United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.J., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Baltimore, MD, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 18-1081

Issued: May 22, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

On April 13, 2018 appellant timely filed a timely appeal from a November 1, 2017 merit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate 

Boards assigned Docket No. 18-1081.

On May 1, 1992 appellant, then a 32-year-old city carrier, filed an occupational disease 

claim (Form CA-2) alleging that her job duties caused pain, weakness, and inflammation in her 

knees. 

OWCP initially accepted the claim for bilateral genu varum, and later accepted congenital 

deformity of the knee joint, bilateral chondromalacia patellae, and bilateral unspecified internal 

derangement of the knee. Appellant underwent bilateral knee arthroscopies on July 8, 1992 and 

right knee surgery on September 18, 1995.

By decision dated January 13, 1995, OWCP determined that appellant’s re-employed 

position as a modified letter carrier at the employing establishment fairly and reasonably 

represented her wage-earning capacity with zero loss of wage-earning capacity (LWEC).

On April 13, 1995 OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for a March 6, 1995 recurrence of 

disability. It paid intermittent wage-loss compensation from March 6 to June 9, 1995, and by 

decision dated August 16, 1995, approved leave buy-back for those dates.
2

In correspondence dated January 8, 2007, appellant informed OWCP that she had resigned 

her position with the employing establishment in October 1998 and noted that she her knee 

conditions had been stable. She further noted, however, that she had developed recurrent severe 

knee pain and problems. Appellant continued to notify OWCP of her knee problems following 

her retirement and inquired into the availability of further medical coverage. On July 21, 2016 she 

received a development letter from OWCP noting the deficiencies in her claim for a recurrence of 

disability and need for medical treatment and informed her of the type of evidence necessary to 

establish the claim. No further action was taken on the recurrence claim at that time.

On January 25, 2017 submitted a notice of recurrence (Form CA-2a) of disability due to 

her accepted knee conditions and a request for medical treatment. An additional copy of the claim 

form was submitted on June 25, 2017. Appellant indicated that her recurrence began on 

January 26, 2007. She also submitted an itemization of her medical treatment for her knees since 

2007, additional medical evidence, and a job history of her employment since leaving the 

employing establishment. The record also evinces that appellant submitted a CD containing 

additional evidence in support of her claim.

By decision dated November 1, 2017, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for a recurrence of 

disability. It found the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish a change or 

worsening of her accepted conditions, without an intervening cause, to the point that she could no 

longer work. OWCP noted that this decision did not affect her entitlement to medical benefits for 

her accepted work-related conditions.

The Board has duly reviewed the matter and finds that the case is not in posture for 

decision. 

Appellant’s January 25 and June 25, 2017 notices of recurrence of disability and the need 

for medical treatment commencing January 26, 2007 indicates that she believed the accepted 

conditions had materially worsened such that she could no longer work. The claim should 

therefore have been regarded as a request for modification of the January 13, 1995 LWEC

determination. The Board has held that, when an LWEC determination has been issued and a 

claimant submits evidence with respect to disability for work, OWCP must evaluate the evidence 

to determine if modification of the LWEC determination is warranted.1 OWCP procedures 

specifically provide that, if a formal LWEC decision has been issued and the claimant subsequently 

alleges a worsening of the accepted condition or conditions, such claim should be processed in 

accordance with procedures for modifying a formal LWEC decision.2 In its November 1, 2017

decision, OWCP adjudicated appellant’s recurrence claim without proper consideration of the 

LWEC determination. 

The Board finds that OWCP should have determined whether appellant had established 

that the January 13, 1995 LWEC determination should be modified, based on a worsening of the 

 

1 A.S., Docket No. 18-0370 (issued March 5, 2019).

2

Id.; Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Modification of Loss of Wage-Earning Capacity 

Decisions, Criteria for Modification, Chapter 2.1501.3.a.2 (June 2013).
3

accepted conditions.3 The Board further finds that OWCP must also consider and rule upon 

appellant’s claim for a recurrence of her need for medical treatment. The Board will therefore 

remand the case to OWCP for proper adjudication, to be followed by issuance of a de novo decision 

to preserve appellant’s appeal rights.4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 1, 2017 decision of the Office of 

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

consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: May 22, 2020

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Christopher J. Godfrey, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3 A.S., supra note 1.

4

Id.