United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

P.W., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, EDUCATION 

ACTIVITIES, Alexandria, VA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-1814 

Issued: January 15, 2016 

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 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On September 1, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from an August 14, 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 her burden of proof to establish an employmentrelated injury on February 2, 2015. 

On appeal appellant generally asserts that the medical evidence submitted is sufficient to 

establish her claim. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On February 4, 2015 appellant, then a 59-year-old procurement analyst, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that she sustained a panic attack, headache, elevated blood 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

pressure and pulse rate, and an asthma attack when she was stuck in an elevator for 

approximately 45 minutes on February 2, 2015. She stopped work that day and returned on 

February 4, 2015. 

In a letter dated February 18, 2015, OWCP informed appellant of the evidence needed to 

support her claim. The requested evidence was to include a physician’s opinion supported by a 

medical explanation as to how the reported work incident caused or aggravated a medical 

condition. In an attached questionnaire, appellant was asked to describe any similar disability or 

symptoms that occurred prior to the injury and to provide records of prior treatment. Appellant 

was afforded 30 days to respond. OWCP also asked the employing establishment to furnish 

information about the claimed incident. Appellant did not respond to the request. 

On March 10, 2015 the employing establishment concurred that the claimed injury 

occurred at appellant’s duty station. 

By decision dated March 19, 2015, OWCP denied the claim, finding that the evidence of 

record did not support that the injury occurred as described and that she had submitted no 

medical evidence containing a medical diagnosis in connection to the claimed event. 

On April 6, 2015 appellant requested reconsideration. In a February 25, 2015 

questionnaire, she described the claimed employment incident, relating that as she was reporting 

to work, she was stuck in an elevator for nearly an hour and this caused panic, disorientation, 

confusion, and caused an asthma attack. Appellant indicated that she had a managed history of 

anxiety and asthma, which was aggravated by the February 2, 2015 incident she alleged to have 

first sought treatment on February 18, 2015. 

In a March 4, 2015 attending physician’s report, Terrez Hawkins, a nurse practitioner, 

described the employment incident. She diagnosed panic disorder and checked a box marked 

“yes,” noting that appellant had been trapped in a malfunctioning elevator on February 2, 2015. 

Ms. Hawkins advised that appellant could return to regular duty on February 4, 2015. 

In a March 16, 2015 attending physician’s report, Dr. Jyothi Racha, a Board-certified 

psychiatrist, noted that appellant had a history of anxiety and depression and had increased 

anxiety and panic attacks when she attempted to use the elevator. She diagnosed specific phobia, 

fear of using elevators, and checked a box marked “yes,” indicating that appellant reported that 

she had bad dreams and thoughts of being trapped in the past which led to crying spells and 

anxiety attacks. Dr. Racha advised that appellant could return to regular duty on 

February 4, 2015. 

In a merit decision dated August 14, 2015, OWCP denied modification of the March 19, 

2015 decision. It found that the February 2, 2015 incident had occurred as alleged, but denied 

the claim because appellant had not submitted sufficient medical evidence. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA has the burden of establishing the essential 

elements of his or her claim including the fact that the individual is an employee of the United 

States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was filed within the applicable time limitation 

of FECA, that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged, and that any 
3

disability and/or specific condition for which compensation is claimed are causally related to the 

employment injury. These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim 

regardless of whether the claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.2

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 she actually experienced the employment incident at 

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

to establish that the employment incident caused a personal injury.3

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 certainty, and must be support by medical 

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

specific employment factors identified by the claimant.4

ANALYSIS 

OWCP accepted that on February 2, 2015 appellant was stuck in a malfunctioning 

elevator at work for 45 minutes to 1 hour. 

The Board finds, however, that appellant has failed to submit sufficient medical evidence 

to establish her traumatic injury claim. To be of probative value, a physician’s opinion must 

relate the condition to the accepted incident, must be based on a complete and accurate factual 

history, and must contain adequate medical rationale in support of the conclusions.5 The factors 

that comprise the evaluation of medical evidence include the physician’s relative area of 

expertise, the opportunity for and thoroughness of physical examination, the accuracy and 

completeness of the physician’s knowledge of the facts and medical history, the care of analysis 

manifested in reaching his or her stated conclusions and the medical rationale expressed in 

support of the physician’s opinion.6

 

The March 4, 2015 report from Ms. Hawkins does not constitute probative medical 

evidence as a nurse practitioner is not considered a physician under FECA.7

 Section 8101(2) of 

FECA provides that “physician” includes surgeons, podiatrists, dentists, clinical psychologists, 

optometrists, chiropractors, and osteopathic practitioners within the scope of their practice as 

defined by State law.8 

 2 Gary J. Watling, 52 ECAB 357 (2001). 

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

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

5 Mary J. Ruddy, 49 ECAB 545 (1998). 

6 Cecelia M. Corley, 56 ECAB 662 (2005). 

7 L.D., 59 ECAB 648 (2008). 

8

 5 U.S.C. § 8101(2). 
4

In the March 16, 2015 attending physician’s report, Dr. Racha noted that appellant had a 

history of anxiety and depression and had increased anxiety and panic attacks when she 

attempted to use the elevator. She diagnosed a specific phobia, fear of using elevators, and 

checked a form box marked “yes,” indicating that appellant reported that she had bad dreams and 

thoughts of being trapped in the past which led to crying spells and anxiety attacks. Dr. Racha 

advised that appellant could return to regular duty on February 4, 2015. She, however, did not 

describe the February 2, 2015 incident and did not relate a diagnosed condition to the accepted 

employment incident. Moreover, appellant indicated that she first sought medical attention on 

February 18, 2015. However, the record does not contain medical evidence dated 

February 18, 2015. 

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 her burden of proof to establish an injury on 

February 2, 2015 in the performance of duty. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 14, 2015 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: January 15, 2016 

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