United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

C.H., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SEVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Hampton, VA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 14-1900 

Issued: February 2, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA HOWARD FITZGERALD, Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On August 26, 2014 appellant filed a timely appeal from an April 8, 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 her burden of proof to establish that she sustained 

carpal tunnel syndrome of the right hand on January 21, 2014. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On February 19, 2014 appellant, then a 45-year-old clerk, filed a traumatic injury claim 

alleging that she injured her hands on January 21, 2014 after pulling and pushing heavy 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

equipment, and lifting, and tossing heavy packages. She stopped work on February 5, 2014. 

Appellant resigned from the employing establishment on April 25, 2014. 

With her claim, appellant submitted a supplemental statement dated February 14, 2014 

and a February 19, 2014 statement from the employing establishment. In her supplemental 

statement, she explained that she went to the doctor on January 31, 2014 for pain in her right 

hand and arm with numbness in her fingers at night. The physician told appellant that she had 

carpal tunnel syndrome in the right hand due to overuse activity at work. The physician faxed 

paperwork to the employing establishment recommending that appellant not push, pull, or throw 

any packages over 10 pounds. Appellant was then told by her supervisor to work the cage, but 

on February 5, 2014 she was told not to come in because there were too many individuals 

working the cage. She was placed on sick leave on February 6, 2014 and told to inform the 

employing establishment when she could return to full duty. 

In the February 19, 2014 statement, the employing establishment’s customer services 

manager noted that appellant was placed on sick leave after medical documentation was received 

stating that she could not push, pull, or throw items greater than 10 pounds. She also noted that 

on February 19, 2014 she gave appellant a Form CA-1 to fill out, and then realized it should have 

been a Form CA-2 for occupational disease. When the manager tried to give appellant the Form 

CA-2 appellant stated that she was told to complete a Form CA-1, and that appellant then refused 

to accept the Form CA-2. 

In a report of a January 31, 2014 visit to Riverside Mercury West, an assessment of right 

carpal tunnel syndrome, possibly secondary to overuse activity at work was provided. The report 

is devoid of information as to who provided the assessment. 

In a February 3, 2014 note, Dr. Sohini Majumdar, a Board-certified family practitioner, 

recommended that appellant not push, pull, or throw items or packages greater than 10 pounds 

due to her current symptoms. 

On February 24, 2014 OWCP advised appellant of the deficiencies in her claim and 

requested that she submit additional factual and medical information. Appellant was afforded 30 

days to submit the requested information. 

In response, OWCP received a March 7, 2014 personal statement, and medical 

documents from Riverside Mercury West. In a March 20, 2014 note, Dr. Majumdar advised that 

appellant was seen on January 31, 2014 for right hand symptoms that had been going on for two 

months. Onset of the symptoms by history appears to have been November 2013. Diagnosis 

was right hand carpal tunnel syndrome secondary to over-use, including lifting, and transferring 

heavy materials repeatedly. The January 31, 2014 office visit from Dr. Majumdar was included, 

which contained a history of right hand pain of two-month duration and notes that she works at 

the employing establishment for six months doing heavy lifting, transferring heavy materials, 

and boxes. No prior right hand symptoms were noted. An assessment of right carpal tunnel 

syndrome, possible secondary to overuse activity at work was provided. 

By decision dated April 8, 2014, OWCP denied the claim on the grounds causal 

relationship was not established. 
3

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim, including the fact that the individual is an employee of the 

United States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was filed within the applicable time 

limitation, that an injury was sustained while in the performance of duty as alleged and that any 

disability and/or specific condition for which compensation is claimed are causally related to the 

employment injury.2 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim 

regardless of whether the claim is predicated on a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.3

 

To determine whether a federal employee has sustained a traumatic injury in the 

performance of duty, it must first be determined whether a fact of injury has been established. A 

fact of injury determination is based on two elements. First, the employee must submit sufficient 

evidence to establish that she actually experienced the employment incident at the time, place, 

and in the manner alleged. Second, the employee must submit sufficient evidence, generally 

only in the form of medical evidence, to establish that the employment incident caused a 

personal injury. An employee may establish that the employment incident occurred as alleged 

but fail to show that his or her condition relates to the employment incident.4

 

Whether an employee sustained an injury in the performance of duty requires the 

submission of rationalized medical opinion evidence.5 The opinion of the physician must be 

based on a complete factual and medical background of the employee, must be one of reasonable 

medical certainty, and must be supported by medical rationale explaining the nature of the 

relationship between the diagnosed condition and the specific employment factors identified by 

the employee.6 The weight of the medical evidence is determined by its reliability, its probative 

value, its convincing quality, the care of analysis manifested, and the medical rationale expressed 

in support of the physician’s opinion.7

 Neither the mere fact that a disease or condition 

manifests itself during a period of employment nor the belief that the disease or condition was 

caused or aggravated by employment factors or incidents is sufficient to establish causal 

relationship.8 

ANALYSIS 

OWCP accepted that appellant performed work duties on January 21, 2014 which 

included pulling and pushing heavy equipment, and tossing heavy packages. However it denied 

 2 C.S., Docket No. 08-1585 (issued March 3, 2009); Bonnie A. Contreras, 57 ECAB 364 (2006). 

3 S.P., 59 ECAB 184 (2007); Joe D. Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989). 

4 See Shirley A. Temple, 48 ECAB 404, 407 (1997); John J. Carlone 41 ECAB 354, 356-57 (1989). 

5 See J.Z., 58 ECAB 529, 531 (2007); Paul E. Thams, 56 ECAB 503, 511 (2005). 

6 I.J., 59 ECAB 408, 415 (2008); Victor J. Woodhams, 41 ECAB 345, 352 (1989). 

7 James Mack, 43 ECAB 321, 329 (1991). 

8 Dennis M. Mascarenas, 49 ECAB 215 (1997). 
4

her claim on the grounds that the medical evidence failed to establish a causal relationship 

between her reported activities and the diagnosed right carpal tunnel syndrome. 

Dr. Majumdar evaluated appellant on January 31, 2014. She noted that appellant 

presented with a history of right hand pain of two-month duration and that she worked at the 

employing establishment for six months doing heavy lifting, transferring heavy materials, and 

boxes. No prior right hand symptoms were noted. An assessment of right carpal tunnel 

syndrome, possible secondary to overuse activity at work, was provided. The Board has held, 

however, that an opinion that a condition is causally related because the employee was 

asymptomatic before the injury is insufficient, without sufficient rationale, to establish causal 

relationship.9

 In this case, Dr. Majumdar has provided no medical rationale or explanation 

sufficient to establish that the work conditions caused or contributed to appellant’s diagnosed 

right-sided carpal tunnel condition. Furthermore, her opinion that it was possible that appellant’s 

right carpal tunnel syndrome was possibly secondary to overuse activity at work is speculative or 

equivocal in character and is of diminished probative value.10 

The Board also notes that appellant claimed that she was injured on January 21, 2014, but 

Dr. Majumdar noted a history of right hand pain of two months duration without explaining how 

her present symptoms are causally related to work activity that had been ongoing for two 

months. In her February 3 and March 20, 2014 notes, Dr. Majumdar fails to provide any medical 

rationale as to how right hand carpal tunnel syndrome can develop secondary to over-use, 

including lifting, and transferring heavy materials repeatedly as performed by appellant in a 

specific incident. The Board has found that a physician must provide a narrative description of 

the identified employment incident and a reasoned opinion on whether the employment incident 

described caused or contributed to appellant’s diagnosed medical condition.11 For these reasons, 

the Board finds that Dr. Majumdar’s reports are insufficient to establish appellant’s claim. 

While Dr. Majumjar’s reports suggest a history more consistent with an injury occurring 

over time, rather than in one shift,12 the employing establishment’s customer service manager 

has indicated that appellant refused to complete a claim for occupational disease.13 

In a report of a January 31, 2014 visit to Riverside Mercury West, an assessment of right 

carpal tunnel syndrome, possibly secondary to overuse activity at work, was provided. The 

report is devoid of information as to who provided the assessment. The Board finds that this 

report is insufficient to establish appellant’s claim as medical reports lacking proper 

identification do not constitute probative medical evidence.14

 9 T.M., Docket No. 08-975 (issued February 6, 2009); Michael S. Mina, 57 ECAB 379 (2006). 

10 D.D., 57 ECAB 734, 738 (2006); Kathy A. Kelley, 55 ECAB 206 (2004). 

11 John W. Montoya, 54 ECAB 306 (2003). 

12 See the definition of occupational disease provided in 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(q): “Occupational disease or Illness 

means a condition produced by the work environment over a period of time longer than a single workday or shift.” 

13 Appellant may submit a Form CA-2 and supporting medical evidence. 

14 See D.D., supra note 10. 
5

The Board finds that the medical evidence of record does not establish that appellant 

sustained a medical condition causally related to her federal employment on January 21, 2014. 

An award of compensation may not be based on surmise, conjecture nor speculation. Neither the 

fact that appellant’s condition became apparent during a period of employment or the belief that 

her condition was caused, precipitated, or aggravated by her employment, is sufficient to 

establish causal relationship.15 Causal relationship must be established by rationalized medical 

opinion evidence. As noted, the medical evidence is insufficient to establish appellant’s claim. 

Consequently, OWCP properly found that she did not meet her burden of proof in establishing 

her claim. 

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. 

 15 Supra note 9.
6

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant did not meet her burden of proof to establish that she 

sustained carpal tunnel syndrome of the right hand on January 21, 2014. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the April 8, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: February 2, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia Howard Fitzgerald, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board