United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

C.M., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, U.S. NAVAL 

ACADEMY, Annapolis, MD, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 17-0310 

Issued: February 15, 2017 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

On November 23, 2016 appellant filed a timely appeal from an August 22, 2016 nonmerit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) denying her request for 

reconsideration as untimely filed and insufficient to demonstrate clear evidence of error. The 

Board docketed the appeal as No. 17-0310. 

The Board has duly considered this matter and finds that the case is not in posture for 

decision. On January 7, 2003 appellant, then a 36-year-old painter, filed a traumatic injury claim 

(Form CA-1) alleging that on November 26, 2002 she sustained pinched nerves in both shoulders 

and her neck due to repairing a ceiling for painting. OWCP accepted the claim for cervical strain 

and aggravation of cervical degenerative intervertebral disc. 

On August 25, 2011 appellant filed a claim for a schedule award. By decision dated 

April 11, 2012, OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for one percent permanent 

impairment of the right lower extremity and one percent permanent impairment of the left lower 

extremity, which ran for 5.76 weeks. By decision dated August 9, 2012, an OWCP hearing 

representative set aside the schedule award and remanded the case to OWCP to correctly identify 

the parts of the body sustaining permanent impairment. By decision dated August 15, 2012, 

OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for one percent permanent impairment of the right 

upper extremity and one percent permanent impairment of the left upper extremity. 
2

On May 25, 2016 OWCP received appellant’s request for reconsideration of the 

August 15, 2012 impairment rating. Appellant contended that her condition had worsened over 

the years. In support of her request, she submitted an October 27, 2011 report by Dr. William 

Tham, a treating Board-certified physiatrist. Using Table 17-2 of the American Medical 

Association, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (6th ed.), Dr. Tham determined 

that appellant had 24 percent permanent impairment of the cervical spine. 

In schedule award cases, a distinction is made between an application for an additional 

schedule award and a request for reconsideration of the existing schedule award. When a 

claimant is asserting that the original award was erroneous based on her medical condition at that 

time, this is a request for reconsideration. A claim for an additional schedule award may be 

based on new exposure to employment factors or on the progression of an employment-related 

condition, without new exposure, resulting in greater permanent impairment.1

The Board finds that appellant alleged that her accepted cervical condition worsened and 

submitted new medical evidence regarding her current condition. The Board has repeatedly held 

that a claimant may request a schedule award or increased schedule award at any time based on 

evidence of a new exposure or medical evidence showing the possible progression of an 

employment-related condition resulting in permanent impairment or increased impairment.2

 The 

Board finds, therefore, that OWCP erroneously issued a denial of appellant’s request for 

reconsideration under the clear evidence of error standard. On remand, OWCP should review 

the medical evidence and issue an appropriate decision regarding her request for an increased 

schedule award. 

 1 See B.K., 59 ECAB 228 (2007); Candace A. Karkoff, 56 ECAB 622 (2005). 

2 See Linda T. Brown, 51 ECAB 115 (1999); Paul R. Reedy, 45 ECAB 488 (1994); see also B.K., id. (where it 

was evident that the claimant was seeking a schedule award based on new and current medical evidence, OWCP 

should have issued a merit decision on the schedule award claim rather than adjudicate an application for 

reconsideration). 
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 22, 2016 of the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded for further development consistent 

with this order of the Board. 

Issued: February 15, 2017 

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