United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.W., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, HIDENWOOD POST 

OFFICE, Newport News, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 18-0483

Issued: March 7, 2019

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge

On January 2, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a July 6, 2017 nonmerit decision 

of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).1 The Board assigned Docket No. 

18-0483.

2

On March 15, 2012 appellant, a 51-year-old letter carrier, filed an occupational disease 

claim (Form CA-2), alleging that he sustained an emotional condition due to factors of his federal 

employment, including harassment and threats of disciplinary action from his supervisor. By 

decisions dated December 13, 2012 and April 24, 2013, OWCP denied appellant’s claim because 

the factual evidence of record failed to establish fact of injury. By decision dated February 22, 

 

1 Under the Board’s Rules of Procedure, an appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of an 

OWCP decision. An appeal is considered filed upon receipt by the Clerk of the Appellate Boards. See 20 C.F.R. 

§ 501.3(e)-(f). One hundred and eighty days from July 6, 2017, the date of OWCP’s last decision, was 

January 2, 2018. Because using January 3, 2018, the date the appeal was received by the Clerk of the Appellate 

Boards, would result in the loss of appeal rights, the date of the postmark is considered the date of filing. The date of 

the U.S. Postal Service postmark is January 2, 2018, rendering the appeal timely filed. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(f)(1).

2 Together with his appeal request, appellant submitted a timely request for oral argument pursuant to 20 C.F.R. 

§ 501.5(b). By order dated October 1, 2018, the Board exercised its discretion and denied the request as appellant’s 

arguments on appeal could be adequately addressed in a decision based on a review of the case as submitted on the 

record. Order Denying Request for Oral Argument, Docket No. 18-0483 (issued October 1, 2018).
2

2016, the Board affirmed OWCP’s December 11, 2014 decision denying appellant’s request for 

reconsideration of the merits.3

Appellant subsequently requested reconsideration. By decision dated June 21, 2016, 

OWCP modified its prior decisions and denied appellant’s claim because the evidence failed to 

establish that he sustained an injury in the performance of duty. 

On June 22, 2017 appellant requested reconsideration and submitted a cover letter dated 

June 18, 2017 and a legal argument in support of his emotional condition claim.

By decision dated July 6, 2017, OWCP denied appellant’s request for reconsideration, 

finding that it was untimely filed and failed to demonstrate clear evidence of error. It indicated 

that it had denied appellant’s request based on a decision “outlined in the enclosure.”

The Board, having duly considered the matter, finds that OWCP failed to properly explain 

the findings with respect to the issue presented. In its July 6, 2017 decision, OWCP failed to 

provide an explanation as to why its prior decision was improperly decided. It indicated that it 

had provided reasons for its denial which were “outlined in [an] enclosure,” but no such enclosure 

exists within the decision or in the case file. OWCP’s failure to provide factual findings and 

explain the basis for its conclusion that appellant did not demonstrate clear evidence of error 

precludes the Board’s review of the decision.4

The Board finds that OWCP, in its July 6, 2017 decision, did not discharge its 

responsibility to set forth findings of fact and a clear statement of reasons explaining the 

disposition so that appellant could understand the basis for the decision.5 The Board will therefore 

set aside OWCP’s July 6, 2017 decision and remand the case for an appropriate decision on 

appellant’s untimely reconsideration request.

 

3 Docket No. 15-1225 (issued February 22, 2016).

4 20 C.F.R. § 10.126; see also R.C., Docket No. 16-0563 (issued May 4, 2016).

5

Id.
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the July 6, 2017 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is set aside and the case remanded to OWCP for further action consistent 

with this order of the Board.

Issued: March 7, 2019

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