United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

M.S., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, PROCESSING & 

DISTRIBUTION CENTER, Southeastern, PA, 

Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0490 

Issued: September 18, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Thomas R. Uliase, Esq., for the appellant 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On January 5, 2015 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from an August 5, 

20141

 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to 

the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the 

Board has jurisdiction to consider the merits of the case. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits effective December 19, 2013. 

On appeal counsel argues that the report of the impartial medical examiner (IME) was not 

sufficient to meet OWCP’s burden of proof as it was based on a deficient statement of accepted 

 1

 Contrary to counsel’s arguments on appeal, there is no OWCP decision in the record after August 5, 2014 

reviewing additional medical evidence. 

2

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

facts. He alleges that the statement of accepted facts did not include all the electrodiagnostic 

testing. Counsel also argues that the IME treated appellant’s claim as a traumatic injury rather 

than an occupational disease. Finally he contends that the IME’s report was inconsistent and 

speculative. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On December 11, 1996 appellant, then a 38-year-old mail processor, filed a claim 

alleging that on August 5, 1994 she developed injuries to her wrists due to her federal 

employment. OWCP accepted this claim for right hand strain, right carpal tunnel syndrome and 

right carpal tunnel release. A nerve conduction velocity (NCV) test dated August 16, 1994 

demonstrated moderate carpal tunnel syndrome on the left. OWCP consequently expanded the 

acceptance of appellant’s claim to include left carpal tunnel syndrome as an employment-related 

condition. 

On September 13, 2001 appellant received a schedule award for 33 percent permanent 

impairment of each upper extremity. 

On January 31, 2007 appellant filed a claim alleging that on December 20, 2005 she 

sustained a recurrence of disability due to her August 5, 2004 employment injury. She noted that 

she returned to work in a light-duty position making labels and performing nixie work. 

Appellant stated that she experienced tingling and numbness in her right elbow performing her 

light-duty work. 

By decision dated March 21, 2007, OWCP accepted that appellant sustained a recurrence 

of disability on December 30, 2006. 

In a report dated March 8, 2007, appellant’s attending physician, Dr. Scott Fried, an 

osteopath, diagnosed cumulative trauma disorder bilaterally secondary to work activities, median 

neuropathy at the wrists and forearms, bilaterally, or carpal tunnel syndrome, radial tunnel 

syndrome on the left and radiculopathy on the basis of plexopathy. He listed appellant’s lightduty as entailing pitching mail with the same motion as throwing a Frisbee, reaching, sorting 

labels into boxes and labeling with a computer. Dr. Fried recommended further modifications of 

her duties. He stated that appellant had substantial multilevel nerve involvement consistent with 

repetitive strains at more than one level in her arms. Dr. Fried agreed with the diagnosis of 

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and also diagnosed additional levels of nerve involvement at the 

brachial plexus and elbows. 

By decision dated April 25, 2007, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for compensation for 

the period January 6 to 19, 2007 and February 17 to March 2, 2007. 

In a report dated February 16, 2009, Dr. Fried noted appellant’s symptoms of left arm 

pain. He diagnosed left radial neuropathy. 

OWCP proposed to terminate appellant’s medical benefits for physical therapy and 

chiropractic treatment on March 31, 2009. By decision dated May 29, 2009, it terminated 

appellant’s medical benefits for physical therapy and chiropractic care effective June 1, 2009. 
3

Counsel requested an oral hearing before OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review on 

June 2, 2009. 

In a note dated July 22, 2009, Dr. Fried stated that appellant had increased right arm 

symptoms with severe pain down through the right radial forearm and increased numbness and 

tingling in the right hand. Appellant underwent an electromyography (EMG) evaluation on 

August 7, 2009 which demonstrated nerve compromises at the right brachial plexus, left upper 

and lower brachial plexus, left ulnar nerve at the elbow, right radial nerve at the radial tunnel, 

and bilateral median nerve compromises at the wrists worse on the right. On September 10, 

2009 appellant reported right radial forearm pain with numbness and tingling in her right fingers. 

Dr. Fried stated that all nerves were connected and her injuries were progressively worsening. 

He concluded, “This is directly related to her work and we want to be able to treat all of the areas 

of work injuries including her brachial plexus which remains significantly symptomatic.” 

Dr. Fried examined appellant on October 26, 2009 and found pain at the right volar wrist 

spreading up through the radial forearm. Her symptoms had improved on January 4, 2009. 

By decision dated November 17, 2009, an OWCP hearing representative affirmed the 

May 29, 2009 decision terminating physical therapy and chiropractic care for appellant’s 

accepted bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. 

Dr. Fried examined appellant on March 23, 2010 and found a mass in her right forearm 

over the radial tunnel which he believed was getting larger. Dr. Fried stated that appellant’s 

radial sensory nerve symptoms were worsening and opined that surgery might be warranted. He 

requested a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan on March 23, 2010 due to a soft tissue mass 

at the radial tunnel in the right elbow and forearm. The MRI scan on May 13, 2010 found no 

mass, but mild tendinosis of the common extensor origin. In a report dated May 11, 2010, 

Dr. Fried included appellant’s description of right radial forearm pain as well as an enlarging 

mass there. He diagnosed neuropathy including radial neuropathy on the right and ulnar 

neuropathy on the left as well as appellant’s accepted carpal tunnel syndrome. Dr. Fried 

recommended decompression surgery of the radial nerve on July 29, 2010. 

OWCP denied this request on August 13, 2010. 

Appellant requested a review of the written record from OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and 

Review on September 7, 2010. She argued that she developed severe radial tunnel symptoms in 

her right forearm due to her employment duties as a nixie clerk. Appellant stated that she 

worked with a chair that was too low for the high desktop surface. She attributed the mass in her 

forearm to this work activity. 

Dr. Fried examined appellant on September 2, 2010 and argued that appellant’s work 

activities had worsened with ongoing work activities. He again requested right radial nerve 

surgery. Throughout September, October, November, and December 2010, and April 9, 2011 

appellant was sent home from her modified duty under the National Reassessment Process. 

In a decision dated February 1, 2011, a second OWCP hearing representative vacated 

OWCP’s August 13, 2010 decision denying authorization for surgery, finding that Dr. Fried had 

established uncontroverted evidence that appellant’s radial nerve condition was employment 
4

related. She remanded the case for a second opinion evaluation on the issue of whether 

appellant’s diagnosed radial nerve condition was causally related to her employment duties. 

OWCP referred appellant to Dr. Noubar A. Didizian, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, for a second opinion evaluation on February 23, 2011. Dr. Didizian reported on 

March 8, 2011 that appellant had signs of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, that she could 

continue to perform modified duty, that she had no evidence of employment-related median or 

radial nerve condition, that she had reached maximum medical improvement and required no 

further medical treatment, and that surgery was not indicated. 

OWCP denied appellant’s request for surgery by decision dated April 21, 2011. 

Counsel requested an oral hearing from OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review in a 

letter dated May 6, 2011. 

By decision dated September 30, 2011, OWCP hearing representative vacated the 

April 21, 2011 OWCP decision denying appellant’s request for surgery and remanded for referral 

to an impartial medical examiner to resolve the conflict of medical opinion evidence between the 

second opinion physician, Dr. Didizian, and Dr. Fried on the issues of whether appellant 

demonstrated right radial neuropathy due to her employment and whether she required surgical 

treatment for this condition. 

On February 7, 2012 OWCP referred appellant for an impartial medical examination with 

Dr. Jack Abboudi, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, to resolve the conflict of medical 

opinion evidence. In a report dated March 9, 2012, Dr. Abboudi described appellant’s 

employment and medical history. He examined appellant and found that any type of provocative 

maneuver in the wrist and distal forearm was positive for discomfort for appellant with no 

specific localization of discomfort even to a specific quadrant of the wrist. Dr. Abboudi found 

that Tinel’s sign at almost any location produce a described sense of tingling in the distal 

extremity including locations that had no anatomic basis for that type of finding. He diagnosed 

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, but noted no wasting atrophy of the muscle innervated by the 

median nerve through the carpal tunnel and no significant loss of sensory function. Dr. Abboudi 

opined that this condition had resolved based on EMG findings and nerve conduction studies. 

He stated that multiple diagnostic tests demonstrated mild borderline and virtually normal 

findings with no concerning compression of the nerve in the carpal tunnel. Dr. Abboudi noted 

that appellant described tingling in her fingertips with almost any maneuver and point of 

examination such that it was difficult to validate her input and subjective descriptions. He 

further stated that on examination she had no motor or sensory loss to support a continuing 

diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. 

Dr. Abboudi found that appellant had no radial nerve condition in either extremity based 

on electrodiagnostic testing related to her accepted employment duties. He further found that 

appellant’s light-duty positions since 2004 were not the direct cause, aggravation, precipitation 

or acceleration of any radial condition, neuropathy, or radial tunnel condition. Dr. Abboudi 

opined that appellant could return to her date-of-injury position with no restrictions. He stated 

that appellant’s complaints were subjective and that her subjective responses were difficult to 

validate. Dr. Abboudi stated, “The global nature of her complaints, as has been described with 
5

her multiple points of tenderness and subjective complaints during her history and physical 

examination, defy any type of localization to any particular anatomic landmarks or structures. In 

addition, her complaints of tingling in the extremity are such that even nonanatomic testing for 

tingling in the extremity also produced those symptoms, again invalidating her subjective input.” 

He also noted that appellant’s grip strength improved by one third when she was distracted 

which raised a great concern regarding her true cooperative effort with the examination. 

By decision dated April 4, 2012, OWCP denied appellant’s request for radial tunnel 

surgery based on Dr. Abboudi’s report. 

Appellant requested an oral hearing and by decision dated June 13, 2012, a third OWCP 

hearing representative vacated the April 4, 2012 decision, finding that it was not clear from the 

record that Dr. Abboudi was properly selected as the IME. 

OWCP, by letter dated June 5, 2012, proposed to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits. It stated that Dr. Abboudi was a second opinion physician 

on the issue of whether appellant’s accepted employment-related residuals and disability had 

resolved and that his report was sufficient to establish that she had no medical residuals or 

disability related to her accepted conditions of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and right arm 

strain. 

Counsel disagreed with the proposed termination by letter dated June 14, 2012. 

On June 18, 2012 OWCP opined that Dr. Abboudi was properly selected as the IME 

through the Physician Directory System (PDS) and reissued the denial of surgery effective that 

date. 

Counsel requested an oral hearing of the June 18, 2012 decision from OWCP’s Branch of 

Hearings and Review on June 19, 2012. He submitted a June 14, 2012 report by Dr. Fried who 

continued to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome and radial neuropathy on the right due to 

appellant’s employment duties. Dr. Fried opined that she could perform modified duties. 

By decision dated July 13, 2012, OWCP terminated appellant’s wage-loss compensation 

and medical benefits effective July 29, 2012 based on Dr. Abboudi’s report. 

Counsel requested an oral hearing of the July 13, 2012 termination decision from 

OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review on July 19, 2012. In support, Dr. Fried reported on 

August 30, 2012 that appellant returned to regular duty on July 27, 2012 and was experiencing 

increased pain in both arms. He reported findings of positive Tinel’s sign in both wrists, at the 

ulnar nerve at the bilateral cubital tunnels, and at the radial nerve in the right elbow. Dr. Fried 

found indications of inflammation and scarring about the nerves of the brachial plexus at the 

thoracic outlet level. He diagnosed carpal tunnel medial neuropathy, bilaterally, and radial 

neuropathy on the right. Dr. Fried opined that appellant’s conditions were secondary to work 

activities. 

On August 1, 2012 appellant underwent an EMG study which demonstrated right 

brachial plexus level nerve compromise, left brachial plexus postganglionic sensory components 

which had improved, borderline right median nerve compromise at the wrist, borderline left 
6

median nerve sensory abnormality, moderate left ulnar nerve compromise, and moderate right 

posterior interosseous nerve compromise at the elbow. 

On November 9, 2012 Dr. Fried described appellant’s current employment duties and 

reviewed her medical history. He diagnosed right radial neuropathy, left ulnar neuropathy, 

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, and brachial plexus involvement. Dr. Fried stated that 

appellant’s EMG supported her diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome. He opined that appellant 

could perform light-duty work. Dr. Fried reviewed Dr. Abboudi’s report and opined that as 

appellant returned to repetitive activities she had increased symptoms. He stated that he would 

not expect atrophy, but that there was ongoing nerve dysfunction as evidenced by ongoing 

numbness, tingling and discomfort when attempting work activities. 

By decision dated January 11, 2013, a fourth OWCP hearing representative vacated the 

June 18 and July 13, 2012 decisions of OWCP. He found that Dr. Abboudi was not established 

as appropriately selected to serve as the IME and that OWCP should select a new physician to 

serve in this capacity to determine if appellant required radial nerve surgery. The hearing 

representative also found that benefits must be reinstated effective July 13, 2012. Accordingly, 

OWCP entered appellant on the periodic rolls effective January 18, 2013. 

OWCP referred appellant for an impartial medical examination with Dr. John Donahue, a 

Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, on February 26, 2013. It provided him with the case record, 

a statement of accepted facts which described appellant’s date-of-injury position, her accepted 

conditions, and her medical treatment through 2009. The statement of accepted facts provided 

the dates of appellant’s varying employment duties from 2011. OWCP also provided 

Dr. Donahue with a list of specific questions. 

In a report dated March 11, 2013, Dr. Donahue noted appellant’s history of injury and 

history of medical treatment include EMG study reports dated July 7, 2011 and August 1, 2012. 

He reported appellant’s mass below the elbow and stated that this was the region in which she 

had discomfort. Dr. Donahue found normal strength in the wrist extensors and flexors as well as 

in appellant’s fingers. He found negative Tinel’s sign in the cubital tunnels, but variable Tinel’s 

sign and Phalen’s test on examination. Dr. Donahue noted that these results were totally 

inconsistent. He found no evidence of weakness. Dr. Donahue noted tenderness over the lateral 

epicondylar area. He reported no clear evidence of radial carpal tunnel syndrome, but stated that 

the large space-occupying lesion of the proximal extensor compartment of the forearm which 

could contribute to her symptoms, but was not employment related. Dr. Donahue reviewed 

appellant’s electrodiagnostic testing and found no employment-related right radial nerve 

condition. He stated that appellant’s subjective complaints were variable, inconsistent, and not 

reproducible. Dr. Donahue concluded, “If there are any subjective complaints consistent with 

radial or carpal tunnel syndrome, it could be due to the previously described large space 

occupying mass of the right forearm which is not causally related to the workers’ comp[ensation] 

injury of August 4, 1994.” Dr. Donahue opined that appellant’s accepted condition of bilateral 

carpal tunnel syndrome and right arm strain did not require further work restrictions or treatment. 

By decision dated April 1, 2013, OWCP denied appellant’s request for surgery. 
7

Counsel requested a review of the written record from OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and 

Review on April 4, 2013. A fifth OWCP hearing representative issued a decision on October 28, 

2013 and found the record did not establish the need for right radial nerve surgery as a result of 

her accepted employment activities. 

Dr. Fried examined appellant on July 22, 2013 and diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome, right radial neuropathy, and left ulnar neuropathy. On July 22, 2013 appellant 

underwent neuromusculoskeletal ultrasounds which demonstrated nerve compression consistent 

with carpal tunnel median nerve compression, perineural scarring about the median nerve 

bilaterally. Appellant also demonstrated right radial nerve compression. 

Dr. Fried completed a report dated November 11, 2013 which found that Phalen’s test 

was positive bilaterally for dysesthesias in the median nerve distribution as well as positive 

Tinel’s sign at the median nerve of both wrists. He also found positive Roos and Hunter tests 

demonstrating inflammation and scarring about the nerves of the brachial plexus at the thoracic 

outlet level. Dr. Fried diagnosed carpal tunnel median neuropathy or repetitive strain injury in 

the upper extremities, bilaterally. He stated this condition was secondary to work activities. 

Dr. Fried attributed appellant’s thoracic outlet and brachial plexus involvement, her right 

thoracic neuritis, right trigger finger and cervical strain and sprain to her March 8, 2009 motor 

vehicle accident. 

On November 15, 2013 OWCP issued a Notice of Proposed Termination of both 

appellant’s medical benefits and compensation for wage loss. It based its determination on 

Dr. Donahue’s March 11, 2013 report. 

In a decision dated December 19, 2013, OWCP terminated appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits effective December 19, 2013. 

Counsel requested an oral hearing on December 23, 2013 and submitted additional 

medical evidence from Dr. Fried. 

Dr. Fried completed a report on January 30, 2014 and reviewed appellant’s history of 

injury. He reported appellant’s symptoms of neck pain, brachial plexus discomfort and with 

radiation to the shoulder and down to the arms. Dr. Fried stated that appellant’s symptoms were 

worse on the right than the left. He found Tinel’s signs at the neck, elbows, and forearms. 

Dr. Fried reported positive compression tests in the anterior forearm and positive Phalen’s test. 

He found moderate trapezial spasm. Dr. Fried diagnosed cumulative trauma disorder secondary 

to work activities, carpal tunnel syndrome, right radial tunnel syndrome and moderate cubital 

tunnel syndrome bilaterally as well as radiculopathy. He opined that appellant developed 

substantial multilevel nerve involvement consistent with repetitive strains as more than one level 

in her arms. Appellant underwent orthopedic neuromusculoskeletal ultrasound on July 22, 2013 

which demonstrated carpal tunnel median nerve compression, perineural scaring of the median 

nerve, and flexor tenosynovitis bilaterally. Her ultrasound also demonstrated radial tunnel nerve 

compression on the right. Dr. Fried disagreed with Dr. Donahue’s findings regarding appellant’s 

carpal tunnel syndrome noting that he did not specify where he found appellant’s variable Tinel’s 

signs and Phalen’s test. 
8

In the August 5, 2014 decision, an OWCP hearing representative found that OWCP met 

its burden of proof to terminate wage-loss compensation and medical benefits effective 

December 19, 2013 based on Dr. Donahue’s reports and affirmed OWCP’s December 19, 2013 

decision. She further found that the case was not in posture for a decision and remanded the 

claim for additional development of the medical evidence in regard to appellant’s claim for 

continuing benefits after December 19, 2013. OWCP hearing representative stated that OWCP 

should arrange for the impartial medical examiner to review the neuromusculoskeletal ultrasound 

procedure performed on July 22, 2013.3

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Once OWCP accepts a claim, it has the burden of proving that the disability has ceased or 

lessened in order to justify termination or modification of compensation benefits.4

 After it has 

determined that an employee has disability causally related to his or her federal employment, 

OWCP may not terminate compensation without establishing that the disability has ceased or 

that it is no longer related to the employment.5

 Furthermore, the right to medical benefits for an 

accepted condition is not limited to the period of entitlement for disability.6

 To terminate 

authorization for medical treatment, OWCP must establish that appellant no longer has residuals 

of an employment-related condition which require further medical treatment.7 

 When there are opposing reports of virtually equal weight and rationale, the case will be 

referred to an impartial medical specialist pursuant to section 8123(a) of FECA which provides 

that, if there is disagreement between the physician making the examination for the United States 

and the physician of the employee, the Secretary shall appoint a third physician who shall make 

an examination and resolve the conflict of medical evidence.8 This is called a referee 

examination and OWCP will select a physician who is qualified in the appropriate specialty and 

who has no prior connection with the case.9

In situations where there are opposing medical reports of virtually equal weight and 

rationale, and the case is referred to an impartial medical specialist for the purpose of resolving 

 3

 As OWCP hearing representative did not issue a final decision on appellant’s entitlement to continuing benefits 

after December 19, 2013, instead remanding the case for further development of the medical evidence by OWCP, 

the issue of whether appellant has established continuing employment-related residuals or disability causally related 

to her employment injuries is in an interlocutory posture. As such, the Board will not address this issue on appeal. 

See 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(2). 

4 Mohamed Yunis, 42 ECAB 325, 334 (1991). 

5 Id.

6 Furman G. Peake, 41 ECAB 361, 364 (1990). 

7 Id.

8

 5 U.S.C. §§ 8101-8193, 8123; M.S., 58 ECAB 328 (2007); B.C., 58 ECAB 111 (2006). 

9 R.C., 58 ECAB 238 (2006). 
9

the conflict, the opinion of such specialist, if sufficiently well rationalized and based on a proper 

factual background, must be given special weight.10

ANALYSIS 

The Board finds that OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits effective December 19, 2013. 

Appellant’s attending physician, Dr. Fried, supported that appellant had continuing 

partial disability and medical residuals due to her accepted conditions of bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome. Dr. Abboudi, acting as a second opinion physician on behalf of OWCP, examined 

appellant on March 9, 2012, describing appellant’s employment and medical history. He found 

that Tinel’s sign at almost any location produce a described sense of tingling in the distal 

extremity including locations that had no anatomic basis for that type of finding. Dr. Abboudi 

diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome by history, but noted no wasting atrophy of the 

muscle innervated by the median nerve through the carpal tunnel and no significant loss of 

sensory function. He opined that the accepted condition had resolved based on EMG findings 

and nerve conduction studies. Dr. Abboudi opined that appellant could return to her date-ofinjury position with no restrictions. The Board finds that OWCP properly identified a conflict of 

medical opinion evidence between appellant’s attending physician, Dr. Fried, and the second 

opinion physician, Dr. Abboudi, on the issues of appellant’s continuing disability and need for 

medical treatment due to her accepted condition of carpal tunnel syndrome. This conflict 

required referral to an impartial medical examiner pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8123(a). 

OWCP referred appellant, a statement of accepted facts and list of questions and the 

medical record to Dr. Donahue to resolve this conflict of medical opinion evidence. In a report 

dated March 11, 2013, Dr. Donahue reviewed appellant’s history of injury and history of medical 

treatment including EMG reports dated July 7, 2011 and August 1, 2012. He reported his 

findings on physical examination including normal strength, negative Tinel’s sign in the cubital 

tunnels, and otherwise variable Tinel’s signs and Phalen’s tests on examination. Dr. Donahue 

noted that these results were totally inconsistent. He found no evidence of thenar eminence 

weakness. Dr. Donahue stated that appellant’s subjective complaints were variable, inconsistent, 

and not reproducible. He concluded, “If there are any subjective complaints consistent with ... 

carpal tunnel syndrome, it could be due to the previously described large space occupying mass 

of the right forearm which is not causally related to the workers’ comp[ensation] injury of 

August 4, 1994.” Dr. Donahue found that appellant could return to full duty with no restrictions 

and no need for further medical treatment. 

The Board finds that this report is sufficiently detailed and well-reasoned to constitute the 

special weight of the medical opinion evidence and meet OWCP’s burden of proof to terminate 

appellant’s wage-loss compensation and medical benefits due to her accepted employment injury 

of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Dr. Donahue provided a review of the relevant medical 

records including diagnostic testing, contrary to counsel’s argument on appeal. He also provided 

results of his physical examination and found that appellant’s testing results were inconsistent 

 10 Nathan L. Harrell, 41 ECAB 401, 407 (1990). 
10

and variable. Dr. Donahue provided a clear opinion that appellant had no need for further 

medical treatment and had no work restrictions due to her accepted employment injury. The 

Board finds that the record does not support counsel’s arguments that Dr. Donahue improperly 

evaluated appellant’s claim or that his report was inconsistent and speculative. 

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 OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits effective December 19, 2013. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 5, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: September 18, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board