United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

V.T., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, LAKEVIEW POST 

OFFICE, Chicago, IL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0475

Issued: June 3, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On February 10, 2022 appellant timely filed an appeal from a November 3, 2021 nonmerit 

decision of the OWCP of Workers’Compensation Programs (OWCP).

1

 The Clerk of the Appellate 

Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0475.

On February 23, 2016 appellant, then a 48-year-old letter carrier, filed an occupational

disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she had sustained left hip osteoarthritis, which was 

aggravated by factors of her federal employment, including walking, climbing stairs, bending, 

stooping and twisting for the last 22 years. By decision dated October 24, 2018, OWCP accepted 

the claim for permanent aggravation of left hip arthritis.

On March 28, 2019 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for total 

disability from July 9, 2016 through December 28, 2018. 

By decision dated October 21, 2020, OWCP found that appellant was entitled to wage-loss 

compensation for the period April 18, 2017 through December 28, 2018; however, compensation 

 

1 Appellant indicated on her AB-1 Form that she was appealing from a February10, 2022 decision, which is a Board 

decision under Docket No. 21-1157. As appellant filed her request within 30 days of the issuance of the Board’s 

decision, the Board will treat it as a timely petition for reconsideration. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a). The only final 

adverse OWCP decision within the Board’s jurisdiction is the November 3, 2021 nonmerit decision. See 20 C.F.R. 

§§ 501.2(c) and 501.3.
2

remained denied for the period July 9, 2016 through April 17, 2017. It found that the medical 

evidence of record supported a finding that appellant’s April 18, 2017 left hip total arthroplasty 

was medically necessary for her accepted condition of permanent aggravation of left hip arthritis.

On October 21, 2021 appellant filed a request for reconsideration of the October 21, 2020 

decision. In a letter accompanying her reconsideration request, she explained that her treating 

physician, Dr. Mara Terras, a Board-certified internist, placed her off work from July 9, 2016 

through April 17, 2017 pending her total hip replacement. Appellant explained that during this 

time period she experienced severe pain, difficulty walking, and difficulty with numerous activities 

of daily living. However, OWCP initially denied her claim and she could not schedule her left hip 

total replacement.

By decision dated November 3, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s request for 

reconsideration,finding that appellant neither raised substantive legal questions, nor provided new 

and relevant evidence.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, concludes that this case is not in posture 

for decision.

Section 8124(a) of FECA (5 U.S.C. § 8124(a)) provides that OWCP shall determine and 

make findings of fact and make an award for or against payment of compensation. Its regulations 

at 20 C.F.R. § 10.126 provide that the decision of the Director of OWCP shall contain findings of 

fact and a statement of reasons. As well, OWCP’s procedures provide that the reasoning behind 

OWCP’s decision should be clear enough for the reader to understand the precise defect of the 

claim and the kind of evidence which would overcome it.2

In the November 3, 2021 decision, OWCP summarily denied appellant’s request for 

reconsideration and did not reference or discuss the specific argument appellant raised on 

reconsideration. In its decision, it 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, i.e., why the argumentsubmitted on reconsideration was insufficient to meet 

any of the requirements of 20 C.F.R. § 10.606(b)(3), warranting further merit review. This case 

must, therefore, be remanded to OWCP for an appropriate decision on appellant’s reconsideration 

request that describes the evidence submitted on reconsideration and provides detailed reasons for 

accepting or rejecting the reconsideration request,3 pursuant to the standards set forth in 5 U.S.C. 

§ 8124(a) and 20 C.F.R. § 10.126. Accordingly,

2 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 --Claims, Disallowances,Chapter 2.1400.5 (February 2013).

3

See R.T., Docket No. 19-0604 (issued September 13, 2019); T.M., Docket No. 17-1609 (issued December 4, 

2017); J.J.,Docket No. 11-1958 (issued June27, 2012).
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the decision dated November 3, 2021is set aside and 

the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order of the Board. 

Issued: June 3, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board