United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

K.J., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOREST 

SERVICE, Albuquerque, NM, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-1000 

Issued: September 21, 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 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On March 30, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from a January 21, 2015 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 the case. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant met his burden of proof to establish that he sustained a 

traumatic injury on June 5, 2014 while in the performance of duty. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On December 8, 2014 appellant, then a 21-year-old forestry aide, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1), alleging that on June 5, 2014, he slipped and sprained his right ankle while 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

hiking to participate in a fire training exercise. The record indicates that he stopped work on 

June 5, 2014 and returned on June 9, 2014. 

In support of his claim, appellant submitted two June 5, 2014 medical billing forms from 

Kootenai Medical Center, indicating that he received emergency medical treatment on 

June 5, 2014. Portions of one form are illegible. 

In a December 16, 2014 letter, OWCP informed appellant that the medical evidence of 

record was insufficient to support his claim. It requested additional evidence, including a 

medical report containing a diagnosis and a physician’s opinion supported by a medical 

explanation as to how the reported work incident caused his condition. OWCP also requested 

the employing establishment to submit treatment notes if appellant was treated in the employing 

establishment medical facility. No additional evidence was received. 

In a January 21, 2015 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s claim finding that he did not 

submit medical evidence establishing a medical diagnosis in connection with the work incident. 

It noted that the only medical information received were medical billing forms. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

An employee seeking compensation under FECA has the burden of establishing the 

essential elements of his or her claim by the weight of reliable, probative, and substantial 

evidence,2 including that he is an “employee” within the meaning of FECA and that he filed his 

claim within the applicable time limitation.3 The employee must also establish that he sustained 

an injury in the performance of duty as alleged and that his disability for work, if any, was 

causally related to the employment injury.4 

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

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

There are two components involved in establishing fact of injury. First, the employee must 

submit sufficient evidence to establish that he actually experienced the employment incident at 

the time, place, and in the manner alleged. Second, the employee must submit evidence, in the 

form of medical evidence, to establish that the employment incident caused a personal injury.5

 

Causal relationship is a medical issue and the evidence generally required to establish 

causal relationship is rationalized medical opinion evidence. Rationalized medical opinion 

evidence is generally required to establish causal relationship. The opinion of the physician must 

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

 2 J.P., 59 ECAB 178 (2007); Joseph M. Whelan, 20 ECAB 55, 57 (1968). 

3 R.C., 59 ECAB 427 (2008). 

4 Id.; Elaine Pendleton, 40 ECAB 1143, 1145 (1989). 

5 T.H., 59 ECAB 388 (2008). 
3

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.6

ANALYSIS 

The record supports that he slipped on June 5, 2014 while hiking to participate in a fire 

training exercise. The Board finds, however, that appellant did not submit medical evidence to 

establish that a diagnosed medical condition is causally related to this incident. 

The only evidence received by OWCP was two medical billing forms indicating that 

appellant underwent an emergency medical examination on June 5, 2014. Portions of one form 

are illegible. A physician did not sign the forms and there is no physician’s report accompanying 

these forms. On December 16, 2014 OWCP advised appellant of his responsibility to provide a 

comprehensive medical report from a physician addressing how the employment incident caused 

his condition. Appellant did not submit any medical evidence in response to OWCP’s request. 

As noted, part of his burden of proof includes submitting rationalized medical opinion evidence. 

As there is no rationalized medical report containing a history of injury, diagnosis of appellant’s 

condition and rationale addressing how his claimed injury was caused by his employment, the 

Board finds that he did not establish that he sustained a traumatic injury in the performance of 

duty on June 5, 2014. 

On appeal, appellant asserts that he submitted medical evidence from a physician which 

showed that he was injured on the job. As explained, the evidence of record at the time of 

OWCP’s January 21, 2015 decision does not contain any medical evidence from a physician 

which addresses causal relationship.7

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 appellant has not met his burden of proof in establishing that he 

sustained an injury in the performance of duty on June 5, 2014. 

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

7

 Appellant submitted additional medical evidence on appeal. The record indicates that OWCP also received 

additional evidence subsequent to its January 21, 2014 decision. However, the Board cannot consider such evidence 

for the first time on appeal. 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). 
4

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 21, 2015 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: September 21, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board