United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.J., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, PROCESSING & 

DISTRIBUTION CENTER, Tulsa, OK, Employer

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0727 

Issued: July 16, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On February 3, 2015 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a 

November 3, 2014 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 appellant has met his burden of proof to establish total disability 

from September 9, 2012 to January 21, 2014 due to his accepted employment injury. 

On appeal, counsel contends that OWCP’s decision is contrary to law and fact. 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On August 31, 2012 appellant, then a 37-year-old mail handler, filed an occupational 

disease claim alleging that on September 11, 2010 he first became aware of his carpal tunnel 

syndrome and realized that his condition was caused by repetitive lifting at work. He stopped 

work on August 23, 2012. 

In an October 23, 2012 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s occupational disease claim. 

It accepted that he was exposed to the employment factors, but found that the medical evidence 

submitted was insufficient to establish that he sustained a medical condition causally related to 

the accepted work factors. Appellant requested a hearing on November 19, 2012. 

In a July 31, 2013 decision, an OWCP hearing representative affirmed the October 23, 

2012 decision, finding that the medical evidence was insufficient to establish a causal 

relationship between appellant’s claimed injury and the accepted employment factors. 

On September 3, 2013 appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration. 

In an August 12, 2013 medical report, Dr. Perry D. Inhofe, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, reviewed in detail appellant’s work duties and his activities outside work, and found 

that his repetitive work duties caused his carpal tunnel syndrome. He stated that there was no 

evidence of a health condition or a vocational activity that caused or contributed to appellant’s 

condition. Dr. Inhofe further stated that there was a preponderance of evidence concerning 

appellant’s specific work at the employing establishment, all of which was performed within a 

length of time which more than met any “DRG” criteria for a repetitive use injury. 

In a December 4, 2013 decision, OWCP set aside the July 31, 2013 decision, finding that 

appellant had submitted sufficient medical evidence to establish that he sustained bilateral carpal 

tunnel syndrome due to his accepted work factors based on Dr. Unhofe’s August 12, 2013 report. 

In a December 4, 2013 letter, OWCP advised appellant that his claim had been accepted 

for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. 

On January 21, 2014 appellant filed a claim for compensation for leave without pay from 

September 9, 2012 through January 21, 2014. The employing establishment stated that his 

employment was terminated on March 30, 2013. 

In a February 21, 2013 report, Dr. Christopher C. Hunter, a Board-certified family 

practitioner, stated that appellant was seen by him for nonsurgical issues. He indicated that any 

statement regarding direct and causal work relationships related to appellant’s orthopedic 

diagnoses and procedures would need to be addressed by his treating surgeon. 

In a January 21, 2014 test form report, Dr. David K. Wong, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, advised that an electromyogram and nerve conduction study (EMG/NCS) revealed wrist 

carpal tunnel syndrome. In narrative reports dated January 21 and February 24, 2014, he 

provided a history of the accepted employment injury, and appellant’s medical treatment, family, 

and social background. Dr. Wong provided findings on physical and x-ray examination. He 

diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and bilateral first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint 
3

osteoarthritis. Dr. Wong advised that the major cause of appellant’s current symptoms and 

problems was his work injury. He further advised that appellant could return to full-duty work 

with no restrictions. 

By letter dated January 31, 2014, OWCP advised appellant that the evidence submitted 

was insufficient to establish his claim for disability. It requested additional medical evidence. 

OWCP also requested that the employing establishment provide the reason for appellant’s 

termination. 

On February 4, 2014 the employing establishment stated that appellant was terminated 

due to job abandonment, as he had failed to respond to its requests to discuss his work options. 

On February 14, 2014 appellant stated that the employing establishment had told him to 

go home. 

In a February 14, 2014 report, Dr. Kathleen M. Sisler, a Board-certified physiatrist, 

provided examination findings and diagnosed very mild right carpal tunnel syndrome and 

moderate left carpal tunnel syndrome. There was no electrodiagnostic evidence of right cervical 

radiculopathy, right or left cubital tunnel syndrome or ulnar nerve entrapment at the wrist, or 

generalized peripheral neuropathy involving the upper extremities. Dr. Sisler compared her test 

results with another physician’s prior test results and found apparent improvement on the right, 

but not on the left. The right median nerve findings were very mild while they were previously 

moderate. The left median nerve findings remained moderate. 

Reports dated February 25 and 27, and March 6, 2014 from appellant’s occupational 

therapists addressed the treatment of his wrists and fingers. 

In a March 28, 2014 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for compensation from 

September 9, 2012 through January 21, 2014, finding that the medical evidence failed to 

establish total disability during the claimed period due to his accepted bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome. 

By letter dated April 4, 2014, appellant, through counsel, requested a telephone hearing 

with an OWCP hearing representative. 

In reports dated March 11 to June 18, 2014, appellant’s occupational therapists addressed 

the treatment of his wrists. 

Hospital records, including Dr. Wong’s March 28, 2014 report, indicated that appellant 

underwent right carpal tunnel release on that date. In reports dated April 7, May 15, and June 19, 

2014, Dr. Wong provided a history of the accepted employment injury, examination findings, 

and an impression of status post right carpal tunnel release and left carpal tunnel syndrome. He 

released appellant to return to light-duty work with restrictions. In a June 24, 2014 prescription, 

Dr. Wong diagnosed right carpal tunnel syndrome and ordered a gel shell brace for appellant to 

wear four to eight weeks. 
4

On May 19, 2014 appellant requested that a subpoena be issued for a witness who had 

evidence that the employing establishment sent him home because no work was available. In an 

August 5, 2014 decision, OWCP denied his request to subpoena a witness. 

In a November 3, 2014 decision, an OWCP hearing representative affirmed the 

March 28, 2014 decision. She found that the medical evidence was insufficient to establish that 

appellant was disabled from September 9, 2012 to January 21, 2014 due to his accepted 

employment injury. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

With respect to a claimed period of disability, an employee has the burden of establishing 

that any disability or specific condition for which compensation is claimed is causally related to 

the employment injury.2

 The term disability is defined as the incapacity because of an 

employment injury to earn the wages the employee was receiving at the time of the injury, i.e., a 

physical impairment resulting in loss of wage-earning capacity.3

Whether a particular injury causes an employee to be disabled for employment and the 

duration of that disability are medical issues which must be proved by a preponderance of the 

reliable, probative, and substantial medical evidence.4 The medical evidence required to 

establish a period of employment-related disability is rationalized medical evidence.5

 

Rationalized medical evidence is medical evidence based on a complete factual and medical 

background of the claimant, of reasonable medical certainty, with an opinion supported by 

medical rationale.6 The Board, however, will not require OWCP to pay compensation for 

disability in the absence of medical evidence directly addressing the specific dates of disability 

for which compensation is claimed.7 To do so, would essentially allow an employee to selfcertify their disability and entitlement to compensation.8

ANALYSIS 

OWCP accepted that appellant sustained bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome while working 

as a mail handler. Appellant claimed compensation for disability from September 9, 2012 to 

January 21, 2014. OWCP denied his claimed compensation for disability as the evidence was 

insufficient to establish that the claimed disability was due to his accepted bilateral carpal tunnel 

 2 Kathryn Haggerty, 45 ECAB 383 (1994); Elaine Pendleton, 40 ECAB 1143 (1989). 

3

 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(f); see, e.g., Cheryl L. Decavitch, 50 ECAB 397 (1999) (where appellant had an injury but no 

loss of wage-earning capacity). 

4 See Fereidoon Kharabi, 52 ECAB 291 (2001). 

5 Jacqueline M. Nixon-Steward, 52 ECAB 140 (2000). 

6 Leslie C. Moore, 52 ECAB 132 (2000). 

7 Sandra D. Pruitt, 57 ECAB 126 (2005). 

8 See William A. Archer, 55 ECAB 674 (2004); Fereidoon Kharabi, supra note 4. 
5

syndrome. The Board finds that appellant did not submit sufficient medical evidence to establish 

employment-related disability for the period claimed due to his accepted injury. 

Dr. Inhofe reported on August 12, 2013 that appellant had bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome caused by his repetitive work duties. Dr. Wong’s reports dated January 21 to June 24, 

2014 also found that appellant had bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and bilateral first CMC joint 

osteoarthritis caused by his work duties. Prior to the right carpal tunnel release he performed on 

March 28, 2014, he advised that appellant could to return to full-duty work. Subsequent to this 

surgery, Dr. Wong found that appellant was status post right carpal tunnel release and still had 

left carpal tunnel syndrome. He prescribed a brace for his right wrist and released him to return 

to light-duty work with restrictions. Neither Dr. Inhofe nor Dr. Wong offered an opinion stating 

that appellant was totally disabled from September 9, 2012 to January 21, 2014 due to the 

accepted work injury.9

 The Board notes that the condition of bilateral first CMC joint 

osteoarthritis has not been accepted by OWCP as work related and Dr. Wong did not sufficiently 

explain how this condition was caused or aggravated by the established employment factors.10 

Appellant has the burden of proof to establish a causal relationship for any condition not 

accepted as employment related.11 The Board finds that the reports of Dr. Inhofe and Dr. Wong 

do not establish appellant’s disability claim for the period September 9, 2012 to January 21, 2014 

and, thus, appellant has not met his burden of proof with these submissions. 

The reports of Dr. Sisler and Dr. Hunter are also insufficient to establish a claim of 

disability. Neither physician provided an opinion on the causal relationship between the 

accepted employment injury and appellant’s disability during the claimed period.12

The reports from appellant’s occupational therapists have no probative medical value. 

An occupational therapist is not a physician as defined under FECA.13

On appeal counsel contended that OWCP’s decision was contrary to law and fact. For 

reasons stated above, the Board finds that the weight of the medical evidence does not establish 

that appellant’s total disability from September 9, 2012 through January 21, 2014 was causally 

related to his accepted employment injury of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. 

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. 

 9 See K.W., 59 ECAB 271 (2007); A.D., 58 ECAB 149 (2006); Jaja K. Asaramo, 55 ECAB 200 (2004); 

Michael E. Smith, 50 ECAB 313 (1999). 

10 G.A., Docket No. 09-2153 (issued June 10, 2010); Jaja K. Asaramo, 55 ECAB 200 (2004); Alice J. Tysinger, 

51 ECAB 638 (2000). 

11 See Jaja K. Asaramo, supra note 10. 

12 See cases cited, supra note 10. 

13 The term physician includes surgeons, podiatrists, dentists, clinical psychologists, optometrists, chiropractors, 

and osteopathic practitioners within the scope of their practice as defined by State law. 5 U.S.C. § 8102(2); R.S., 

Docket No. 11-1085 (issued January 3, 2012). 
6

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has failed to meet his burden of proof to establish that he 

was totally disabled from September 9, 2012 to January 21, 2014 due to his accepted 

employment injury. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 3, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: July 16, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board