2026.  See 20 C.F.R. § 422.810(h)(1)(i).

On July 31, 2026, Petitioner sent an email to OF.Debt.Management.Team@ssa.gov with the subject line “Hearing Dispute of Debt # 61740943606” and attached her Hearing Request and supporting worksheet.  CRD Dkt. Entry Nos. 1, 1b-1c.  Petitioner requests a hearing because she alleges she was “erroneously charged an overpayment of 8 hours due to an administrative error and there has been no indication of fraud on [her] part.”  CRD Dkt. Entry No. 1b at 1.  Petitioner asserts that “[p]rior to going out on maternity leave in 11/2025 from a high risk pregnancy I submitted a leave calendar with the leave to be used while I’m out until 10/2026.”  Id.  “My local office processed my leave request wrong and has been working on correcting this matter since 6/2026 through HR connect[]” adding that this is an ongoing matter between HR and her timekeepers.  Id.

On August 6, 2026, I issued an Acknowledgment, Order to Show Cause, and Stay of Decision Deadline (Show Cause Order).  CRD Dkt. Entry No. 2.  The Show Cause Order directed SSA to brief whether:  (1) Petitioner’s hearing request was timely; (2) whether the delay was the result of circumstances beyond Petitioner’s control or due to the fact that Petitioner did not receive actual notice of the filing deadline; (3) SSA’s position on the 60-day statutory limitation; and (4) the current collection status of Petitioner’s alleged debt.  Id. at 3.  Petitioner was given an opportunity to respond.  Id.  I also stayed the 60-day decision deadline.  Id. at 4.

On August 17, 2026, SSA electronically filed a Response to the Show Cause Order. CRD Dkt. Entry No. 3.  SSA argued:  (1) Petitioner’s Hearing Request was untimely and not excused; (2) that the 60-day time limitation commenced on July 31, 2026; and (3) that $251.48 of the debt was collected before Respondent received Petitioner’s Hearing Request and collection has been suspended.  Id. at 1-3.

On August 27, 2026, Petitioner filed a letter and six supporting documents labeled as Exhibits 1-6.  CRD Dkt. Entry Nos. 4, 4a-4f.  Petitioner’s letter argues that “[t]his is my first time filing a request of this matter to the courts and I am requesting mercy in my lateness of filing this hearing [request].”  CRD Dkt. Entry No. 4.  Petitioner disagrees with SSA’s assertion that her Hearing Request is untimely and not excused, and that only $251.48 was recovered, asserting that a total in the amount of $413.43 was recovered in two different payments from her paycheck.  Id.

Page 3

II.  Discussion and Analysis

1. Petitioner waived her right to a hearing by failing to submit a timely request for hearing.

Pursuant to the salary offset statute and regulations, an SSA employee has 15 days from receiving a notice of salary offset to request a hearing.  5 U.S.C. § 5514(a)(1)(D); 20 C.F.R. § 422.810(h)(1)(i).1 

Generally, if the employee fails to request a hearing within the 15-day period, the right to a hearing is waived.  20 C.F.R. § 422.810(h)(2)(ii)(A).  The regulations, however, provide that an untimely request for hearing may be accepted if the employee establishes “either that the delay was the result of circumstances beyond the employee’s control or that the employee failed to receive actual notice of the filing deadline.”  Id. § 422.810(h)(2)(i).

Here, Petitioner’s Hearing Request is dated July 31, 2026, 39 days after the June 22, 2026 debt notification.  Compare CRD Dkt. Entry No. 1 with CRD Dkt. Entry No. 1a.  The hearing request does not provide an explanation for being filed beyond the 15-day window.  The “Right to Hearing” section of the debt notification states that:

The Director, DCAR may grant an extension or excuse a delay of filing of a request for hearing if the debtor shows good cause for the late filing.  A reasonable extension will be granted only if the debtor shows the delay was caused by circumstances beyond the debtor’s control, or that the debtor did not receive notice.  A debtor who fails to meet the filing deadline or to request an extension waives the right to a hearing and will be subject to offset.

CRD Dkt. Entry No. 1a at 8.  Although Petitioner requests mercy in the untimeliness of her hearing request, SSA asserts that this late filing has not been excused by the DCAR director.  CRD Dkt. Entry No. 3 at 2.

Based on my review of the available record, Petitioner was well beyond the 15-day window to file her appeal and did not provide a reason for the delay.  Accordingly, Petitioner has waived her right to a hearing, and I lack the jurisdiction to review the hearing request or her supporting documents.  See 20 C.F.R. § 422.810(h)(2)(ii)(A).

Page 4

III.  Order

For all the reasons stated above, the stay on the decision deadline is LIFTED, Petitioner’s request for hearing is DISMISSED, and this matter is closed.

IT IS ORDERED.