United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.S., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, PA, 

Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-655 

Issued: May 12, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Jason S. Lomax, Esq., for the appellant 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

On January 30, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from a January 6, 2015 nonmerit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) denying his request for 

reconsideration as untimely and insufficient to establish clear evidence of error. The appeal was 

docketed as No. 15-655. 

By decision dated March 9, 2011, OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for a 12 

percent permanent impairment of the right upper extremity pursuant to the American Medical 

Association, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (sixth edition) (A.M.A., 

Guides). In a merit decision dated December 27, 2013, it denied his claim for an additional 

schedule award. 

In a letter dated December 26, 2014, received by OWCP on December 29, 2014, 

appellant requested reconsideration of the December 27, 2013 decision. In a report dated 

February 22, 2013, received by OWCP on December 29, 2014, Dr. Arthur Becan, a Boardcertified orthopedic surgeon, provided examination findings and thereafter calculated that 

appellant had a 26 percent right upper extremity impairment pursuant to the A.M.A., Guides. 

By decision dated January 6, 2015, OWCP denied his request for reconsideration as 

untimely filed and as it did not demonstrate clear evidence of error. 
2

In schedule award cases, a distinction is made between an application for an additional 

schedule award and a request for reconsideration of the existing schedule award. When a 

claimant is asserting that the original award was erroneous based on his or her medical condition 

at that time, this is a request for reconsideration. A claim for an additional schedule award may 

be based on new exposure to employment factors or on the progression of an employmentrelated condition, without new exposure, resulting in greater permanent impairment.1

On December 26, 2014 appellant requested an increased schedule award and submitted 

Dr. Becan’s report indicating that he had a 26 percent right upper extremity impairment. The 

Board has repeatedly held that a claimant may request a schedule award or increased schedule 

award based on evidence of a new exposure or medical evidence showing progression of an 

employment-related condition resulting in permanent impairment or increased impairment.2 The 

Board finds, therefore, that OWCP erroneously issued a denial of appellant’s request for 

reconsideration under the clear evidence of error standard. On remand, OWCP should review 

and develop the factual and medical evidence and issue an appropriate decision regarding his 

request for an increased schedule award. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 6, 2015 decision of the Office of 

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

consistent with this order of the Board. 

Issued: May 12, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 1 See B.K., 59 ECAB 228 (2007); Candace A. Karkoff, 56 ECAB 622 (2005). 

2 See Linda T. Brown, 51 ECAB 115 (1999); Paul R. Reedy, 45 ECAB 488 (1994).