United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

B.C., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, MAIN POST OFFICE, 

Chicago, IL, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 13-1824 

Issued: May 16, 2014 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

RICHARD J. DASCHBACH, Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

PATRICIA HOWARD FITZGERALD, Judge 

On August 1, 2013 appellant filed a timely appeal from the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs’ (OWCP) March 18, 2013 nonmerit decision denying her request for 

reconsideration and May 7, 2013 nonmerit decision denying her request for an oral hearing. The 

Board assigned Docket No. 13-1824. 

This case has previously been before the Board with respect to the termination of 

appellant’s medical benefits.1

 In a May 9, 2008 decision, the Board affirmed OWCP’s 

January 18 and November 15, 2007 decisions which terminated appellant’s medical benefits 

related to her May 7 and July 24, 1985 work injuries and found that she did not have any 

continuing employment-related residuals after January 18, 2007.2

 

 1

 Docket No. 08-571 (issued May 9, 2008). 

2

 In an August 21, 2013 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s June 12, 2013 request for reconsideration of the 

May 9, 2008 termination decision on the grounds that it was not timely filed and failed to establish clear evidence of 

error of the prior decision. It is well established that the Board and OWCP may not have concurrent jurisdiction 

over the same issue in a case. Consequently, any decision by OWCP on an issue pending before the Board is null 

and void. Douglas E. Billings, 41 ECAB 880, 895 (1990). As OWCP issued the August 21, 2013 decision after 

appellant filed her August 1, 2013 Board appeal and, as it is on the same issue pending before the Board, i.e., 

whether appellant’s request for reconsideration of the termination decision was timely filed or established clear 

evidence of error, it is null and void. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(2). 
2

By letter dated September 20, 2012, appellant requested reconsideration “for the 

termination of my claim on January 18, 2007 for no residual of ongoing disability” and 

submitted evidence. 

In the March 18, 2013 decision, OWCP failed to address the proper issue on 

reconsideration. OWCP stated that the request for reconsideration concerned whether appellant 

had sustained a recurrence of disability; yet the issue on reconsideration clearly was the 

termination of medical benefits. 

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that OWCP failed to address the 

relevant issue in this case. Appellant specifically requested reconsideration of OWCP’s decision 

terminating her medical benefits as of January 18, 2007 on the grounds that she no longer had 

any employment-related residuals or disability. Therefore, the decision is void ab initio, that is, 

void from its inception and of no force and effect3

. OWCP should have adjudicated the issue of 

whether appellant’s September 20, 2012 request for reconsideration of the termination of her 

medical benefits was timely filed or established clear evidence of error. The Board finds that the 

case must be remanded to OWCP for a proper decision on this issue.4 Following this and such 

other development as deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue an appropriate decision on 

appellant’s September 20, 2012 request for reconsideration. 

 3 Cf. Donald E. Buckles, 43 ECAB 707 (1992), in which the Board found that its prior order remanding case was 

void ab initio where the Board had no authority, due to lack of jurisdiction, to issue the order at the time of issuance. 

In the instant case, OWCP improperly adjudicated a recurrence issue when appellant had requested reconsideration 

of the termination of her medical benefits. OWCP’s actions precluded appellant from a proper adjudication of her 

reconsideration request and, as such, it acted outside its authority when issuing the March 18, 2013 decision on the 

recurrence issue. 

4

 In light of the disposition of this case, the Board finds that the May 7, 2013 OWCP decision denying an oral 

hearing is moot. 
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 18, 2013 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case remanded to OWCP for further 

action consistent with this order. 

Issued: May 16, 2014 

Washington, DC 

 

 Richard J. Daschbach, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia Howard Fitzgerald, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board