United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.K., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Bellmawr, NJ, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1078

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

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

On July 6, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 4, 2021 merit decision of the 

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

assigned Docket No. 21-1078.

1

 

On March 29, 2021 appellant, then a 44-year-old custodial laborer, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on January 11, 2021 he contracted COVID-19 while in the 

performance of duty. He stopped work on January 11, 2021 and returned to work on 

January 29, 2021. No evidence was submitted in support of appellant’s claim.

Appellant submitted a January 13, 2021 COVID-19 antigen test summary and a 

January 13, 2021 work-excuse note from an urgent care facility by an unknown provider with an 

illegible signature. The provider noted that appellant was positive for COVID-19 and was unable 

to work from January 10 through 21, 2021 because he had to self-quarantine for 10 days. 

1 The Board notes that appellant submitted additional evidence on appeal. 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

By decision dated June 4, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding that the medical 

evidence of record was insufficient to establish a medical diagnosis of COVID-19. 

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

decision. 

An employee seeking benefits under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA)

2

has the burden of proof to establish the essential elements of his or her claim, including the fact 

that the individual is an employee of the United States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim 

was filed within the applicable time limitation of FECA,3that an injury was sustained while in the 

performance of duty as alleged; and that any disability or specific 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 on 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 subject 

to a risk of exposure to COVID-19.7

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 or Antigen COVID-19 test result; (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 

2

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 

3 C.B., Docket No. 21-1291 (issued April28, 2022); S.C., Docket No. 18-1242 (issued March 13, 2019); J.P., 59 

ECAB 178 (2007); Joe D. Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989).

4 L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2020); T.H., Docket No. 18-1736 (issued March 13, 2019); R.C., 

59 ECAB 427 (2008).

5 P.A., Docket No. 18-0559 (issued January 29, 2020); T.E., Docket No. 18-1595 (issued March 13, 2019); 

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).

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

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 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. 

Accordingly,

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).
4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 4, 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 7, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board