United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.S., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Minneapolis, MN, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-1677 

Issued: December 11, 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 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On August 4, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from a May 21, 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 the case. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant has established eligibility for continuation of pay. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On April 6, 2015 appellant, then a 47-year-old city carrier technician, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on March 4, 2015 he tripped over a shovel and fell 

injuring his right wrist. The CA-1 form was signed by appellant on March 23, 2015. 

Appellant’s supervisor, Michelle Johnson, signed the form on March 4, 2015. The employing 

 

 1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

establishment stamped the CA-1 form as received on March 19, 2015. However, the employing 

establishment noted that the claim was not filed within 30 days and indicated the date that it 

received the notice was April 6, 2015. The employing establishment did not indicate that 

appellant stopped work. 

Appellant was treated by Dr. Desiree Kempcke, a Board-certified orthopedist, on 

March 18, 2015, who diagnosed intra-articular radius fracture with small displacement of a distal 

radial ulnar joint fragment. Dr. Kempcke noted that appellant could return to work, but could 

not lift more than three pounds with his right hand. 

On April 20, 2015 OWCP advised appellant of the type of factual and medical evidence 

needed to establish his claim. Appellant submitted a report from Dr. Kempcke dated March 18, 

2015 who diagnosed intra-articular radius fracture with small displacement of a distal radial 

ulnar joint fragment. He also submitted a report from Dr. Paul Dworak, a Board-certified 

orthopedist, dated March 19, 2015, who placed appellant in a right short arm cast. An April 10, 

2015 report from Dr. Corey Wulf, a Board-certified orthopedist, diagnosed work-related right 

extra articular distal radius fracture. Dr. Wulf transitioned appellant from the right arm cast to a 

splint. Each of these physicians found that appellant could return to work within restrictions. 

By decision dated May 21, 2015, OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for closed fracture of 

the lower end of the right radius. 

In another decision dated May 21, 2015, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for continuation 

of pay because he had failed to submit a written claim within 30 days of his March 4, 2015 

employment injury. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Section 8118(a) of FECA authorizes continuation of pay, not to exceed 45 days, to an 

employee who has filed a claim for a period of wage loss due to a traumatic injury with his or her 

immediate superior on a form approved by the Secretary of Labor within the time specified in 

section 8122(a)(2) of this title.2

 This latter section provides that written notice of injury shall be 

given within 30 days.3

 The context of section 8122 makes clear that this means within 30 days 

of the injury.4 

OWCP regulations provide, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for continuation of pay, 

an employee must: (1) have a traumatic injury which is job related and the cause of the disability 

and/or the cause of lost time is due to the need for medical examination and treatment; (2) file 

Form CA-1 within 30 days of the date of the injury (but if that form is not available, using 

 

2 Id. at § 8118(a). 

3 Id. at § 8122(a)(2). 

4 Robert M. Kimzey, 40 ECAB 762, 763-64 (1989); Myra Lenburg, 36 ECAB 487, 489 (1985). 
3

another form would not alone preclude receipt); and (3) begin losing time from work due to the 

traumatic injury within 45 days of the injury.5 

The employee must provide a written report on a Form CA-1 to the employing 

establishment within 30 days of the injury.6

 OWCP’s procedures state that another OWCPapproved form, such as CA-2, CA-2a, or CA-7, which contain words of claim, can be used to 

satisfy timely filing requirements.7

 

The Board has held that section 8122(d)(3) of FECA,8

 which allows OWCP to excuse 

failure to comply with the time limitation provision for filing a claim for compensation because 

of exceptional circumstances, is not applicable to section 8118(a), which sets forth the filing 

requirements for continuation of pay. Thus, there is no provision in the law for excusing an 

employee’s failure to file a claim within 30 days of the employment injury.9

 

ANALYSIS 

Appellant filed a written notice of a traumatic injury on April 6, 2015 more than 30 days 

after his injury on March 4, 2015. Because he filed the claim on April 6, 2015, the Board finds 

that it was not filed within 30 days of the injury, as specified in sections 8118(a) and 

8122(a)(2) of FECA. 

On appeal appellant indicated that he originally submitted Form CA-1 unsigned and the 

CA-1 form was returned. He noted the supervisor who filled out the accident report was moved 

to a different station and the employing establishment’s injury compensation specialist sent the 

information to the wrong address which caused a delay in the submission of the Form CA-1. 

Appellant indicated that for these reasons he did not submit a signed Form CA-1 within 30 days 

of the injury. There is no provision in FECA for excusing a late filing and therefore appellant is 

not entitled to continuation of pay.10 This is so regardless of any failure on the part of the 

employing establishment.11 The Board finds that appellant was not entitled to continuation of 

pay as he did not file within the requisite 30 days from the date of injury.12 

 5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.205(a)(1-3). See also J.M., Docket No. 09-1563 (issued February 26, 2010). 

6 Id. at § 10.210(a). 

7

 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Continuation of Pay and Initial Payments, Chapter 

2.807.5(b) (June 2012). 

8

 5 U.S.C. § 8122(d)(3). 

9 Dodge Osborne, 44 ECAB 849, 855 (1993). 

10 Id.

11 See 20 C.F.R. § 10.211 (the employer’s responsibilities in continuation of pay cases). 

12 Id. This decision only applies to continuation of pay. It does not preclude appellant from filing a claim for 

wage-loss compensation if he missed time from work due to the accepted injury. 
4

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has not established eligibility for continuation of pay. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the May 21, 2015 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: December 11, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board