United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.D., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Memphis, TN, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 19-0091

Issued: July 26, 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

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

On October 15, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a September 17, 2018 of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

docketed the appeal as No. 19-0091.

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that this case is not in posture for a 

decision.

By decision dated October 2, 2009, OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for hearing loss due 

to his employment-related noise exposure. However, it denied his claim for a schedule award 

finding that his hearing loss was not sufficiently severe to be ratable.

Following this decision, appellant submitted additional medical evidence regarding the 

extent of his permanent hearing loss, including a December 20, 2012 audiogram received by 

OWCP on February 11, 2013. OWCP also developed the medical evidence, including referral to 

a second opinion physician and review by an OWCP district medical adviser (DMA). This referral 

to the second opinion physician also produced an April 10, 2014 audiogram. On August 8, 2017 

OWCP advised appellant that the DMA recommended obtaining new audiometric tests and that 

once they were received the case would be referred back to the DMA for an opinion of the extent 
2

of his hearing loss, if any, for purposes of a schedule award. On September 5, 2018 OWCP 

received an August 28, 2018 audiogram. 

On September 5, 2018 appellant requested reconsideration of the merits of his claim and 

submitted additional evidence of hearing impairment. By decision dated September 17, 2018, 

OWCP declined to reopen his schedule award claim finding that his request for reconsideration 

was untimely filed and failed to demonstrate clear evidence of error.

The Board finds that, in accordance with relevant case law and regulations, the case should 

be remanded for adjudication of appellant’s schedule award claim. A claimant may seek a 

schedule award or an increased schedule award at any time if the evidence establishes that he or 

she sustained impairment or increased impairment at a later date causally related to the accepted 

employment injury.1

As appellant requested reconsideration of his schedule award decision and OWCP received 

new medical evidence in support of the claim, OWCP failed to properly adjudicate and process 

the claim.2 The Board will therefore remand the case for further development, if necessary, 

followed by a de novo merit decision addressing the medical evidence submitted in support of 

appellant’s schedule award claim. Accordingly, 

 

1 See S.B., Docket No. 15-1499 (issued October 16, 2015); Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, 

Schedule Awards and Permanent Disability Claims, Chapter 2.808.7(b) (January 2010).

2 OWCP developed the medical evidence in furtherance of appellant’s schedule award claim. Proceedings under 

FECA are not adversarial in nature, and OWCP is not a disinterested arbiter. See T.E., Docket No. 18-1595 (issued 

March 13, 2019); J.S., Docket No. 16-0777 (issued January 3, 2017); Vanessa Young, 55 ECAB 575 (2004). The 

claimant has the burden of proof to establish entitlement to compensation, but OWCP shares responsibility in the 

development of the evidence to see that justice is done. See V.H., Docket No. 18-0848 (issued February 25, 2019); 

T.R., Docket No. 17-1961 (issued December 20, 2018); William J. Cantrell, 34 ECAB 1223 (1983). Once OWCP 

undertakes development of the record, it must do a complete job in procuring medical evidence that will resolve the 

relevant issues in the case. Id.; See V.B., Docket No. 18-1273 (issued March 4, 2019); Richard F. Williams, 55 ECAB 

343, 346 (2004).
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the September 17, 2018 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded for further action 

consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: July 26, 2019

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board