United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

B.H., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Cincinnati, OH, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0383

Issued: August 29, 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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On January 17, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a December 16, 2021 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.2

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that, following the December 16, 2021 decision, appellant submitted additional evidence to 

OWCP. However, the Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “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 his burden of proof to establish disability from work 

for the period November 2 through 19, 2021 causally related to his accepted September 17, 2021 

employment injury. 

FACTUAL HISTORY

On September 23, 2021 appellant, then a 34-year-old rural carrier, filed a traumatic injury

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on September 17, 2021 he fractured his back when he was 

involved in a motor vehicle accident while in the performance of duty. He stopped work on that 

date. OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for concussion with loss of consciousness, nondisplaced 

fracture of right clavicle, wedge compression fracture of T11-12 vertebra, and wedge compression 

fracture of unspecified thoracic vertebra. 

On November 10, 2021 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for 

disability from work for the period October 23 through November 5, 2021. On the reverse side of 

the claim form, an occupational health specialist for the employing establishment indicated that

appellant received continuation of pay from September 18 through November 5, 2021. On an 

attached time analysis form (Form CA-7a), appellant indicated that he used eight hours of leave 

without pay on November 2, 3, 4, and 5, 2021. 

In a November 15, 2021 development letter, OWCP advised appellant that the evidence 

submitted was insufficient to establish disability beginning November 2, 2021 and requested that 

he submit additional factual and medical evidence to establish that he was unable to work during 

the period claimed due to his September 17, 2021 employment injury. It provided a questionnaire 

for his completion and afforded him 30 days to respond. 

In a November 1, 2021 outpatient progress note, Maureen Carberry, a physician assistant, 

reported appellant’s complaints of ongoing neck pain and dull aching back pain. She conducted a 

physical examination and diagnosed T11 superior endplate fracture, C7-T6 acute compression 

fractures, right upper extremity weakness, and low back pain. 

OWCP also received diagnostic examination reports and hospital records dated 

November 1, 2021. The hospital records indicated that appellant was admitted for diagnoses of 

other displaced fracture of seventh cervical vertebra and wedge compression fracture of the 

thoracic vertebra. X-ray examination reports of the cervical and thoracic spines showed stable 

fractures through C7-T6 vertebral bodies without appreciable loss of vertebral body height and 

stable T11 superior endplate fracture. 

A November 10, 2021 cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan 

demonstrated an unremarkable examination aside from a shallow disc bulge at C5-6. 

On November 29, 2021 appellant filed an additional Form CA-7 for disability from work 

for the period November 5 through 19, 2021. 

By decision dated December 16, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for disability for 

the period November 2 through 19, 2021. It found that the medical evidence of record was 
3

insufficient to establish that he was disabled from work during the claimed period due to his 

accepted September 17, 2021 employment injury. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA3 has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim, including that any disability or specific condition for which 

compensation is claimed is causally related to the employment injury. 4 The term disability is 

defined as the incapacity, because of an employment injury, to earn the wages the employee was 

receiving at the time of the injury.5 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.6 

To establish causal relationship between the disability claimed and the employment injury, 

an employee must submit rationalized medical evidence.7 The opinion of the physician must be 

based on a complete factual and medical background, must be one of reasonable medical certainty, 

and must be supported by medical rationale explaining the nature of the relationship between the 

claimed disability and the accepted employment injury.8

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.9

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish disability from 

work for the period November 2 through 19, 2021 causally related to his accepted September 17, 

2021 employment injury.

3

Supra note 1.

4 D.S., Docket No. 20-0638 (issued November 17, 2020); F.H., Docket No. 18-0160 (issued August 23, 2019); 

C.R., Docket No. 18-1805 (issued May 10, 2019); Kathryn Haggerty, 45 ECAB 383 (1994); Elaine Pendleton, 40 

ECAB 1143 (1989).

5

20 C.F.R. § 10.5(f); S.T., Docket No. 18-0412 (issued October 22, 2018); CherylL. Decavitch, 50 ECAB 

397 (1999).

6 B.O., Docket No. 19-0392 (issued July 12, 2019); D.G., Docket No. 18-0597 (issued October 3, 2018); AmeliaS. 

Jefferson, 57 ECAB 183 (2005).

7 L.O., Docket No. 20-0170 (issued August 13, 2021); S.J., Docket No. 17-0828 (issued December 20, 2017); 

KathrynE. DeMarsh, 56 ECAB 677 (2005).

8 V.A., Docket No. 19-1123 (issued October 29, 2019); C.B., Docket No. 18-0633 (issued November 16, 2018).

9

See S.G., Docket No. 18-1076 (issued April11, 2019); WilliamA. Archer, 55 ECAB 674 (2004); Fereidoon 

Kharabi, 52 ECAB 291 (2001).
4

In support of his claim for compensation, appellant submitted a November 1, 2021 progress 

note by Ms. Carberry, a physician assistant. This report, however, is of no probative value to 

establish appellant’s wage-loss compensation claim because physician assistants are not 

considered physicians as defined under FECA.10

OWCP also received November 1, 2021 cervical and thoracic spine x-ray examination 

reports and a November 10, 2021 cervical spine MRI scan. The Board has consistently held that 

diagnostic test studies, standing alone, lack probative value as they do not address whether the 

accepted employment injury caused the diagnosed condition. 11 For this reason, the Board finds 

that the diagnostic reports of record are insufficient to establish appellant’s disability claim.12 

As stated previously, 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.13 Because appellant has not submitted rationalized medical 

opinion evidence sufficient to establish employment-related disability during the claimed period, 

the Board finds that he has not met his burden of proof to establish his claim.

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 his burden of proof to establish disability from 

work for the period November 2 through 19, 2021 causally related to his accepted September 17, 

2021 employment injury.

10 5 U.S.C. § 8102(2) of FECA provides as follows: (2) physician includes surgeons, podiatrists, dentists, clinical 

psychologists, optometrists, chiropractors, and osteopathic practitioners within the scope of their practice as defined 

by State law. 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(t). See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Causal Relationship, 

Chapter 2.805.3a(1) (January 2013); DavidP. Sawchuk, 57 ECAB 316, 320 n.11 (2006) (lay individuals such as 

physician assistants, nurses, and physical therapists are not competent to render a medical opinion under FECA);see 

also S.S., Docket No. 21-1140 (issued June 29, 2022) (physician assistants are not considered physicians under FECA 

and are not competent to provide medical opinions); GeorgeH. Clark, 56 ECAB 162 (2004) (physician assistants are 

not considered physicians under FECA). 

11 G.T., Docket No. 18-1369 (issued March13, 2019); Merle J. Marceau, 53 ECAB 197 (2001).

12 See M.D., Docket No. 21-1270(issued March21, 2022).

13 Supra note 6.
5

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the December 16, 2021 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: August 29, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board