United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.B., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

AGENCY, Alexandria, VA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 13-2157 

Issued: March 6, 2014 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

James A. Bruni, pro se

Office of the Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

PATRICIA HOWARD FITZGERALD, Judge 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On September 23, 2013 appellant filed a timely appeal from the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs’ (OWCP) decision dated May 1, 2013. 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 met his burden of proof in establishing that he is entitled to 

compensation for wage loss from November 30, 2012 to January 15, 2013. 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

Appellant, a 52-year-old damage estimator, filed a claim Form CA-1 for traumatic injury 

on November 30, 2012, alleging that he sustained a right foot infection after sand penetrated the 

skin on his right foot. OWCP accepted the claim for right great toe cellulitis. 

On February 28, 2013 appellant submitted a Form CA-7 requesting compensation for 

wage loss for the period November 30, 2012 to January 15, 2013. 

By letter to appellant dated March 15, 2013, OWCP requested additional factual and 

medical evidence to establish disability for work during the entire period claimed, including 

medical documentation to establish that he either had medical treatment or was unable to work as 

a result of his work injury for all dates claimed. It advised him that he had 30 days to submit the 

requested information. 

Appellant submitted a blank Form CA-20 and numerous hospital records from 

November 27 and 30, 2012. The hospital records noted that he was seen in the emergency room 

on that day. Appellant was diagnosed with cellulitis of the foot and received wound care. It was 

noted that he could return to work in one week. The signatures on these records are illegible. 

By decision dated May 1, 2013, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for compensation for 

wage loss for November 30, 2012 to January 15, 2013. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

It is the employee’s burden of proof to establish disability during the period of time for 

which wage-loss compensation is claimed. The term “disability” is defined by implementing 

regulations as “the incapacity, because of an employment injury, to earn the wages the employee 

was receiving at the time of injury. It may be partial or total.”2 The Board has long held that 

whether a particular injury causes an employee disability for employment is a medical question 

which must be resolved by competent medical evidence.3 

ANALYSIS 

OWCP accepted a claim for right foot cellulitis. It asked appellant to submit medical 

evidence to support the periods of disability claimed. Appellant, however, did not provide a 

probative, rationalized medical opinion establishing that he was disabled for work due to the 

accepted right foot cellulitis for the period November 30, 2012 through January 15, 2013.4

 

To establish entitlement to compensation, an employee must establish through competent 

medical evidence that disability from work resulted from the employment injury.5

 The Board 

 2

 20 C.F.R. § 10.5 (f). 

3 See Donald E. Ewals, 51 ECAB 428 (2000). 

4 William C. Thomas, 45 ECAB 591 (1994). 

5 Supra note 3. 
3 

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. To do so 

would essentially allow an employee to self-certify their disability and entitlement to 

compensation.6

 Appellant has the burden to demonstrate his disability for work based on 

rationalized medical opinion evidence. The issue of whether a claimant’s disability is related to 

an accepted condition is a medical question which must be established by a physician who, on 

the basis of a complete and accurate factual and medical history, concludes that the disability is 

causally related to employment factors and supports that conclusion with sound medical 

reasoning.7 There is no such evidence in this case. While appellant submitted hospital records 

dated November 30, 2012 which diagnosed great toe cellulitis and noted that he could return to 

work in one week, there is no medical explanation provided as to why his accepted condition 

would disable him from work for any period of time. 

Appellant has thus failed to submit such evidence which would indicate that his right foot 

cellulitis condition caused any wage loss for any periods. Because he has not provided a 

rationalized opinion supporting his disability for work for the period in question, OWCP 

properly denied his claim for wage-loss compensation. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden to establish that he was entitled to 

compensation for wage loss from November 30, 2012 through January 15, 2013. 

 6 Paul E. Thams, 56 ECAB 503 (2005). 

7 Howard A. Williams, 45 ECAB 853 (1994). 
4 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the May 1, 2013 decision of the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: March 6, 2014 

Washington, DC 

 

 Patricia Howard Fitzgerald, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board