United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.S., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, KENOSHA CARRIER 

ANNEX, Pleasant Prairie, WI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0225

Issued: July 20, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On December 2, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 7, 2022 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.

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met his burden of proof to establish a diagnosis of 

COVID-19.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On February 2, 2022 appellant, then a 34-year-old city carrier, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on January 15, 2022 he was exposed to COVID-19 while in the 

performance of duty. He stopped work on January 16, 2022 and returned to work on 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

January 31, 2022. Appellant submitted a photograph of a COVID-19 home rapid antigen test, 

indicating a positive result.

In an April 6, 2022 letter, the employing establishment controverted the claim. 

In a development letter dated April 29, 2022, OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies 

of his claim. It advised him of the type of evidence needed and provided a questionnaire for his

completion. OWCP afforded appellant 30 days to provide the necessary evidence. No response 

was received.

By decision dated June 7, 2022, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that the evidence 

of record was insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19. It concluded, therefore, that the 

requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by FECA. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

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 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 401.6 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 subject 

to a risk of exposure to COVID-19.7

2

Supra note 1.

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 ARPA, id.; 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. 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 laboratory test result is not available. Selfadministered COVID-19 tests, also called “home tests,” “at-home tests,” or “over-the-counter 

(OTC) tests” are 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.8

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish a diagnosis of 

COVID-19.

Appellant filed a claim on February 2, 2022, alleging that he had developed COVID-19 

within 21 days of his exposure while in the performance of duty.9 In support of his claim, appellant 

submitted a photograph of a home rapid antigen test for COVID-19. However, the case record 

does not indicate that the home test was monitored by a health care professional. As noted, 

OWCP’s guidance provides that a home test is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19, 

unless the home test is monitored by a health care professional and the results are verified through 

documentation submitted by such professional.10 The Board, therefore, finds that appellant’s home 

rapid antigen test is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19.

As the medical evidence of record is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19, the 

Board finds that appellant has not met his 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(a) 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 a diagnosis of 

COVID-19.

8 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. 

9

Id.

10 Id.; see also R.F., Docket No. 23-0192 (issued June 27, 2023). 
4

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 7, 2022 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: July 20, 2023

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