[House Report 106-179]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    106-179

======================================================================



 
FOR THE PRIVATE RELIEF OF RUTH HAIRSTON BY WAIVER OF A FILING DEADLINE 
  FOR APPEAL FROM A RULING RELATING TO HER APPLICATION FOR A SURVIVOR 
                                ANNUITY

_______________________________________________________________________


   June 9, 1999.--Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 660]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 660) for the private relief of Ruth Hairston by 
waiver of a filing deadline for appeal from a ruling relating 
to her application for a survivor annuity, having considered 
the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                  

                                                                 Page
Purpose and Summary........................................           2
Background and Need for the Legislation....................           2
Hearings...................................................           2
Committee Consideration....................................           2
Committee Oversight Findings...............................           3
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight Findings......           3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures..................           3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate..................           3
Constitutional Authority Statement.........................           4

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 660 would allow the claimant to petition the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for a review of the Merit Systems Protection 
Board decision denying her the annuity.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Ms. Hairston's husband retired with 35 years of civil 
service. When he retired, he elected to provide a survivor 
annuity for Ms. Hairston with a reduced annuity for himself. 
After 53 years of marriage, the Hairstons divorced.
    The Civil Service Retirement Spouse Equity Act of 1985 
allowed a spouse to elect a survivor annuity within 2 years 
following the divorce. When Mr. Hairston received the notice of 
this option which in part said `` . . . you may elect a 
survivor annuity for that former spouse within 2 years after 
the marriage ended. You will have to accept a reduced annuity . 
. . '', he assumed he had already met the requirement of 
responding to the letter. He had already elected to provide Ms. 
Hairston with a survivor annuity and accepted a reduced 
annuity.
    The Hairstons were divorced in 1987. Mr. Hairston never 
attempted to stop Ms. Hairston's annuity or increase his 
reduced annuity. Ms. Hairston started receiving annuity 
payments in 1988 as a result of the community property ruling 
regarding Mr. Hairston's civil service pension. Therefore, she 
was not aware of any need to reiterate Mr. Hairston intent to 
provide her with the survivor annuity.
    In 1995, Mr. Hairston died. Because Mr. Hairston had never 
sent proper notification of his intent to provide Ms. Hairston 
with a survivor annuity, Ms. Hairston's annuity payments were 
stopped upon his death.
    Ms. Hairston appealed the Office of Personnel Management 
decision to deny her annuity to the Merit Systems Protection 
Board. The Board denied her appeal, with a dissent by the 
Chairman of the Board. At that time written notification was 
sent to Ms. Hairston that she had 30 days to appeal.
    The Subcommittee has received testimonials from medical 
professionals caring for Ms. Hairston. They indicate that due 
to Ms. Hairston's medical condition during the period in which 
she could appeal, she was unable to do so.
    This bill does not reach a conclusion on Ms. Hairston's 
annuity claim. The bill would only allow the 30-day time period 
for an appeal request to be waived, so that Ms. Hairston may 
petition the U.S. Court of Appeals for a review of the Merit 
Systems Protection Board decision denying her the annuity.

                                Hearings

    The Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims held 
no hearings on H.R. 660.

                        Committee Consideration

    On March 4, 1999, the Subcommittee on Immigration and 
Claims met in open session and ordered favorably reported the 
bill H.R.660 without amendment by voice vote, a quorum being 
present.
    On May 19, 1999, the Committee on the Judiciary met in open 
session and ordered reported favorably the bill H.R. 660, by 
voice vote, a quorum being present.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of Rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

         Committee on Government Reform and Oversight Findings

    No findings or recommendations of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in 
clause 3(c)(4) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII is inapplicable because 
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or 
increased tax expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, H.R. 660, the following estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 20, 1999.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 660, a bill for 
the private relief of Ruth Hairston by waiver of a filing 
deadline for appeal from a ruling relating to her application 
for a survivor annuity.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is John R. 
Righter, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                  Dan L. Crippen, Director.
H.R. 660.--A bill for the private relief of Ruch Hairston by waiver of 
        a filing deadline for appeal from a ruling relating to her 
        application for a survivor annuity.
    H.R. 660 would permit Ms. Hairston to petition the U.S. 
Court of Appeals to review a decision made by the Merit Systems 
Protection Board (MSPB), wherein it upheld the government's 
decision to deny Ms. Hairston annuity payments. If the court 
were to reverse the decision made by MSPB and reinstate the 
annuity payments, the bill would increase direct spending from 
the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund. The amount of 
any annual increase, however, would be negligible. Because the 
bill could affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures 
would apply.
    The CBO staff contact is John R. Righter, who can be 
reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by Robert A. 
Sunshine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in Article 1, Section 1, Clause 8 of the 
Constitution.

                                   - 
