United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

C.M., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Edison New, Jersey, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 13-2178 

Issued: March 6, 2014 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, 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 September 30, 2013 appellant, through her attorney, filed a timely appeal from an 

April 30, 2013 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) that 

terminated her compensation and medical benefits. Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ 

Compensation Act1

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction to 

consider the merits of the case. 

ISSUES 

The issues are: (1) whether OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s 

compensation benefits effective October 19, 2012; and (2) whether appellant met her burden of 

proof to establish any continuing disability or medical residuals on or after October 19, 2012. 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On September 10, 2011 appellant, then a 24-year-old mail carrier, filed a traumatic injury 

claim alleging that she developed low back pain that day while lifting a bucket of mail in the 

performance of duty. OWCP accepted her claim for a lumbar strain on October 28, 2011. 

A magnetic resonance imaging scan obtained on November 8, 2011 demonstrated 

bulging discs at L4-5 and L5-S1. 

In a report dated December 5, 2011, appellant’s attending physician, Dr. Steven G. 

Dorsky, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, stated that appellant was currently totally disabled 

and required medication, physical therapy and epidural steroid injections. 

Dr. Brett Gerstman, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, examined appellant on 

December 27, 2011. He reported a full range of motion of the lumbar spine, normal motor 

strength and decreased sensation to light touch along the left L5 dermatome. Dr. Gerstman 

recommended physical therapy and epidural steroid injections. 

On January 2, 2012 Dr. Gerstman diagnosed lumbar radiculopathy. He recommended 

physical therapy and epidural steroid injections. Dr. Gerstman provided an injection on 

January 18, 2012. He completed a work restriction on January 23, 2012 and recommended that 

appellant return to sedentary work with lifting up to 10 pounds and primarily sitting with a small 

amount of standing and walking. In a note dated January 30, 2012, Dr. Gerstman recommended 

more advanced diagnostic testing to better evaluate whether she had underlying nerve damage. 

He stated that appellant could perform light-duty work, if available. On January 31, 2012 

Dr. Gerstman advised that she could return to light duty lifting up to 20 pounds. On February 7, 

2012 he found that electromyogram and nerve conduction velocity testing demonstrated 

evidence of an acute left-sided S1 radiculopathy. Dr. Gerstman recommended further steroid 

injections and medications. On February 17, 2012 he indicated that appellant could return to 

light work lifting up to 20 pounds as of February 20, 2012. Dr. Gerstman performed L5-S1 and 

L1-S1 transforaminal epidural steroid injections on February 29, 2012. 

OWCP authorized compensation benefits from November 3, 2011 through 

February 21, 2012. 

On March 1, 2012 Dr. Gerstman advised that appellant could return to light-duty work 

lifting up to 20 pounds for four hours a day, five days a week beginning March 1, 2012. 

The employing establishment noted that appellant returned to part-time limited duty on 

February 22, 2012. 

On March 2, 2012 Dr. Gerstman stated that appellant was cleared for part-time light duty. 

He completed a report on March 8, 2012 and stated that she was experiencing an acute 

exacerbation of her pain after being required to lift more than 20 pounds. 

Dr. Dorsky completed a work restriction evaluation on March 16, 2012. He opined that 

appellant could return to full duty and that she had reached maximum medical improvement as 

of that date. 
3

Appellant stopped work on March 16, 2012. In a narrative report dated March 19, 2012, 

Dr. Dorsky stated that she could return to work on a full and unrestricted basis, but that she had 

not yet reached maximum medical improvement. 

On March 30, 2012 Dr. Gerstman noted that while appellant had returned to full-time 

work her current work load aggravated her back pain. He recommended additional medication. 

In a report dated April 10, 2012, Dr. Gerstman noted that appellant reported difficulties with her 

full-time work and recommended a functional capacity evaluation. He also increased her pain 

medication. Dr. Gerstman indicated that appellant could work full time without restrictions. 

On April 17, 2012 Dr. Gerstman found that appellant could perform full-time work and 

that she had reached maximum medical improvement. In a report dated April 19, 2012, he noted 

that she had been misleading him regarding her work capacity. Dr. Gerstman believed that 

appellant was working since March 16, 2012, but that she confirmed that this was not the case. 

He stated that she continued to have symptoms secondary to left-sided S1 radiculopathy. 

Appellant had maximized conservative measures and there was no further treatment 

Dr. Gerstman could offer her as she was not a surgical candidate. Dr. Gerstman stated that she 

had reached maximum medical improvement and was cleared to return to work on a full-time 

basis without restrictions since March 16, 2012. 

OWCP proposed to terminate appellant’s medical benefits and wage-loss compensation 

on June 20, 2012. It found that Dr. Gerstman established that appellant’s work-related medical 

condition and disability had ceased. Appellant did not submit any additional medical evidence. 

By decision dated October 19, 2012, OWCP terminated appellant’s medical and wageloss benefits effective October 19, 2012. 

Counsel requested an oral hearing before an OWCP hearing representative on 

October 29, 2012. Appellant testified at the oral hearing held on February 6, 2013 that she was 

unable to return to work due to her back injury. 

In a decision dated April 30, 2013, OWCP’s hearing representative found that OWCP 

met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s compensation benefits as of October 19, 2012. 

Appellant did not submitted sufficient evidence to establish continuing residuals or disability 

after that day. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 1 

Once OWCP accepts a claim, it has the burden of proving that the disability has ceased or 

lessened in order to justify termination or modification of compensation benefits.2

 After it has 

determined that an employee has disability causally related to his or her federal employment, 

OWCP may not terminate compensation without establishing that the disability has ceased or 

that it is no longer related to the employment.3

 Furthermore, the right to medical benefits for an 

 2 Mohamed Yunis, 42 ECAB 325, 334 (1991). 

3 Id.
4

accepted condition is not limited to the period of entitlement for disability.4

 To terminate 

authorization for medical treatment, OWCP must establish that appellant no longer has residuals 

of an employment-related condition which require further medical treatment.5

 

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1 

OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for a lumbar sprain. Appellant sought medical 

treatment from Drs. Dorsky and Gerstman. The physicians supported her need for medical 

treatment and disability for work until April 17, 2012. Dr. Gerstman indicated on that date that 

appellant could perform full-time work and that there was no further treatment that he could 

provide her as she was not a surgical candidate. He found that she had reached maximum 

medical improvement and was cleared to return to work on a full-time basis without restrictions 

as of March 16, 2012. 

There is no medical evidence of record to support appellant’s continued medical residuals 

or disability after April 17, 2012. Appellant’s physicians found that she could return to work at 

full time without restrictions and did not require further medical treatment. The Board finds that 

based on the medical evidence OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s 

compensation and medical benefits effective October 19, 2012. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT -- ISSUE 2 

As OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s compensation benefits, the 

burden shifted to her to establish that she had disability causally related to her accepted 

employment injury.6 To establish a causal relationship between the condition, as well as any 

disability claimed and the employment injury, the employee must submit rationalized medical 

opinion evidence, based on a complete factual background, supporting such a causal relationship. 

Rationalized medical opinion evidence is medical evidence which includes a physician’s detailed 

opinion on the issue of whether there is a causal relationship between the claimant’s diagnosed 

condition and the implicated employment factors. The opinion of the physician must be based 

on a complete factual and medical background of the claimant, 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 claimant. The weight of 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 

 4 Furman G. Peake, 41 ECAB 361, 364 (1990). 

5 Id.

6 George Servetas, 43 ECAB 424, 430 (1992). 

7 James Mack, 43 ECAB 321 (1991). 
5

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 2 

Appellant did not submit any medical opinion evidence after OWCP’s October 19, 2012 

termination decision which supported her need for further medical treatment or her disability for 

work on or after October 19, 2012. As she failed to submit the necessary medical opinion 

evidence, she failed to meet her burden of proof. 

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 the record does not establish that appellant has any continuing 

disability or medical residuals on or after October 19, 2012 causally related to her accepted 

employment injury. Thus, OWCP properly terminated wage-loss and medical benefits and 

appellant has failed to establish continuing employment-related disability or residuals. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the decision of the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs dated April 30, 2013 is affirmed. 

Issued: March 6, 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