United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.C., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU 

OF LAND MANAGEMENT, Vale, OR, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-0973

Issued: February 9, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Stephanie Leet, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On April 1, 2020 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from an October 24, 

2019 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the 

Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2(FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board 

has jurisdiction over the merits of this case.3

 

1

In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal 

or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). 

No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or 

representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or 

imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a 

representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation.

2 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

3 The Board notes that, following the October 24, 2019 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. 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

ISSUES

The issues are: (1) whether OWCP has met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s 

wage-loss compensation, effective March 4, 2018, as he no longer had residuals or disability 

causally related to his accepted August 19, 2000 employment injury; and (2) whether appellant 

has met his burden of proof to establish continuing residuals or disability causally related to his 

accepted left wrist injury on or after March 4, 2018.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On August 19, 2000 appellant, then a 59-year-old emergency firefighter, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on August 17, 2000 he tripped when walking a dozer line 

and fell on his left hand, sustaining an injury to his left wrist while in the performance of duty. He

stopped work on August 17, 2000. OWCP accepted the claim for a left wrist ligament strain 

necessitating open reduction and repair of the scapholunate ligament and paid appellant wage-loss 

compensation for temporary total disability commencing October 4, 2000. It subsequently 

expanded its acceptance of the claim to include a left triquetral fracture with open reduction and 

repair. 

On December 19, 2000 appellant underwent authorized surgical repair of the left 

scapholunate ligament, performed by Dr. T. Clark Robinson, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon. 

He continued under medical care. Appellant remained off work. OWCP paid him wage-loss 

compensation for temporary total disability on the periodic rolls commencing April 22, 2001. 

In a December 16, 2010 report, Dr. Robinson noted that appellant continued to experience 

pain and instability of the left wrist. He diagnosed primary localized arthritis of the left forearm 

and other joint derangement of the left forearm. 

On March 26, 2015 OWCP expanded its acceptance of the claim to include post-traumatic 

arthritis of the left wrist. 

On April 7, 2015 appellant underwent authorized left scaphoid excision with mid carpal 

fusion, performed by Dr. Robinson. In a July 16, 2015 report, Dr. Robinson released appellant to

full activity, but restricted lifting to 25 pounds. He explained that appellant could not return to his 

date-of-injury position as a firefighter “due to his age and not his wrist.”

On September 14, 2015 OWCP referred appellant, the medical record, a statement of 

accepted facts (SOAF), and a list of questions to Dr. Paul Collins, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, for a second opinion regarding the nature and extent of appellant’s accepted left wrist 

condition. The SOAF indicated appellant’s date-of-injury position as an emergency firefighter 

required arduous physical activity over extended periods of time, including lifting more than 50 

pounds. 

Dr. Collins submitted a September 30, 2015 report in which he reviewed the medical record 

and SOAF. He noted that appellant continued to experience left wrist pain. On examination of 

the left upper extremity Dr. Collins further noted a surgical scar in the dorsal aspect of the wrist, 

diminished grip strength, and restricted wrist motion in all planes. He diagnosed traumatic left 

wrist scapholunate junction subluxation with degenerative changes from the accepted August 17, 
3

2000 incident, and postoperative changes from scapholunate and wrist fusion. Dr. Collins opined 

that the accepted injury had resulted in progressive degenerative arthritis of the left wrist, 

postoperative alteration of the left wrist and left forearm and wrist weakness related to traumatic 

damage to the left scapholunate junction. He permanently restricted appellant to sedentary duty. 

Dr. Collins explained that he did not believe appellant’s work status would change over time given 

the severity of the accepted injury and subsequent treatment. 

In a November 14, 2017 development letter, OWCP requested that Dr. Robinson submit a

more current report regarding current clinical findings, diagnoses, and appellant’s work capacity. 

In response, Dr. Robinson submitted a December 14, 2017 report, noting appellant’s symptoms of 

left wrist pain and stiffness. On examination of the left hand and wrist, he observed no tenderness 

to palpation, 20 degrees wrist flexion, 55 degrees wrist extension, 10 degrees ulnar deviation, 10 

degrees radial deviation, full forearm rotation, normal strength, and normal sensation. 

Dr. Robinson obtained x-rays of the left wrist demonstrating a scaphoid excision and mid carpal 

fusion with two screws in place. He diagnosed primary osteoarthritis of the left hand, scaphoid 

excision, and partial wrist fusion. Dr. Robinson opined that appellant’s left wrist fusion had healed 

without residual symptoms and that he had no work restrictions related to his wrist. He found 

appellant permanently disabled from his date-of-injury position as a firefighter due to his age of 

77 years, with no restrictions attributable to his left wrist condition. 

In a January 18, 2018 notice, OWCP advised appellant that it proposed to terminate his 

wage-loss compensation as he no longer had residuals of disability causally related to his accepted 

August 17, 2000 employment injury. It indicated that the weight of the medical opinion evidence 

with respect to employment-related residuals/disability rested with the December 14, 2017 opinion 

of Dr. Robinson. OWCP afforded appellant 30 days to submit evidence and argument challenging 

the proposed termination action.4 

By decision dated March 1, 2018, OWCP terminated appellant’s wage-loss compensation,

effective March 4, 2018, as he no longer had disability causally related to his accepted August 17, 

2000 employment injury. It found that the weight of the medical opinion evidence with respect to 

employment-related residuals/disability rested with the December 14, 2017 opinion of

Dr. Robinson. OWCP noted that the claim remained open for medical benefits. 

On March 23, 2018 appellant requested an oral hearing before a representative of OWCP’s 

Branch of Hearings and Review. In a September 7, 2018 statement, he contended, through 

counsel, that Dr. Robinson’s February 14, 2017 opinion was insufficiently rationalized to 

represent the weight of the medical evidence. 

Appellant also submitted an August 21, 2018 report by Dr. Robert G. Hansen, a Boardcertified orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Hansen noted a history of injury and treatment. On examination 

he found mild swelling over the left wrist, pain to palpation, decreased sensation in the little and 

ring fingers, and a positive Tinel’s sign at the left elbow. Dr. Hansen obtained x-rays which 

 

4

In response, appellant provided a statement from S.R., an associate of appellant’s, contending that appellant did 

not understand why Dr. Robinson had suddenly changed his opinion after asserting for many years that appellant could 

no longer work as a firefighter. He continued to experience left wrist pain and had to take medication frequently. 
4

demonstrated left intercarpal fusion, scaphoid excision, and significant arthrosis of the radial 

lunate joint. 

By decision dated October 25, 2018, an OWCP hearing representative affirmed the 

March 1, 2018 decision, finding that Dr. Robinson’s December 14, 2017 opinion continued to 

represent the weight of the medical evidence. 

On October 11, 2019 appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration. Counsel 

contended that OWCP had not met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation as Dr. Robinson’s December 14, 2017 opinion was inconsistent with his prior 

reports and contained no rationale explaining his change of opinion. Appellant submitted 

additional evidence.5

In a July 22, 2019 report, Dr. Jonathan Bowman, a Board-certified family practitioner, 

reviewed a history of injury and treatment. He diagnosed post-traumatic arthritis of the left wrist 

and noted permanent work restrictions against reaching above the shoulder, pushing, pulling, 

lifting, and carrying more than 10 pounds, no repetitive reaching, and no repetitive wrist 

movements. Dr. Bowman opined that the accepted left wrist injury and post-traumatic arthritis of 

the left wrist prevented appellant from returning to his date-of-injury position as a firefighter. 

By decision dated October 24, 2019, OWCP denied modification of the March 1, 2018 

decision, finding that Dr. Robinson’s December 14, 2017 opinion continued to represent the 

weight of the medical evidence.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

Once OWCP accepts a claim and pays compensation, it has the burden of proof to justify 

termination or modification of an employee’s benefits.6 After it has been determined that, an 

employee has a disability causally related to his or her employment, OWCP may not terminate 

compensation without establishing that the disability has ceased or that it is no longer related to 

the employment.

7

 Its burden of proof includes the necessity of furnishing rationalized medical 

opinion evidence based on a proper factual and medical background.8

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that OWCP has not met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wageloss compensation, effective March 4, 2018.

In his December 14, 2017 report, Dr. Robinson discussed appellant’s history of medical 

treatment and reported his continuing symptoms of left wrist pain and stiffness. He detailed the 

 

5 Appellant also submitted chart notes signed by Troy Landes, a physician assistant. 

6 Z.D., Docket No. 19-0662 (issued December 5, 2019); see R.P., Docket No. 17-1133 (issued January 18, 2018); 

S.F., 59 ECAB 642 (2008); Kelly Y. Simpson, 57 ECAB 197 (2005); Paul L. Stewart, 54 ECAB 824 (2003).

7 See R.P., id.; Jason C. Armstrong, 40 ECAB 907 (1989); Charles E. Minnis, 40 ECAB 708 (1989); Vivien L. 

Minor, 37 ECAB 541 (1986).

8 See R.P., id.; Del K. Rykert, 40 ECAB 284, 295-96 (1988).
5

physical examination findings, which included restricted motion in all planes. Dr. Robinson 

diagnosed primary osteoarthritis of the left hand and postsurgical status. He opined that appellant 

was disabled from his date-of-injury position as a firefighter due to appellant’s age of 77 years, 

with no restrictions or limitations referable to the employment injury. Dr. Robinson opined that 

the wrist fusion had healed, however, he did not address whether the accepted condition of primary 

osteoarthritis had resolved. The absence of medical rationale on the crucial issue of continuing 

residuals/disability from work significantly diminishes the probative value of Dr. Robinson’s 

opinion.9

The Board further finds that, in his December 14, 2017 report, Dr. Robinson noted both 

that appellant reported continued left wrist pain and stiffness and that appellant had no left wrist 

symptoms. The Board has held that a medical opinion which is equivocal in nature is of limited 

probative value regarding a given medical question.10 

As Dr. Robinson does not provide a well-rationalized, unequivocal opinion that appellant 

had no residuals or disability related to the accepted August 17, 2000 employment injury on or 

after March 4, 2018,11 OWCP has not met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation, effective March 4, 2018, based on his report.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that OWCP has not met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wageloss compensation, effective March 4, 2018.12

 

9 M.R., Docket No. 20-0707 (issued November 30, 2020).

10 See E.B., Docket No. 18-1060 (issued November 1, 2018); Leonard J. O’Keefe, 14 ECAB 42, 48 (1962).

11 See supra note 8.

12 In light of the Board’s disposition of Issue 1, Issue 2 is rendered moot.
6

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the October 24, 2019 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is reversed.

Issued: February 9, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board