United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.B., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Clearwater, FL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 19-1643

Issued: July 20, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On July 30, 2019 appellant filed a timely appeal from a July 18, 2019 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 his burden of proof to establish that he sustained a 

bilateral upper extremity condition in the performance of duty.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On May 7, 2019 appellant, then a 43-year-old city carrier, filed an occupational disease 

claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he sustained bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of his 

job duties including repetitive use of his hands when “sorting mail, casing mail by placing it into 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

the letter case, and fingering through the mail while carrying and delivering mail/packages.” He

indicated that he first became aware of his claimed condition and its relationship to his federal

employment on January 11, 2019. On the reverse side of the claim form, K.H., a customer service 

manager, noted that appellant had been on extended leave since November 24, 2018 due to an 

unrelated injury.

In a development letter dated May 22, 2019, OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies 

of his claim. It advised him of the type of factual and medical evidence needed and provided a 

questionnaire for his completion. In a separate development letter of even date, OWCP requested 

that the employing establishment provide comments from a knowledgeable supervisor on the 

accuracy of statements made by appellant in support of his claim. This was to include commentary 

on the tasks he performed involving repetitive hand and wrist movements, and other details 

regarding the employment-related exposures alleged to have contributed to his claimed condition. 

OWCP afforded both parties 30 days to respond. 

OWCP subsequently received an April 29, 2019 letter from Dr. Angelo M. Alves, a Boardcertified neurologist, who diagnosed significant bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. He opined that 

the condition was due to or associated with duties of appellant’s federal employment consisting of 

sorting mail on a daily basis and for long periods of time. Dr. Alves attached the results of a 

January 11, 2019 electromyography and nerve conduction velocity study of the upper extremities 

and neck, which demonstrated results consistent with mild bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and 

mild entrapment neuropathy of the ulnar nerve at the wrist level, worse on the left than the right. 

In a statement dated June 14, 2019, K.H., on behalf of the employing establishment,

responded to OWCP’s inquiries. She indicated that, as a letter carrier, appellant was required to 

sort mail into a case for approximately one and a half to two hours per day while standing, and for 

approximately the remaining six hours, he would sort mail intermittently between addresses and 

drive. K.H. maintained that no repetitive hand or wrist movements were performed at that time. 

She also listed specific periods of time when appellant had not performed his duties on a long-term 

basis. K.H. reported that, for the past two years, he had only performed repetitive hand and wrist 

motions intermittently for a span of two months and then a span of three months, and that from 

August 25 through November 20, 2018 he was given assistance with his street duties for one to 

two hours daily. She asserted that appellant’s carpal tunnel syndrome was not caused by these 

repetitive motions due to the infrequency of his delivery duties, especially over the last two years. 

K.H. attached a job description for appellant’s city carrier position. The duties listed 

included, inter alia, casing classes of mail in sequence of delivery along an established route; 

withdrawing mail from a distribution case and preparing it in sequence for efficient delivery; 

preparing and separating all classes of mail to be carried; and becoming proficient, when assigned 

to a route, in the casing of mail on other routes as assigned. Additionally, K.H. indicated that from 

August 25 through November 20, 2018 appellant was given assistance on a daily basis between 

one hour and two hours of his street duties. Also attached was an undated, unsigned duty status 

report (Form CA-17). Only the supervisor’s portion of the form was completed, and this included 

appellant’s name with daily work requirements including fine manipulation and simple grasping 

for eight hours intermittently and pushing and pulling for one hour intermittently. 
3

By decision dated July 18, 2019, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that he had not 

submitted sufficient evidence to support that the injury or event(s) occurred as described. It noted 

that he had not responded to the May 22, 2019 development letter and had not provided a full 

description of the repetitive motions that he believed lead to his carpal tunnel syndrome. OWCP 

concluded, therefore, that the requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by 

FECA. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA2 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 each and 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 an occupational 

disease claim, a claimant must submit the following: (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 claimant.5

ANALYSIS

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

On his May 7, 2019 occupational disease claim form, appellant alleged that he sustained 

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome due to his duties as a city carrier which required repetitive use of 

his hands to sort, case, and finger mail. 

By letter dated June 14, 2019, K.H. explained that, as a letter carrier, appellant was required 

to sort mail into a case for approximately one and a half to two hours per day while standing. For 

approximately the next six hours, appellant would sort mail intermittently between addresses and 

drive. 

In a job description for the position of city carrier, duties included casing classes of mail in 

sequence of delivery along an established route; withdrawing mail from a distribution case and 

 

2

Id.

3 C.K., Docket No. 18-1286 (issued April 20, 2020); A.F., Docket No. 18-1154 (issued January 17, 2019); C.S., 

Docket No. 08-1585 (issued March 3, 2009); Elaine Pendleton, 40 ECAB 1143 (1989).

4

Id.

5 See L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2010). M.S., Docket No. 18-1554 (issued February 8, 2019).
4

preparing it in sequence for efficient delivery; preparing and separating all classes of mail to be 

carried; and becoming proficient, when assigned to a route, in the casing of mail on other routes 

as assigned. Also, the supervisor’s portion of a Form CA-17 listed appellant’s work requirements 

as including fine manipulation and simple grasping for eight hours per day intermittently. 

As the record contains sufficient evidence to establish that appellant performed repetitive 

tasks of sorting, casing, and fingering mail while in the performance of duty, the Board finds that 

he has established that the alleged occupational exposure occurred as alleged.6

As appellant has established that the claimed occupational exposures occurred as alleged, 

the question becomes whether these exposures caused an injury.7 Thus, the Board will set aside 

OWCP’s July 18, 2019 decision and remand the case for consideration of the medical evidence of 

record with regard to the issue of causal relationship.

8

 After any further development as deemed 

necessary, OWCP shall issue a de novo decision addressing whether appellant has met his burden 

of proof to establish a medical condition causally related to the accepted federal employment 

factors. 

CONCLUSION

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

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the July 18, 2019 decision of the Office of Workers’

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

with this decision of the Board.

Issued: July 20, 2020

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

6 See M.D., Docket No. 18-1365 (issued March 12, 2019).

7 See S.A., Docket No. 19-1221 (issued June 9, 2020).

8

Id.