Barbara Lee Chafin v. Office of Personnel Management

No. 2024-2369 (Fed. Cir. May 27, 2026) · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · May 27, 2026 · No. 2024-2369

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s denial of Barbara Lee Chafin’s application for Federal Employees’ Retirement System disability retirement benefits. The court held that Chafin’s inability to commute to her assigned workplace was not relevant to whether she could render useful and efficient service under 5 U.S.C. § 8451(a)(1)(B), and that factual findings underlying the physical disability determination were not subject to judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 8461(d).

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Writing for the Court
Lourie, Circuit Judge; Moore, Chief Judge; Mayer, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decision date
May 27, 2026
Docket number
2024-2369
Procedural posture
Petition for review of a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board denying FERS disability retirement benefits.
Standard of review
Under 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c), the court generally reviews a Board decision for arbitrariness, capriciousness, abuse of discretion, legal error, procedural error, or lack of substantial evidence. Under 5 U.S.C. § 8461(d), OPM's factual findings concerning physical disability determinations are final and conclusive and are not subject to judicial review, although the court may review substantial procedural departures, misconstruction of governing legislation, or similar legal error going to the heart of the administrative determination.
Precedential value
Published Federal Circuit opinion
Parties
Barbara Lee Chafin v. Office of Personnel Management
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

federal employment lawmerit systems protection boardjudicial review of agency actionstatutory interpretationappellate jurisdiction

Practice areas

Administrative lawFederal employment lawCivil service retirement benefitsAppellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Board legally erred by refusing to consider Chafin's inability to commute, the lack of public transportation, and the cost of ride-sharing services when determining whether she could render useful and efficient service under 5 U.S.C. § 8451(a)(1)(B).
  2. Whether the court could review Chafin's argument that the Board's factual determination that she could render useful and efficient service was inadequately supported by the evidence.

Holdings

  1. An employee's inability to commute to the existing position is not a consideration in determining whether the employee is unable to render useful and efficient service under 5 U.S.C. § 8451(a)(1)(B). The Board therefore correctly refused to consider Chafin's inability to drive, the lack of public transportation, and the cost of ride-sharing services.
  2. The Federal Circuit could not review Chafin's fact-based challenge to the determination that she was able to render useful and efficient service because 5 U.S.C. § 8461(d) makes OPM's factual findings concerning physical disability final and conclusive.

Key quotations

That explicit inclusion in the refusal of a reassignment provision indicates that Congress intended to exclude considerations of the ability to commute in generally defining whether an employee can “render useful and efficient service,” and is thus disabled, under § 8451(a)(1)(B). (6)
We are therefore statutorily barred from considering this argument because it is a request to reconsider a factual matter relating to OPM’s determination that Chafin was not physically disabled. (7)

Factual background

Chafin worked as a GS-03 Operational Support Technician for the FBI in Miramar, Florida, a position requiring physical presence at the office. After being removed from her position in 2018, she applied for FERS disability retirement benefits, asserting that seizures prevented her from driving to work and performing her duties. OPM concluded that she had not shown that she was unable, because of disease or injury, to render useful and efficient service in her position.

Procedural history

OPM denied Chafin's application for Federal Employees' Retirement System disability retirement benefits and denied reconsideration. An administrative judge affirmed OPM's determination, and the full Merit Systems Protection Board adopted that decision. Chafin timely petitioned the Federal Circuit for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(9).

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…