United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

H.J., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Greensboro, NC, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 14-382 

Issued: May 1, 2014 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Daniel F. Read, Esq., for the appellant 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

RICHARD J. DASCHBACH, Chief Judge 

MICHAEL E. GROOM, Alternate Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On January 13, 2014 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a 

September 23, 2013 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). 

Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act1

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 

501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over the merits of this case. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether OWCP abused its discretion by denying appellant’s request for 

reimbursement of travel expenses for October 15, 2012. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On May 4, 2002 appellant, then a 38-year-old rural carrier, sustained multiple injuries as 

a result of a motor vehicle accident. OWCP accepted the claim for contusions of the left lower 

limb and hip; injury to the sciatic nerve; displacement of a lumbar intervertebral disc without 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

myelopathy; a cervical herniated disc at C6-7; C6-7 discectomy and bilateral chondromalacia of 

patellae. Appellant did not return to work and OWCP authorized treatment for his injuries. 

On August 15, 2013 appellant requested mileage reimbursement for travel to a medical 

appointment on October 15, 2012. 

By letter dated August 16, 2013, OWCP informed appellant that it had received his 

request for authorization of mileage reimbursement. It noted that the file did not contain any 

medical reports for treatment on October 15, 2012 and June 27, 2013. OWCP requested that 

appellant submit copies of medical records for those dates to be considered for authorization of 

payment.2

In support of his claim, appellant submitted a June 27, 2013 medical report from 

Dr. Keith Walker Michael, a treating physician. No medical records were received documenting 

treatment on October 15, 2012. 

By decision dated September 23, 2013, OWCP denied appellant’s request for 

reimbursement of travel on October 15, 2012. It noted that no evidence was received relevant to 

treatment on October 15, 2012 to support reimbursement of travel. OWCP authorized travel on 

June 27, 2013 as a medical report pertaining to that date was submitted. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Medical expenses, along with transportation and other expenses incidental to securing 

medical care, are covered by section 8103 of FECA. This section provides that the United States 

shall furnish to an employee who is injured while in the performance of duty, the services, 

appliances and supplies prescribed or recommended by a qualified physician, which OWCP 

considers likely to cure, give relief, reduce the degree of the period of disability or aid in 

lessening the amount of monthly compensation.3 Section 10.315 of Title 20 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations provide in relevant part that the employee may be furnished necessary and 

reasonable transportation and expenses incidental to the securing of such services, appliances 

and supplies.4

 To determine what a reasonable distance to travel is, OWCP will consider the 

availability of services, the employee’s condition, and the means of transportation. Generally, 

100 miles from the place of injury, the work site, or the employee’s home, is considered a 

reasonable distance to travel.5

 2

 The development letter also referenced other dates claimed for mileage reimbursement. It noted the dates which 

were authorized for payment and dates which were not approved because authorization of reimbursement of mileage 

to Dr. Fred McQueen’s office, appellant’s physician, was terminated effective May 31, 2012 and upheld by the 

Branch of Hearings and Review on January 7, 2013. The Board notes that it does not have jurisdiction to review the 

January 7, 2013 decision because more than 180 days elapsed from issuance of that decision to the filing of this 

appeal on January 13, 2014. 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e). 

3

 5 U.S.C. § 8103. 

4 Id. at § 8103(a). 

5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.315. 
3

The issues of authorization for medical treatment and reimbursement of travel expenses 

for medical treatment are separate and distinct. OWCP may authorize medical treatment but 

determine that the travel expense incurred for such authorized treatment was unnecessary or 

unreasonable.6

 The Board has recognized that OWCP has discretion with respect to 

authorization of travel expenses for medical treatment.7

The only limitation on OWCP’s authority is reasonableness. Abuse of discretion is 

generally shown through proof of manifest error, clearly unreasonable exercise of judgment or 

actions taken which are contrary to both logic and probable deductions from known facts.8 The 

Board has held that, in interpreting relevant sections of FECA, OWCP has broad discretion in 

approving services provided under FECA.9

ANALYSIS 

The Board finds that OWCP did not abuse its discretion by denying reimbursement of 

travel for October 15, 2012. 

On August 15, 2013 appellant requested authorization of mileage reimbursement on 

October 15, 2012. In an August 16, 2013 letter, OWCP advised him that he must submit medical 

records establishing treatment on that date for consideration of authorization of payment. 

Appellant, however, failed to submit any medical evidence documenting medical treatment on 

October 15, 2012. 

The Federal (FECA) Procedural Manual provides that no travel expense shall be allowed 

until the evidence shows that travel was performed for the purpose authorized. This is usually 

established by a report from the attending or examining physician which lists the dates when the 

injured employee reported to the physician.10 OWCP may then determine whether the travel 

expense incurred was reasonable and necessary for treatment.11

OWCP has broad discretion in considering whether to reimburse or authorize travel 

expenses. The only limitation on OWCP’s authority is reasonableness. As noted, abuse of 

discretion is generally shown through proof of manifest error, clearly unreasonable exercise of 

judgment or actions taken which are contrary to both logic and probable deduction from known 

facts.12 Appellant failed to submit any medical evidence to document treatment on October 15, 

 6 W.M., 59 ECAB (2007). 

7 V.K., Docket No. 12-1103 (issued October 12, 2012). 

8 See Lecil E. Stevens, 49 ECAB 673 (1998). 

9 See Wanda L. Campbell, 44 ECAB 633 (1993). 

10 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 5 -- Benefit Payments, Overview of the BPS System, Chapter 

5.204.8(m) (January 1996). 

11 See Dr. Mira R. Adams, 48 ECAB 504 (1997). 

12 See William B. Webb, 56 ECAB 156 (2004); Lecil E. Stevens, 49 ECAB 673 (1998). 
4

2012 by a qualified physician. OWCP did not abuse its discretion by denying reimbursement of 

travel on that date.13

On appeal, counsel contends that authorization of reimbursement of mileage to 

Dr. McQueen’s office should not have been terminated. As noted, the Board does not have 

jurisdiction over the January 7, 2013 decision upholding the May 31, 2012 termination of 

authorization of travel and expense reimbursements related to appellant’s treatment by 

Dr. McQueen. 

Appellant may submit new evidence or argument with a written request for 

reconsideration to OWCP within one year of this merit decision, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a) 

and 20 C.F.R. §§ 10.605 through 10.607. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that OWCP did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant’s request 

for reimbursement of travel expenses for the period October 15, 2012. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the September 23, 2013 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: May 1, 2014 

Washington, DC 

 

 Richard J. Daschbach, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Michael E. Groom, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 13 Angie Prater, Docket No. 01-104 (issued February 25, 2003).