United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

A.G., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, 

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0921 

Issued: July 7, 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 23, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from a February 25, 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 this case. 

ISSUE 

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

traumatic injury in the performance of duty on December 9, 2014. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On December 10, 2014 appellant, then a 60-year-old electronic integrated systems 

mechanic, filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on December 9, 2014 he 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

injured his left ankle and knee when he slipped on a piece of paper while climbing on an aircraft. 

He stopped work on December 9, 2014. 

In support of his claim, appellant submitted a December 10, 2014 medical note from 

Dr. Michael Guthrie, a Board-certified internist. The medical note indicated that appellant was 

under Dr. Guthrie’s care and could return to work on December 17, 2014. 

In a January 2, 2015 letter, OWCP informed appellant that the medical evidence of record 

was insufficient to support his claim. It advised him to provide a physician’s opinion supported 

by a medical explanation as to how employment activities caused the claimed condition. 

Appellant was afforded 30 days to submit additional evidence. No further medical evidence was 

received. 

In a February 25, 2015 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that the 

medical evidence was insufficient to establish that he sustained an injury causally related to the 

employment incident. 

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 or she is an “employee” within the meaning of FECA and that he or 

she filed his or her 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 evidence which includes a physician’s 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, must be one of reasonable medical certainty, and must be supported by 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

rationale explaining the nature of the relationship between the diagnosed condition and the 

specific employment factors identified by the claimant.6

ANALYSIS 

The evidence supports that appellant slipped on a piece of paper while climbing on an 

aircraft on December 9, 2014. The issue is whether the medical evidence establishes that 

appellant’s claimed condition resulted from the accepted employment incident. The Board finds 

that appellant did not establish a causal relationship between the diagnosed condition and the 

employment incident. 

The only medical evidence received by OWCP was a December 10, 2014 note from 

Dr. Guthrie, to the effect that appellant was under medical care and could not return to work until 

December 17, 2014. Dr. Guthrie did not provide a history of injury, a diagnosis, or any opinion 

regarding the cause of appellant’s injury. The Board has held that medical evidence that does 

not offer any opinion regarding the cause of an employee’s condition is of limited probative 

value on the issue of causal relationship.7

 Accordingly, Dr. Guthrie’s report is insufficient to 

establish fact of injury. OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies in the evidence in a 

January 2, 2015 letter. Appellant did not submit any additional medical evidence. 

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 did not meet his burden of proof to establish that he 

sustained a traumatic injury in the performance of duty on December 9, 2014. 

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

7 J.F., Docket No. 09-1061 (issued November 17, 2009). 
4

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the February 25, 2015 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: July 7, 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