United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.B., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

New Orleans, LA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-391 

Issued: June 18, 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 H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On December 9, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal of a September 10, 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 established that he sustained impairment resulting from his 

accepted employment injuries. 

On appeal appellant contends that, as he sustained permanent injuries as the result of his 

employment injury, he is entitled to a schedule award. 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On October 22, 2010 appellant, then a 61-year-old tractor trailer operator, filed a 

traumatic injury claim alleging that on that day he sustained neck and lower back injuries as a 

result of being rear-ended while driving a tractor trailer in the performance of duty. OWCP 

accepted the claim for lumbar and neck sprains. 

On December 3, 2013 appellant filed a claim for a schedule award. 

In a letter dated December 19, 2013, OWCP informed appellant of the medical evidence 

required to establish a schedule award claim. It also advised that any permanent impairment 

rating must use the sixth edition of the American Medical Association, Guides to the Evaluation 

of Permanent Impairment (hereinafter A.M.A., Guides). Appellant was given 30 days to provide 

the requested information. 

In support of his claim appellant submitted surgical reports by Dr. David J. Wyatt, a 

treating physician Board-certified in orthopedic surgery. Diagnoses included L4-5 instability 

with spondylosis, status post motor vehicle accident and bilateral L4-5 and L5-S1 facet 

arthropathy with facet generated mechanical back pain. On March 18 and May 13, 2011 

Dr. Wyatt performed bilateral L4-5 and L5-S1 facet block. In a July 8, 2011 report, he 

performed a bilateral L3-5 radiofrequency rhizotomy procedure on appellant. 

By decision dated September 10, 2014, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for a schedule 

award as he failed to submit any medical report with an impairment rating or examination 

findings warranting review by an OWCP medical adviser. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

The schedule award provision of FECA2 and its implementing regulations3 set forth the 

number of weeks of compensation payable to employees sustaining permanent impairment from 

loss or loss of use, of scheduled members or functions of the body. However, FECA does not 

specify the manner in which the percentage of loss shall be determined. For consistent results 

and to ensure equal justice under the law to all claimants, good administrative practice 

necessitates the use of a single set of tables so that there may be uniform standards applicable to 

all claimants. The A.M.A., Guides has been adopted by the implementing regulations as the 

appropriate standard for evaluating schedule losses.4

 Effective May 1, 2009, OWCP adopted the 

sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides as the appropriate edition for all awards issued after that 

date.5

 

 2 Id. at § 8107. 

3

 20 C.F.R. § 10.404. 

4 Id. 

5

 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 3 -- Claims, Schedule Awards, Chapter 3.700, Exhibit 1 

(January 2010). 
3

The sixth edition requires identifying the impairment for the Class of Diagnosis (CDX) 

condition which is then adjusted by grade modifiers based on Functional History (GMFH), 

Physical Examination (GMPE) and Clinical Studies (GMCS).6 The net adjustment formula is 

(GMFH - CDX) + (GMPE - CDX) + (GMCS - CDX). 

The sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides does not provide a separate mechanism for rating 

spinal nerve injuries as extremity impairment. For peripheral nerve impairments to the upper or 

lower extremities resulting from spinal injuries, OWCP’s procedures indicate that The Guides 

Newsletter, rating spinal nerve extremity impairment using the sixth edition (July/August 2009) 

is to be applied.7

 

ANALYSIS 

OWCP denied appellant’s claim for a schedule award as the record did not include an 

impairment rating. Prior to denying his claim, it advised appellant of the need to submit an 

impairment rating under the A.M.A., Guides (6th ed. 2009). In support of his claim appellant 

submitted reports dated March 18, May 13, and July 8, 2011 from Dr. Wyatt. Dr. Wyatt’s 

surgical reports do not address impairment. In addition, these records do not include a 

sufficiently detailed description of impairment that would allow one to visualize the character 

and degree of appellant’s disability or whether appellant had reached maximum medical 

improvement. 

Without a medical evaluation of permanent impairment under the sixth edition of the 

A.M.A. Guides, appellant has failed to establish a prima facie claim for a schedule award. The 

Board will therefore affirm OWCP’s September 10, 2014 decision. 

On appeal appellant argues that he sustained permanent injuries as a result of the 

accepted employment injury and will need the money from a schedule award for future medical 

treatment. As noted above he has not submitted any medical evidence containing an impairment 

rating as requested by OWCP. Accompanying his appeal appellant resubmitted copies of 

Dr. Wyatt’s reports. As discussed above these reports are insufficient to establish his claim for a 

schedule award as they contain no impairment rating using the sixth edition of the A.M.A., 

Guides. 

Appellant 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. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish that he is 

entitled to a schedule award as a result of his accepted employment injuries. 

 6

 A.M.A., Guides 494-531. 

7 See L.S., Docket No. 13-1703 (issued March 5, 2014); G.N., Docket No. 10-850 (issued November 12, 2010); 

see also Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, supra note 5 at Chapter 3.700, Exhibit 1, n.5 (January 2010). The 

Guides Newsletter is included as Exhibit 4.3. 
4

ORDER 

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

Compensation Programs dated September 10, 2014 is affirmed. 

Issued: June 18, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board