United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.N., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

U.S. CUSTOMS & BORDER PROTECTION, 

Calexico, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1097

Issued: June 7, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On July 13, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 4, 2021 merit decision and a

June 24, 2021 nonmerit decision ofthe Office ofWorkers’CompensationPrograms(OWCP). The

Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-1097.

On December 18, 2020 appellant, then a 57-year-old customs and border protection agent, 

filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on December 16, 2020 he contracted 

COVID-19 while in the performance of duty. He noted that he interacted with members of the 

traveling public while conducting primary and secondary inspection duties in passenger and 

commercial environments. On the reverse side of the claim form, the supervisor, acknowledged 

that appellant was injured in the performance of duty, and that his knowledge of the facts about 

the injury agreed with statements of the employee and/or witnesses. Appellant stopped work on 

December 18, 2020.

OWCP received a COVID-19 antigen test result dated December 16, 2020, which indicated 

that appellant had tested positive for COVID-19.

In a note dated January 4, 2021, Dr. Unnati Sampat, a Board-certified internal and geriatric 

medicine specialist, related that appellant had tested positive for COVID-19 on December 16, 2020 

and had been under her care. She noted that he had completed two weeks of quarantine and could 

return to work on January 5, 2021 without restrictions.
2

By decision dated June 4, 2021, OWCP accepted that the December 16, 2020 employment 

exposure occurred as alleged, but denied appellant’s traumatic injury claim, finding that he had 

not submitted medical evidence containing a diagnosis of COVID-19. It concluded, therefore, that 

the requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by the Federal Employees’

Compensation Act (FECA).

1

On June 11, 2021 appellant requested reconsideration of the June 4, 2021 decision. 

By decision dated June 24, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s request for reconsideration of 

the merits of his claim, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a).

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

decision. 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA2 has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim, including that the individual is an employee of the United 

States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was timely filed within the applicable time 

limitation period of FECA,3that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged, 

and that any disability or medical condition for which compensation is claimed is causally related 

to the employment injury.4 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim, 

regardless of whether the claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.5

Under section 4016 of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 20216 any claim made 

for COVID-19 by or on behalf of a “covered employee” for benefits under FECA will be deemed 

to have an injury proximately caused by exposure to COVID-19 arising out of the nature of the 

covered employee’s employment. A “covered employee” is defined by ARPA as an employee 

under 5 U.S.C. § 8101(a) and employed in the federal service at any time during the period 

beginning on January 27, 2020 and ending on January 27, 2023. A “covered employee” prior to a 

diagnosis of COVID-19 must have carried out duties that required a physical interaction with at 

least one other person (a patient, member of the public, or a coworker); or was otherwise sub ject 

to a risk of exposure to COVID-19.7

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2

Id.

3 F.H., Docket No. 18-0869 (issued January 29, 2020); J.P., Docket No. 19-0129 (issued April26, 2019); JoeD. 

Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989).

4 L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2020); J.H., Docket No. 18-1637 (issued January 29, 2020); 

James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 ECAB 312 (1988).

5 P.A., Docket No. 18-0559 (issued January 29, 2020); K.M., Docket No. 15-1660 (issued September 16, 2016); 

Delores C. Ellyett, 41 ECAB 992 (1990).

6 Public Law 117-2 (March 11, 2021).

7 FECA Bulletin No. 21-09 (issued April 28, 2021).
3

Exposure to COVID-19 alone is not sufficient to establish a work-related medical 

condition. Manifestation of COVID-19 must occur within 21 days of the covered exposure.8 To 

establish a diagnosis of COVID-19, a claimant must submit the following: (1) a positive 

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) or Antigen COVID-19 test result; or (2) a positive Antibody 

test result, together with contemporaneous medical evidence that the claimant had documented 

symptoms of and/or was treated for COVID-19 by a physician (a notice to quarantine is not 

sufficient if there was no evidence of illness); or (3) if no positive laboratory test is available, a 

COVID-19 diagnosis from a physician together with rationalized medical opinion supporting the 

diagnosis and an explanation as to why a positive test result is not available. Self-administered 

COVID-19 testing is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19 under FECA unless the 

administration of the self-test is monitored by a medical professional and the results are verified 

through documentation submitted by such professional. 9

Paragraph 2 of FECA Bulletin No. 21-10 provides, inter alia, “The FECA program will 

review all COVID-19 claims previously denied in accordance with the guidance provided in FECA 

Bulletin No. 21-09 based on the submission of an antigen test without contemporaneous medical 

to determine if the claim can now be accepted. This will occur without a request from the claimant. 

If the FECA program determines that the case can now be accepted under the ARPA, the case will 

be reopened under the Director’s own motion under Section 8128(a) of the FECA, and the case 

will be accepted. If this occurs, the claimant and employing agency will be notified. ”

In light of the above-noted amendments, OWCP did not take into consideration all of the 

applicable criteria for establishing a diagnosis of COVID-19 when it denied appellant’s claim. 

This case shall therefore be remanded for consideration and application of FECA Bulletin Nos. 

21-09, 21-10, and 22-06 with regard to appellant’s claim for COVID-19.10 Following this and 

other such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue a de novo decision.11 

Accordingly,

8

Id.

9 FECA Bulletin Nos. 21-09 (issued April 28, 2021), 21-10 (issued August 17, 2021), and 22-06 (issued 

February16, 2022). FECA Bulletin No. 21-10 amended FECA Bulletin No. 21-09 in part to allow for a positive 

Antigen COVID-19 test result. FECA Bulletin No. 22-06 amended FECA Bulletin Nos. 21-09 and 21-10 to update 

COVID-19 claims processing guidelines relating to reinfection and home tests. 

10 See e.g., Order Remanding Case, K.C., Docket No. 22-1066 (issued December 23, 2022), Order Remanding 

Case, G.C.,Docket No. 21-1016 (issued September 27, 2022) (the Board remanded these cases for proper application 

of FECA Bulletin No. 21-09).

11 In light of the Board’s disposition regarding the merit issue, the nonmerit issue is rendered moot.
4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 4, 2021 merit decision of the Office of 

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

consistent with this order of the Board. The June 24, 2021 nonmerit decision of the Office of

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside as moot.

Issued: June 7, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board