United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.P., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF 

PRISONS, Tucson, AZ, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0137

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

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On November 2, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 8, 2021 merit decision 

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

assigned Docket No. 22-0137.

On January 7, 2021 appellant, then a 30-year-old correctional officer, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on January 5, 2021 he contracted COVID-19 while in the 

performance of duty. 

With his claim, appellant submitted a document generated by June Betsch, a certified 

physician assistant, which indicated that a December 30, 2020 rapid COVID-19 test was positive. 

This document did not identify appellant as the person who tested positive.

In a January 14, 2021 statement, appellant indicated that he had a positive COVID-19 rapid 

test and that his position was considered high risk. He resubmitted the December 30, 2020 

COVID-19 rapid test form.

On January 14, 2021 B.S., assistant food service administrator, indicated that appellant 

worked in food service and concurred that the food service staff worked in close proximately to 
2

the inmates. She also noted that staff and numerous inmates had contracted COVID at about the 

same time. A position description of a cook supervisor/cook foreman was provided. 

Appellant submitted an unsigned January 5, 2021 emergency room report, prepared by

Carlyn Coates, a physician assistant, which noted a differential diagnosis of COVID-19, 

pulmonary nodular amyloidodid, and bronchospasm.

In a January 14, 2021 note, Stephanie L. Roberts, a nurse practitioner noted that appellant 

presented for shortness of breath and coughing. A diagnosis of COVID-19 and hypoxia was 

provided.

Appellant subsequently submitted a January 4, 2021 report wherein Dr. Jonathan S. 

Lowry, Board-certified in emergency medicine, diagnosed COVID-19 and shortness of breath.

By decision dated June 8, 2021, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for COVID-19 as the 

evidence of record was insufficient to establish the medical component of fact of injury. It found 

that there was insufficient medical evidence to establish a COVID-19 diagnosis. OWCP 

concluded, therefore, that the requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by 

the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA).1

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

decision. 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA2 has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim, including that the individual is an employee of the United 

States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was timely filed within the applicable time 

limitation of FECA,3that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged, and that 

any disability or medical 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 upon 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 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2

Id.

3 F.H., Docket No.18-0869 (issued January 29, 2020); J.P., Docket No. 19-0129 (issued April26, 2019); JoeD. 

Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989).

4 L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2020); J.H.,Docket No. 18-1637 (issued January 29, 2020);

James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 ECAB 312 (1988).

5 P.A., Docket No. 18-0559 (issued January 29, 2020); K.M., Docket No. 15-1660 (issued September 16, 2016);

Delores C. Ellyett, 41 ECAB 992 (1990).

6 Public Law 117-2 (March 11, 2021).
3

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 (PCR) or Antigen COVID-19 test result; or (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 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,

7 ARPA, id.; FECA Bulletin No. 21-09 (issued April 28, 2021).

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

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 for proper application of FECA 

Bulletin No. 21-09).
4

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

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board