United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

T.F., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF 

ENGINEERS, CIVILIAN PERSONNEL 

ADVISORY CENTER HEADQUARTERS, 

Washington, DC, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0015

Issued: May 16, 2022

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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On October 4, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a September 8, 2021 merit 

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

Boards docketed the appeal as No. 22-0015.

On February 14, 2017 appellant, then a 50-year-old human resources specialist, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she had developed bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome due to factors of her federal employment, including the repetitive and extensive use of 

a computer. She noted that she first became aware of her condition on September 16, 2011 and of 

its relationship to her federal employment on June 1, 2015. On June 8, 2018 OWCP accepted the 

claim for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Appellant did not stop work. She underwent an 

OWCP-authorized right carpal tunnel release on December 30, 2019.

On June 29, 2020 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for a schedule 

award.

In a development letter dated July 9, 2020, OWCP informed appellant that additional 

medical evidence was needed in support of her schedule award claim and afforded her 30 days to 

submit the necessary evidence.
2

Appellant provided an undated form report from Dr. Rishi Bhatnagar, an orthopedic 

surgeon, finding that she had reached maximum medical improvement (MMI). She also provided 

his treatment notes dated January 8, February 3, May 4, and June 1, 2020. Appellant submitted 

hospital records from her authorized December 20, 2019 right carpal tunnel release.

By decision dated March 25, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s schedule award claim, 

finding that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish permanent impairment of a 

scheduled member or function of the body due to her accepted employment injury.

On April 15, 2021 appellant requested a review of the written record from a representative 

of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review. She provided additional medical evidence,including 

a March 24, 2021 report from Dr. Robert Wilson, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, diagnosing 

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and carpometacarpal arthritis and providing a permanent 

impairment rating based on the sixth edition of the American Medical Association, Guides to the 

Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (A.M.A., Guides)

1 of 16 percent permanent impairment of 

the right upper extremity.

By decision dated September 8, 2021, OWCP’s hearing representative reviewed the 

written record and affirmed the March 25, 2021 OWCP decision. 

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

decision and must be remanded to OWCP for further development. In the case of William A. 

Couch,

2

the Board held that when adjudicating a claim, OWCP is obligated to consider and address

all evidence properly submitted by a claimant and received by OWCP before the final decision is 

issued.

In its September 8, 2021 decision, OWCP failed to review the March 24, 2021 report from

Dr. Wilson. 

As the Board’s decisions are final as to the subject matter appealed, it is crucial that all 

evidence relevant to the subject matter of the claim properly submitted to OWCP be considered 

and addressed.3 For this reason, the case will be remanded to OWCP to enable it to properly 

consider and address all the evidence submitted at the time of the September 8, 2021 decision. 

Following this and other such further development as OWCP deems necessary, it shall issue a de 

novo decision regarding appellant’s schedule award claim. Accordingly,

1 A.M.A., Guides, 6th ed (2009).

2

41 ECAB 548 (1990); F.A., Docket No. 20-1324 (issued March 1, 2021); T.G., Docket No. 19-1930 (issued 

January 8, 2021).

3

See G.A.,Docket No. 19-1080 (issued January 2, 2020); T.J.,Docket No. 14-1854 (issued February 3, 2015); J.J.,

Docket No. 12-1062 (issued December 12, 2012); William McKennon, 51 ECAB 145 (1999); Linda Johnson, 45 

ECAB 439 (1994). See also C.S., Docket No. 18-1760 (issued November 25, 2019); Yvette N. Davis, 55 ECAB 

475 (2004); WilliamA. Couch, supra note 2.
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the September 8, 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: May 16, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board