United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

Y.C., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, COLLEGE PARK 

POST OFFICE, Atlanta, GA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0327 

Issued: July 27, 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 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On December 1, 2014 appellant filed a timely appeal from a November 18, 2014 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 OWCP properly terminated appellant’s wage-loss and medical 

compensation benefits effective November 18, 2014 as the accepted injuries had ceased without 

residuals. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

This is the third appeal before the Board in this case. Pursuant to the first appeal, by 

order dated May 30, 2003, the Board remanded the case to OWCP for additional development 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

regarding an overpayment of compensation.2 By decision dated May 25, 2004,3 the Board 

affirmed OWCP’s September 15, 2013 decision regarding an overpayment of compensation for 

the period November 14 through December 1, 2001. The law and facts of the case as forth in the 

Board’s prior decision and order are incorporated by reference. 

OWCP accepted that on October 1, 1990 appellant, then a 36-year-old letter carrier, 

sustained bilateral knee sprains with internal derangement. It later expanded the claim to accept 

bilateral derangement of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus and secondary bilateral knee 

osteoarthritis. 

Appellant underwent a left knee arthroscopy on December 18, 1990 and a right knee 

arthroscopy on July 8, 1991 to repair bilateral meniscal tears and a torn right anterior cruciate 

ligament. He returned to light-duty work on July 25, 1991. Appellant remained under treatment. 

He underwent a repeat left knee arthroscopy on June 6, 1995 to address degenerative issues. 

Appellant subsequently returned to light-duty work. He remained under medical treatment for 

post-traumatic degenerative arthritis of both knees. 

Dr. Thomas R. Cadier, an attending Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, followed 

appellant beginning in September 2007. He diagnosed post-traumatic degenerative arthritis of 

both knees and prescribed work restrictions through April 2010. 

OWCP accepted a recurrence of disability commencing August 16, 2010 as the 

employing establishment withdrew appellant’s light-duty position under the National 

Reassessment Process. It authorized total disability compensation beginning on 

August 16, 2010.4

 Appellant did not return to work.5

Dr. Cadier submitted periodic reports through 2013 noting active post-traumatic 

osteoarthritis of both knees, with bilateral patellofemoral crepitus and mild quadriceps atrophy. 

He noted that work limitations on climbing and heavy lifting remained necessary due to bilateral 

knee arthritis. Although, in a report dated September 22, 2014, Dr. Cadier found that x-rays 

demonstrated only “minimal” arthritis in appellant’s knees. He opined that the accepted 

conditions remained active and partially disabling, requiring ongoing care and work restrictions. 

On April 1, 2014 OWCP obtained a second opinion from Dr. Alexander N. Doman, a 

Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, who reviewed the medical record and a statement of 

accepted facts. On examination of both knees, Dr. Doman found a full range of motion, no 

 2

 Docket No. 03-620 (issued May 30, 2003). 

3

 Docket No. 04-528 (issued May 25, 2004). 

4

 On June 28, 2011 OWCP obtained a second opinion from Dr. Harold H. Alexander, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, who obtained x-rays showing patellofemoral degenerative changes and minimal spurring. Dr. Alexander 

diagnosed bilateral knee osteoarthritis, causally related to the accepted injuries. He opined that appellant was able to 

perform full-time light duty. On August 8, 2011 OWCP obtained a functional capacity evaluation showing that 

appellant could perform full-time light-duty work. 

5

 From May 2012 through July 2013, appellant participated in a vocational rehabilitation program and completed 

English as a second language course. He did not obtain employment. 
3

instability, no swelling, normal anterior cruciate ligament testing, and “vague subjective 

tenderness over the patellar facet of both knees.” He diagnosed resolved bilateral knee sprains 

and internal derangement. Dr. Doman explained that x-rays demonstrated no osteoarthritis in the 

right knee, with only minor, clinically insignificant osteoarthritis in the left knee. He opined that 

appellant required no further medical treatment and could return to full, unrestricted duty as a 

letter carrier. 

By notice dated September 4, 2014, OWCP advised appellant that it proposed to 

terminate his wage-loss and medical compensation benefits as the accepted bilateral knee 

conditions had ceased without residuals, based on Dr. Doman’s opinion as the weight of the 

medical evidence. It afforded him 30 days to submit additional evidence and argument. 

Appellant submitted a September 22, 2014 report from Dr. Cadier, who noted that 

appellant continued to have crepitus in both knees, with degenerative patellofemoral arthritis 

visible on x-rays. Dr. Cadier prescribed anti-inflammatory medication and renewed prior work 

restrictions. 

By decision dated November 18, 2014, OWCP terminated appellant’s wage-loss and 

medical compensation benefits effective that day as the accepted knee sprain had ceased without 

residuals. It accorded Dr. Doman the weight of the medical evidence. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Once OWCP has accepted a claim and pays compensation, it bears the burden of proof to 

justify modification or termination of benefits.6 Having determined that an employee has a 

disability causally related to his or her federal employment, it may not terminate compensation 

without establishing either that the disability has ceased or that it is no longer related to the 

employment.7

ANALYSIS 

OWCP accepted that appellant sustained bilateral knee sprains with internal 

derangement, bilateral derangement of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus, and secondary 

bilateral knee osteoarthritis. Appellant underwent a right knee arthroscopy and two left knee 

arthroscopies to address the meniscal tears and degenerative joint disease. OWCP terminated 

appellant’s wage-loss and medical compensation benefits effective November 18, 2014, based on 

the opinion of Dr. Doman, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon and second opinion physician, 

who found the accepted conditions had ceased without residuals. 

Appellant submitted numerous reports from Dr. Cadier, an attending Board-certified 

orthopedic surgeon, who followed appellant from 2007 through 2013. Dr. Cadier noted bilateral 

patellofemoral crepitus and mild quadriceps atrophy. He opined that appellant required work 

restrictions against climbing and heavy lifting due to post-traumatic degenerative arthritis of both 

 6 Bernadine P. Taylor, 54 ECAB 342 (2003). 

7 Id.
4

knees. However, Dr. Cadier did not explain how and why the accepted conditions partially 

disabled appellant on and after November 18, 2014, or require continuing medical treatment. 

Also, he did not explain why the diagnosed osteoarthritis, which he noted as “minimal,” 

warranted work limitations. 

In contrast, Dr. Doman explained that appellant no longer required work restrictions as 

the accepted conditions had resolved. Following a thorough clinical examination, he explained 

that the only abnormality he observed in either knee was vague subjective tenderness over the 

patellar facet. Dr. Doman obtained x-rays demonstrating subclinical osteoarthritis of the left 

knee, with no osteoarthritis in the right knee. In a four-page report, he also based his opinion on 

a detailed review of the medical record and a statement of accepted facts. Dr. Doman found 

nothing in appellant’s history, test results, or clinical presentation that precluded him from 

returning to full duty as a letter carrier. 

The Board finds that OWCP properly accorded Dr. Doman’s opinion the weight of the 

medical evidence. Dr. Doman was clear in his findings and opinions and provided a detailed 

explanation as to why the accepted conditions were no longer present or active. His opinion was 

also based on a complete and accurate factual and medical history. OWCP’s November 18, 2014 

decision terminating appellant’s wage-loss and medical benefits was therefore proper under the 

law and facts of this case. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that OWCP properly terminated appellant’s compensation benefits 

effective November 18, 2014. 
5

ORDER 

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

Compensation Programs dated November 18, 2014 is affirmed. 

Issued: July 27, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board