United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

C.L., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Leesville, SC, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 17-1921

Issued: December 11, 2018

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On September 11, 2017 appellant filed a timely appeal from an August 16, 2017 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 appellant’s case.

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met her burden of proof to establish a June 15, 2017 

injury while in the performance of duty, as alleged.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On July 6, 2017 appellant, then a 41-year-old rural carrier, filed a traumatic injury claim 

(Form CA-1) alleging that, on June 15, 2017, a customer threatened to shoot her and damage her 

car while she was in the performance of duty. She explained that, as a result, she suffered 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

emotional stresses, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and anxiousness. Appellant 

stopped work on June 22, 2017. On the reverse side of the claim form, appellant’s supervisor 

checked a box marked “yes” indicating that their knowledge of the facts about the injury agreed 

with the statements of the employee or witnesses.

In a narrative statement dated July 6, 2017, appellant indicated that she was experiencing 

severe panic attacks, which caused her to feel nervous and fearful. She also related that her 

stomach was in knots and that she experienced chest pain. Appellant explained that when a car 

back-fired she “dove for the side of [her] car for protection.” She noted that, in her mind, it 

sounded like “gunfire” and she no longer felt safe in her job. Appellant also indicated that she was 

always looking over her shoulder, and she could not sleep and she could still hear the customer 

who threatened her yelling with his hand in her face. She further noted that when she did eat, she 

regurgitated and felt pain throughout her body.

By development letter dated July 13, 2017, OWCP informed appellant of the type of 

evidence needed to establish her claim and requested that she submit such evidence within 30 days.

In an accompanying questionnaire, it asked her to describe in detail how the claimed injury 

occurred. 

No evidence was received.

By decision dated August 16, 2017, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that appellant 

had not established that the claimed June 15, 2017 incident occurred, as alleged. It also indicated 

that no medical evidence containing a diagnosis was provided. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA has the burden of proof 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 timely filed within the applicable 

time limitation period of FECA,2and that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty.3 

These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim, regardless of whether the 

claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.4

To determine whether a federal employee has sustained a traumatic injury in the 

performance of duty, it must first be determined whether a fact of injury has been established. 

First, the employee must submit sufficient evidence to establish that he or she actually experienced 

the employment incident at the time, place, and in the manner alleged.5 Second, the employee 

 

2

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

3

James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 ECAB 312 (1988). 

4 Delores C. Ellyett, 41 ECAB 992 (1990). 

5

John J. Carlone, 41 ECAB 354 (1989). 
3

must submit sufficient evidence, generally only in the form of medical evidence, to establish that 

the employment incident caused a personal injury.6

The employee must also submit sufficient evidence, generally only in the form of medical 

evidence, to establish that the employment incident caused a personal injury.7 To establish causal 

relationship between the condition, as well as any attendant disability claimed, and the 

employment event or incident, the employee must submit rationalized medical opinion evidence, 

based on a complete factual and medical background, supporting such causal relationship.8

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish a June 15, 2017 

injury in the performance of duty, as alleged. 

Appellant alleged that on June 15, 2017 a customer threatened to shoot her and damage her 

car while she was in the performance of duty. By letter dated July 13, 2017, OWCP advised 

appellant of the type of evidence needed to establish her claim and afforded appellant 30 days to 

submit the necessary evidence. As appellant did not respond to the request for factual information, 

the record lacks sufficient factual evidence to establish the details of how the claimed injury 

occurred. Thus, the Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof.9

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 a June 15, 2017 

injury in the performance of duty, as alleged.

 

6

Id.

7

J.Z., 58 ECAB 529 (2007). 

8 Michael E. Smith, 50 ECAB 313 (1999). 

9 Supra note 5.
4

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 16, 2017 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: December 11, 2018

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board