United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.M., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, DAYTONA BEACH 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, 

Daytona Beach, FL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0295

Issued: June 9, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Wayne Johnson, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On December 20, 2021 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a June 23, 

2021 nonmerit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).2 The Clerk 

of the Appellate Boards docketed the appeal as No. 22-0295.3

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 The record also contains an October 29, 2021 decision; however, counsel has not appealed this decision. 

Therefore, it is not currently before the Board. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.3.

3 The Board notes that OWCP received additional evidence following the June 23, 2021 decision. 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

On September 27, 2018 appellant, then a 47-year-old transportation security officer

(screener), filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on September 24, 2018 he 

injured his right shoulder, hip, and wrist, as well as his lower back, when he fell backwards out of 

a chair while operating an x-ray machine while in the performance of duty. OWCP accepted the 

claim for right hip contusion; right wrist sprain; aggravation of L4-S1 intervertebral disc disorders 

with myelopathy, and right shoulder rotator cuff tear or rupture.

By decision dated November 13, 2019, OWCP terminated appellant’s medical benefits 

effective that date as he no longer had any residuals of the accepted conditions of right hip 

contusion, aggravation of intervertebral disc disorder with myelopathy at L4-5, L5-S1, and 

aggravation of chronic right rotator cuff tear. It advised appellant that his case remained open for 

unspecified sprain of right wrist. 

On December 9, 2019 appellant, through counsel, requested an oral hearing before a 

representative of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review, which was held on April 9, 2020. 

By decision dated May 27, 2020, OWCP’s hearing representative affirmed the 

November 13, 2019 decision. 

On May 27, 2021 appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration and submitted 

additional medical evidence. Counsel argued that appellant continued to suffer residuals of his 

accepted employment injuries and that he continued to require and receive medical treatment for 

his conditions.

OWCP received evidence including: August 12, 2020 nerve conduction studies; June 19,

October 2 and 9, and November 20, 2020, January 15, February 12, March 19, April 23, and 

June 18, 2021 follow up examination notes from Dr. Robert R. Reppy, a family medicine 

specialist; an October 29, 2020 impairment rating; a February 23, 2021 report from Dr. Tifani 

Gleeson, Board-certified in occupational medicine; and April 26, 2021 magnetic resonance 

imaging (MRI) scans of appellant’s right shoulder, lumbar and cervical spines. 

By decision dated June 23, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s request for reconsideration of 

the merits of his claim. It summarily found that his reconsideration request did not raise a 

substantive legal question nor include new and relevant evidence and, therefore, was insufficient 

to warrant a review of the prior decision.

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

decision. 

In the case of William A. Couch,

4

the Board held that when adjudicating a claim, OWCP is 

obligated to consider all evidence properly submitted by a claimant and received by OWCP before 

the final decision is issued. While OWCP is not required to list every piece of evidence submitted 

to the record, the record is clear that OWCP summarily denied reconsideration without reviewing 

any of the new evidence and argument submitted following the May 27, 2020 merit decision.5

4

41 ECAB 548 (1990); see also R.D.,Docket No. 17-1818 (issued April3, 2018). 

5

See C.D.,Docket No. 20-0168 (issued March 5, 2020).
3

It is crucial that OWCP address all evidence received prior to the issuance of its final 

decision, as the Board’s decisions are final with regard to the subject matter appealed.6 

Accordingly, the Board will set aside the June 23, 2021 decision and remand the case for 

OWCP to review the evidence and argument in support of appellant’s reconsideration request, 

make findings of fact, and provide a statement of reasons for its decision, pursuant to the standards 

set forth in section 5 U.S.C. § 8124(a) and 20 C.F.R. § 10.126. After such further development as 

OWCP deems necessary, it shall issue an appropriate decision.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 23, 2021 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.

Issued: June 9, 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

6

See C.S., Docket No. 18-1760 (issued November 25, 2019); Yvette N. Davis, 55 ECAB 475 (2004); see also

WilliamA.Couch,supranote 5.