United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

K.E., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,

Topeka, KS, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0482

Issued: June 16, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On February 13, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a February 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.2

ISSUE

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

continuation of pay (COP).

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that following the February7, 2022 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

FACTUAL HISTORY

On February 2, 2022 appellant, then a 60-year-old supply clerk, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that he contracted COVID-19 and pneumonia on November 24, 2021

while in the performance of duty. He noted that he felt sick at work on Monday, November 22, 

2021 and was ill through December 6, 2021. On the reverse side of the claim form, the employing 

establishment asserted that appellant was not in the performance of duty when he contracted 

COVID-19 as appellant was unable to identify where he contracted it from. He stopped work on 

November 24, 2021 and return to work on December 7, 2021.

By decision dated February 7, 2022, OWCPdenied appellant’s claim for COP, finding that 

he did not report the injury on a form approved by OWCP within 30 days following the injury. It 

noted that the denial of COP did not preclude him from claiming disability due to the alleged 

November 24, 2021 employment incident.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

Section 8118(a) of FECA authorizes COP, not to exceed 45 days, to an employee who has 

filed a claim for a period of wage loss due to a traumatic injury with his or her immediate superior 

on a form approved by the Secretary of Labor within the time specified in section 8122(a)(2) of 

this title.3 This latter section provides that written notice of injury shall be given within 30 days. 4 

The context of section 8122 makes clear that this means within 30 days of the injury. 5

OWCP’s regulations provide, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for COP, an employee 

must: (1) have a traumatic injury which is job related and the cause of the disability and/or the 

cause of lost time due to the need for medical examination and treatment; (2) file Form CA-1 

within 30 days of the date of the injury; and (3) begin losing time from work due to the traumatic 

injury within 45 days of the injury.6

ANALYSIS

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

COP.

Appellant filed written notice of his traumatic injury (Form CA-1) on February 2, 2022. 

By decision dated February 7, 2022, OWCP denied appellant’s request for COP, as his claim was 

not filed within 30 days of the alleged November 24, 2021 employment incident. It noted that the 

3

Supra note 1 at § 8118(a).

4

Id. at § 8122(a)(2).

5 E.M., Docket No. 20-0837 (issued January 27, 2021); J.S., Docket No. 18-1086 (issued January 17, 2019); 

Robert M. Kimzey, 40 ECAB 762, 763-64 (1989); Myra Lenburg, 36 ECAB 487, 489 (1985).

6

20 C.F.R. § 10.205(a)(1-3); see also T.S., Docket No. 19-1228 (issued December 9, 2019); J.M., Docket No. 

09-1563 (issued February 26, 2010); Dodge Osborne, 44 ECAB 849 (1993); WilliamE. Ostertag, 33 ECAB 

1925 (1982).
3

denial of COP did not preclude him from filing a claim for disability due to the employment 

incident. As appellant did not file written notice of his injury until February 2, 2022, the Board 

finds that he did not file his claim within 30 days of the November 24, 2021 employment incident. 

Accordingly, appellant is not entitled to COP.

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 entitlement to 

COP.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the February 7, 2022 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: June 16, 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