United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

A.S., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Nampa, ID, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 16-0944 

Issued: November 2, 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 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On April 4, 2016 appellant filed a timely appeal from a December 7, 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.2

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant has met her burden of proof to establish left carpal tunnel 

syndrome in the performance of duty. 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 

 2

 Appellant submitted new evidence accompanying her appeal request. However, the Board may not consider 

evidence for the first time on appeal that was not before OWCP at the time it issued the final decision. 20 C.F.R. 

§ 501.2(c). 
2

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On October 19, 2015 appellant, then a 52-year-old rural carrier, filed an occupational 

disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she sustained left carpal tunnel syndrome in the 

performance of duty on or before February 5, 2015. She described pain and numbness in her left 

hand when she closed it in the morning, drove, or performed repetitive motion. Appellant did 

not stop work at the time she filed her claim. 

The employing establishment controverted the claim, contending that appellant submitted 

insufficient medical and factual evidence to meet her burden of proof. 

By October 22, 2015 letter, OWCP advised appellant of the evidence needed to establish 

her claim, including her response to an attached questionnaire regarding the onset and duration 

of her symptoms, any history of injuries or conditions affecting the left upper extremity, a 

detailed description of the work duties she believed caused or contributed to her condition, and a 

description of her nonoccupational activities. It afforded appellant 30 days to submit such 

evidence. 

In response, appellant provided an October 9, 2015 report from Dr. Elaine M. Davidson, 

an attending Board-certified family practitioner, relating appellant’s account of a 12- to 18-

month history of pain and paresthesias in the left hand, including when holding mail at work. 

Dr. Davidson diagnosed left carpal tunnel syndrome. 

October 30, 2015 electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) 

studies of the left upper extremity showed a significantly elevated distal motor latency and distal 

sensory latency. 

Dr. Jeffrey S. Boyer, an attending orthopedic surgeon, noted on November 16, 2015 that 

appellant attributed pain and paresthesias in the left hand to repetitive heavy lifting at the 

employing establishment. On examination he found a positive Tinel’s sign at the left wrist. He 

diagnosed moderate left carpal tunnel syndrome.3

By decision dated December 7, 2015, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that she 

failed to establish fact of injury. It found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to 

establish that she performed the duties as described in her claim form. OWCP noted that 

appellant failed to submit a factual statement as requested on October 22, 2015. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA has the burden of to establish 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, that an injury was sustained while in the performance of duty as alleged, and that any 

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

 

 3 Appellant also submitted a medical records release. 
3

employment injury.4

 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim 

regardless of whether the claim is predicated on a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.5

The determination of whether an employee actually sustained an injury in the 

performance of duty begins with an analysis of whether fact of injury has been established.6 To 

establish fact of injury in an occupational disease claim, an employee must submit: (1) a factual 

statement identifying employment factors alleged to have caused or contributed to the presence 

or occurrence of the disease or condition; (2) medical evidence establishing the presence or 

existence of the disease or condition for which compensation is claimed; and (3) medical 

evidence establishing that the diagnosed condition is causally related to the employment factors 

identified by the employee.7

An employee’s statement that an injury occurred at a given time and in a given manner is 

of great probative value and will stand unless refuted by strong or persuasive evidence.8

 

Moreover, an injury does not have to be confirmed by eyewitnesses. The employee’s statement, 

however, must be consistent with the surrounding facts and circumstances and her subsequent 

course of action. An employee has not met his or her burden in establishing the occurrence of an 

injury when there are such inconsistencies in the evidence as to cast serious doubt upon the 

validity of the claim. Circumstances such as late notification of injury, lack of confirmation of 

injury, continuing to work without apparent difficulty following the alleged injury, and failure to 

obtain medical treatment may, if otherwise unexplained, cast doubt on an employee’s statement 

in determining whether a prima facie case has been established.9

ANALYSIS 

Appellant claimed that she sustained left carpal tunnel syndrome due to performing 

repetitive motions at work. OWCP explained to appellant, in an October 22, 2015, letter of the 

necessity of providing additional information about the work factors claimed to have caused or 

contributed to the claimed condition. It asked her to describe the type and duration of her work 

duties, her nonoccupational activities, her history of left upper extremity symptoms, and any 

prior injuries or conditions affecting the left arm. Appellant submitted medical reports from 

Dr. Davidson and Dr. Boyer; however, he did not respond to the factual questionnaire within the 

30 days afforded and OWCP denied the claim finding that appellant had not established any 

claimed work events occurred. 

As appellant did not respond, the Board finds that appellant’s statements contained in her 

CA-2 are alone insufficient to establish fact of injury. Appellant variously attributed her 

condition to repetitive motion, holding mail, and heavy lifting. Additionally, she did not provide 

 4 Joe D. Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989). 

5 See Irene St. John, 50 ECAB 521 (1999); Michael E. Smith, 50 ECAB 313 (1999). 

6 See S.P., 59 ECAB 184, 188 (2007). 

7 See R.R., Docket No. 08-2010 (issued April 3, 2009); Roy L. Humphrey, 57 ECAB 238, 241 (2005). 

8 R.T., Docket No. 08-408 (issued December 16, 2008); Gregory J. Reser, 57 ECAB 277 (2005). 

9 L.D., Docket No. 16-0199 (issued March 8, 2016); Betty J. Smith, 54 ECAB 174 (2002). 
4

the factual statement requested by OWCP, or evidence corroborating her work duties. Therefore, 

OWCP’s December 7, 2015 decision finding that appellant failed to establish the incident 

component of fact of injury was appropriate. 

On appeal appellant explains that a medical situation in her family prevented her from 

completing and returning OWCP’s October 22, 2015 questionnaire within 30 days. As noted 

above, it is appellant’s burden of proof to provide sufficient evidence to establish that she 

experience the identified work factors as alleged. 

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 has not met her burden of proof to establish left carpal 

tunnel syndrome in the performance of duty. 

ORDER 

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

Compensation Programs dated December 7, 2015 is affirmed. 

Issued: November 2, 2016 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board