United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.D., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

San Francisco, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 18-1365

Issued: March 12, 2019

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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On July 2, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 18, 2018 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 appellant has met her burden of proof to establish an injury in the 

performance of duty.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 19, 2018 appellant, then a 54-year-old mail clerk, filed an occupational disease 

claim (Form CA-2) alleging bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) as a result of her repetitive 

federal employment duties. She explained that her repetitive work duties caused pain in her left 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

wrist, hand, and shoulder which worsened over time. Appellant reported that her left wrist, hand, 

and fingers experienced tingling, pain, numbness, and loss of sensation which radiated into her 

arm and shoulder. She noted that she first became aware of her claimed condition and of its 

relationship to her federal employment on February 2, 2018. 

In an accompanying narrative statement, appellant reported that she began working for the 

employing establishment in 1988. She described the various positions she had held and the 

requisite employment duties. Appellant’s repetitive employment duties included loading and 

clearing mail from machine bins, repeated lifting and loading letter trays to and from machines, 

scanning mail, keying mail through use of a keyboard, breaking down mail, transferring mail to 

containers, replacing and tying sacks, unloading mail from containers, and sorting mail. She 

reported that these repetitive employment duties caused pain in her wrist, hand, and shoulder. 

In a February 2, 2018 electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction velocity (NCV)

study, Dr. Chi-Chen Mao, a Board-certified neurologist, reported that testing revealed evidence of 

moderate bilateral CTS, worse on the right side. 

On March 20, 2018 the employing establishment notified OWCP by letter that appellant 

had previously filed two occupational disease claims for the same injury, which were denied under 

OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx005 and xxxxxx262.

2

 The employing establishment argued that fact of 

injury had not been established and requested this claim, OWCP File No. xxxxxx041, be

administratively combined with OWCP File No. xxxxxx005.

In a development letter dated April 3, 2018, OWCP informed appellant that the evidence 

of record was insufficient to establish her claim. It advised appellant of the type of factual and 

medical evidence needed and provided a questionnaire for her completion. OWCP requested that 

she describe all prior injuries to the hand, arm, or wrist. It asked that appellant explain how this 

February 2, 2018 injury differed from her prior claims filed with a February 23, 2011 date of injury 

under OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx262 and xxxxxx005. OWCP afforded her 30 days to provide the 

requested information.

On April 9, 2018 appellant responded to OWCP’s questionnaire. She asserted that her 

repetitive employment duties caused her left wrist CTS which was diagnosed on February 2, 2018. 

Appellant described her employment duties which included repetitive keying, feeding mail into 

machines, clearing mail from machines, lifting, tying sacks, gripping and bundling mail, and 

manually sorting mail over an eight-hour work shift. She noted that she experienced pain, 

numbness, loss of sensation, and burning which radiated to her arm and shoulder, causing her to 

seek treatment and undergo a nerve test on February 2, 2018 which revealed left wrist CTS. 

Appellant reported that her statements pertaining to her employment duties were also corroborated 

by her supervisor in an accompanying letter. She stated that her February 2, 2018 occupational 

disease claim was for a left wrist injury which she had never previously alleged. Appellant

 

2 On January 18, 2014 appellant filed a Form CA-2 alleging carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of her repetitive 

employment duties. OWCP assigned that claim File No. xxxxxx262. On December 13, 2017 appellant filed a Form 

CA-2 alleging carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of her repetitive employment duties. OWCP assigned that claim 

File No. xxxxxx005. 
3

explained that her 2011 claims under OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx262 and xxxxxx005 related to her 

right wrist injury.

By letter dated April 9, 2018, S.W., appellant’s supervisor, reported that her work activities 

included keying, lifting, tying sacks, feeding mail into machines, clearing mail from machines, 

and manually sorting mail. She concurred with appellant’s statements pertaining to her work 

activities. S.W. further reported that she had recently been made aware of appellant’s left wrist 

and arm complaints. 

In support of her claim, appellant submitted medical reports dated February 2 through 

May 25, 2018. 

By decision dated June 18, 2018, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that the 

evidence of record was insufficient to establish that the occupational exposures occurred as 

alleged. 

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 filed within the applicable time 

limitation, that an injury was sustained while in the performance of duty as alleged, and that any 

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

employment injury.3 These are the essential elements of every compensation claim regardless of 

whether the claim is predicated on a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.4

To establish that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty in a claim for 

occupational disease, 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.5

ANALYSIS -- ISSUE 1

The Board finds that this case is not in posture for a decision.

Appellant’s prior occupational disease claims alleged a right wrist carpal tunnel injury. 

This claim, however, alleges a left wrist carpal tunnel condition as noted on her March 19, 2018 

Form CA-2. On April 9, 2018 appellant responded to OWCP’s April 3, 2018 development letter 

 

3

J.M., Docket No. 17-0284 (issued February 7, 2018); R.C., 59 ECAB 427 (2008); James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 

ECAB 312 (1988). 

4 K.M., Docket No. 15-1660 (issued September 16, 2016); L.M., Docket No. 13-1402 (issued February 7, 2014);

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

5 See Roy L. Humphrey, 57 ECAB 238, 241 (2005); Ruby I. Fish, 46 ECAB 276, 279 (1994). 
4

and provided clarification that her current claim was for a left wrist injury not previously alleged. 

She reported that the two prior claims referenced by OWCP were filed for a right wrist injury 

stemming back to 2011. 

The Board finds that appellant has sufficiently described her employment duties which 

entailed repetitive keying, feeding mail into machines, clearing mail from machines, lifting, tying 

sacks, gripping and bundling mail, and manually sorting mail over an eight-hour work shift.6 

Appellant’s supervisor S.W. concurred with appellant’s statement regarding her repetitive 

employment duties and complaints to the left wrist and arm. 

The Board notes that appellant is not refiling a claim for the same injury as she has now 

alleged left wrist CTS as a result of her federal employment duties. Appellant has also alleged 

with specificity that the occupational exposure occurred at the time, place, and in the manner 

alleged.7 

As appellant has alleged a new injury and has established occupational exposure, further 

consideration of the medical evidence is necessary.8 For these reasons, the case will be remanded 

to OWCP for evaluation of the medical evidence to determine whether there is a causal relationship

between the claimed carpal tunnel condition and the accepted factors of her federal employment. 

Following such further development as OWCP deems necessary, it shall issue a de novo decision.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that this case is not in posture for decision. 

 

6 A.R., Docket No. 15-1716 (issued November 17, 2015).

7 See Willie J. Clements, 43 ECAB 244 (1991).

8 C.f. Bonnie A. Contreas, 57 ECAB 364, 368 n.10 (2006).
5

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 18, 2018 decision of the Office of Workers’

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

with this decision.

Issued: March 12, 2019

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board