United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.W., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, PROCESSING & 

DISTRIBUTION CENTER, Cleveland, OH, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0778

Issued: February 4, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On April 28, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from February 11, 2021 merit decisions 

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.2

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that, following the issuance of the February11, 2021 decisions, OWCP received additional

evidence. However, the Board’s Rules of Procedureprovides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence 

in the case record that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be 

considered by the Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from 

reviewing this additional evidence for the first time on appeal. Id.
2

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met her burden of proof to establish disability from work 

during the period January 4 through November 3, 2020, causally related to her accepted 

September 4, 2014 employment injury. 

FACTUAL HISTORY

This case has previously been before the Board on a different issue. 3 The facts and 

circumstances as set forth in the Board’s prior decision are incorporated herein by reference. The 

relevant facts are as follows.

On September 4, 2014 appellant, then a 45-year-old mail handler, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on that date she injured both knees and arms when she ran to help 

a coworker who was allegedly having a seizure and tripped and fell from an uneven sidewalk while 

in the performance of duty. On December 3, 2014 OWCP accepted bilateral knee contusion, 

bilateral knee sprain, bilateral forearm contusion, and right hip sprain.

On December 28 and 31, 2020 appellant filed claims for compensation (Form CA-7) for 

intermittent dates of disability during the period January 4 through December 18, 2020.4 

In development letters dated January 5 and 6, 2021, OWCP informed appellant that the 

evidence of record was insufficient to establish her claims for compensation for total disability 

from work during the period January 4 through October 2, 2020 and October 7 through 

December 18, 2020, respectively. It advised her of the type of medical evidence needed to 

establish her claims and afforded her 30 days to submit the necessary evidence. 

OWCP subsequently received a July 7, 2020 recertification of medical necessity form for 

a TENS unit by Dr. Louis Keppler, an attending Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, who 

diagnosed contusion of the left forearm and describedequipment prescribed for appellant’s electro 

medical treatment.

By decision dated February 11, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for wage-loss 

compensation for the period January 4 through October 2, 2020, finding that the medical evidence 

of record was insufficient to establish intermittent disability from work during the claimed period

due to the accepted conditions.

5

3 Docket No. 17-1954 (issued April18, 2018).

4

In attached time analysis forms (Form CA-7a) of even dates, she claimed: eight hours of disability on March 12, 

26, and 31, April2, 14, 21, 22, and 30, May 7, 26, and 28, June 2, 4, 10, 20, and 23, July 17 and October 7, 2020;3.38 

hours on February 11, 2020;3.09 hours on April9, 2020;1.6 hours for April15 through 22, 2020; and 1.73 hours on 

November 3, 2020.

5 OWCP, however, found that the evidence of record supported payment of four hours of wage-loss compensation 

for medical treatment of the accepted conditions on April14, 2020. 
3

By separate decision of even date, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for wage-loss 

compensation for November 3, 2020, finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient 

to establish intermittent disability from work during the claimed period due to the accepted 

conditions.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA6 has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim.7 Under FECA, the term disability means incapacity, because 

of an employment injury, to earn the wages that the employee was receiving at the time of injury. 8 

For each period of disability claimed, the employee has the burden of proof to establish that he or 

she was disabled from work as a result of the accepted employment injury. 9 Whether a particular 

injury causes an employee to become disabled from work, and the duration of that disability, are 

medical issues that must be proven by a preponderance of probative and reliable medical opinion 

evidence.10

The Board will not require OWCP to pay compensation for disability in the absence of 

medical evidence directly addressing the specific dates of disability for which compensation is 

claimed. To do so, would essentially allow an employee to self-certify his or her disability and 

entitlement to compensation.11

For a routine medical appointment, a maximum of four hours of compensation for time lost 

to obtain medical treatment is usually allowed.12

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish intermittent 

disability from work during the period January 4 through November 3, 2020, causally related to 

her accepted September 4, 2014 employment injury. 

Appellant submitted a recertification of medical necessity form for a TENS unit dated 

July 7, 2020 from Dr. Keppler who diagnosed contusion of the left forearm, but failed to offer an 

opinion as to whether appellant was disabled from work due to the accepted employment injury. 

6

Supra note 1.

7

See L.S.,Docket No. 18-0264 (issued January 28, 2020); B.O.,Docket No. 19-0392 (issued July 12, 2019).

8

20 C.F.R. § 10.5(f); J.S.,Docket No. 19-1035 (issued January 24, 2020).

9 T.W., Docket No. 19-1286 (issued January 13, 2020).

10 S.G., Docket No. 18-1076 (issued April11, 2019); Fereidoon Kharabi, 52 ECAB 291 (2001).

11 See M.J.,Docket No. 19-1287 (issued January 13, 2020); WilliamA. Archer, 55 ECAB 674 (2004).

12 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Compensation Claims, Chapter 2.901.19(c) 

(February2013);see also K.A.,Docket No. 19-0679 (issued April6, 2020); WilliamA. Archer, id.
4

Therefore, this evidence is of no probative value and insufficient to establish appellant’s claim for 

compensation.13

For each period of disability claimed, the employee has the burden of proof to establish 

that he or she was disabled from work during the claimed period as a result of the accepted 

employment injury.14 Because appellant has not submitted rationalized medical opinion evidence 

to establish employment-related total disability during the claimed periods due to her accepted 

conditions, the Board finds that she has not met her burden of proof.

Appellant may submit new evidence or argument with a written request for reconsideration 

to OWCP within one year of this merit decision, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128 and 20 C.F.R. 

§§ 10.605 through 10.607.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish intermittent 

disability from work during the period January 4 through November 3, 2020 causally related to 

her accepted September 4, 2014 employment injury. 

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the February 11, 2021 decisions of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs are affirmed.

Issued: February 4, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

13 L.B., Docket No. 18-0533 (issued August 27, 2018); D.K.,Docket No. 17-1549 (issued July 6, 2018).

14 Supra note 11.