SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Subpart A of 5 CFR part 178 prescribes general procedures applicable to claims against the United States that may be settled by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) involving Federal civilian employees' compensation and leave, deceased federal employees, and checks issued to a veteran who dies on or after the last day of the period covered by the check. Claims under the exclusive jurisdiction of administrative agencies pursuant to specific statutory authority, claims concerning matters that are subject to negotiated grievance procedures under collective bargaining agreements, and claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) are not subject to these provisions.

Under 31 U.S.C. 3702(a)(2), current or former federal civilian employees may file a claim with OPM disputing their compensation or leave. Such claims typically involve backpay, unpaid overtime, unused annual leave upon separation, or denied allowances. For example, if an overseas employee has reason to believe their request for living quarters allowance was inappropriately denied by the agency, the employee may file a claim with OPM. OPM is not granted policy exception authority over any provisions of implementing regulations or agency-specific regulations.

Under 5 U.S.C. 5583, an employing agency pays money due a deceased Federal employee to the beneficiary the employee designated, or, absent a designation, to the employee's widow or widower. This provision applies to unpaid compensation owed at the time of an employee's death, such as final salary or unused leave. See the definition of “money due” at 5 U.S.C. 5581(2). A designated beneficiary, or the widow or widower of the deceased employee, may file a claim with OPM if they have not been paid the money owed.

A third type of claim addressed by this rule are claims to receive accrued benefits due to a deceased veteran. See 38 U.S.C. 5121 and 5122. Potential claimants for these funds include the veteran's spouse, children, or dependent parents.

OPM developed an electronic filing (eFile) system to support existing regulatory provisions. That system will be used for all appeals and claims to allow for faster receipt facilitating OPM's processing and review. To comply with this and inform the public, OPM must update its administrative claims regulations at 5 CFR part 178, subpart A, which provides the filing instructions.

With this rule, OPM updates the provisions concerning administrative claims submissions by removing the inaccurate information such as the OPM office name and mailing address. It also removes the request for a facsimile number. OPM is also revising the submission provision to require, with limited exception, use of OPM's eFile system for filing a claim. OPM is also requiring claims to include the employing agency name, the claimant's email address, and the “agency employee email address.” This information will allow efficient review of claims and facilitate communication with the appropriate people. With the eFile system, it is important that OPM capture the claimant's email address on the claim submission.

Claims filed before September 29, 2026 will be processed under the requirements in effect on the date of submission or postmark. Any submissions on or after September 29, 2026 must comply with the requirements of this part as amended by this rule. OPM notes that it currently accepts claims submitted by mail and email. Claims that are already in process will continue to be processed outside of the new eFile system.

Direct Final Rule Justification

This is a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice and is therefore exempt from the prior public notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). The rule prescribes the manner and format in which claims and supporting documents are submitted to OPM. It does not change who is eligible to file a claim, the substantive bases on which a claim may be brought, the applicable time limits for filing, the evidence required to establish a claim, or the standards OPM applies in adjudicating claims. Because the rule governs the process for submitting matters to OPM rather than the substantive standards that determine their outcome, it does not alter the substantive rights or obligations of claimants.

OPM acknowledges that the rule changes the required method of filing by directing claimants to use OPM's eFile system in place of postal mail or electronic mail. To ensure that this procedural change does not impede any ( printed page 48232) claimant's ability to file, the rule preserves an exemption process under which OPM may authorize an alternative method of filing for a party or representative who cannot reasonably file electronically. § 178.102(e)(2). The change in filing method therefore does not deprive any claimant of the ability to submit a claim or affect the substantive disposition of claims.

As an independent and alternative basis, OPM finds under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) that notice and public comment are unnecessary and that good cause exists to proceed without prior notice and comment. The rule makes procedural and technical changes—correcting outdated office and contact information and directing filers to OPM's electronic filing system. OPM does not anticipate significant adverse comment but is issuing the rule as a direct final rule and will withdraw it and proceed by notice of proposed rulemaking if it receives significant adverse comment, as described below.

This rule will be effective September 29, 2026, without further action unless significant adverse comments are received. A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) why the rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. If such comments are received, this direct final rule will be withdrawn and a proposed rule for comments will be published. If no such comments are received, this direct final rule will become effective 45 days after the comment period expires. In determining whether a significant adverse comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, OPM will consider whether the comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response had it been submitted in a standard notice and comment process. A comment recommending an addition to the rule will not be considered significant and adverse unless the comment explains how this direct final rule would be ineffective without the addition.

Expected Impact of This Direct Final Rule

OPM determined that this rule was needed to correct outdated information in the regulations and to allow for the use of modern technology in its interactions with Federal employees, former Federal employees, and survivors of deceased Federal employees who may experience a delay in processing times due to the current mail-in procedures. Claims are often delayed in themailroom, misrouted to another organization, or wait to be scanned in for processing. Using an electronic filing system eliminates the possibility of misrouting and the need to scan in the claims.

This rule will allow OPM to leverage an electronic filing system, which will improve the efficiency of appeal and claim processing for claimants and OPM staff. Moving to the electronic filing system is a more secure and cost-effective way to receive claims and appeals, without the threat of losing sensitive information in themail or having to be received and sorted in themailroom. It also will expedite the processing of cases, allowing the adjudication of cases to be more timely. The level of confidentiality will not be compromised with compensation and leave cases because, like the process today, OPM reviews the claim first to comply with any claimant request for confidentiality prior to reaching out to the agency to inform the agency that a claim has been filed. It also reduces the risk of losing sensitive or personally identifiable information via U.S. mail. Sending the claims and all supporting documentation through the electronic filing system creates an automatic record, making it easier for OPM and claimants to track to make sure that all claims are being received and considered by OPM.

Regulatory Compliance

Regulatory Review

OPM has examined the impact of this rule as required by Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, which direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. This rule is considered an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Director of OPM certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is a non-substantive, procedural rule.

Federalism

This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, the Director of OPM certifies that this direct final rule does not have federalism implications that require preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

This rulemaking meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that would impose spending costs on State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or on the private sector, in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. That threshold is currently approximately $206 million. This rulemaking will not result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, in excess of the threshold. Thus, no written assessment of unfunded mandates is required.

Congressional Review Act

The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined this rule does not meet the criteria listed in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This regulatory action will change the reporting or recordkeeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as amended (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). OPM has created an e-filing system for use in collecting and maintaining adjudication records for a variety of different existing regulatory provisions. That system will be used to support the changes in this final rule. OPM has submitted a request for a new information collection to the Office of Management and Budget for the e-filing system. (see 91 FR 46802 (July 24, 2026)

After review of OPM's existing System of Records Notices (SORNs), OPM has determined that the following SORNs may apply to information stored in the e-filing system: OPM/GOVT-1, OPM/GOVT-9, OPM/CENTRAL-2, OPM/CENTRAL-5, and OPM/CENTRAL-9. OPM may disclose information outside the agency when such disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. The information collected through the e-filing system may be shared outside of OPM pursuant to the routine uses published in the following ( printed page 48233) System of Records Notices: OPM/GOVT-1, General Personnel Records; OPM/GOVT-9, File on Position Classification Appeals, Job Grading Appeals, Retained Grade or Pay Appeals, and Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Claims and Complaints; OPM/CENTRAL-2, Complaints and Inquiries Records; OPM/CENTRAL-5, Intergovernmental Personnel Act Assignment Records; and OPM/CENTRAL-9, OPM Suitability Adjudications Files. Principal routine uses include:

• To parties engaged in the adjudication or review of the matter, such as entities responsible for appeals, oversight, or administrative review.
• To individuals or organizations participating in fact finding or decision making, including witnesses, subject matter experts, consultants, or others assisting in resolving the matter.
• To oversight or compliance bodies responsible for reviewing program integrity, privacy compliance, or adherence to applicable laws, rules, or policies.
• To entities responsible for addressing potential violations of law, where the information indicates a possible breach of civil or criminal statutes.
• To courts or adjudicative bodies when the information is relevant to litigation or administrative proceedings.
• To contractors or service providers engaged by OPM to support system operations, case management, or other authorized functions, when access is necessary for them to perform their duties.
• To records management authorities responsible for ensuring proper maintenance, archiving, or disposition of Federal records.

Signing Statement

The Director of OPM, Scott Kupor, reviewed and approved this document and has authorized the undersigned to electronically sign and submit this document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, OPM amends 5 CFR part 178, as follows:

91 FR 48231