United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

L.S., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, BEAUMONT 

STATION POST OFFICE, Lexington, KY, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-1126

Issued: January 20, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On May 4, 2020 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 3, 2020 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

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that,followingthe March 3, 2020decision, OWCP received additional evidence. However, the 

Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board 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

ISSUE

The issue is whether OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits, effective October 2, 2019, finding that she no longer had 

disability or residuals causally related to her accepted November 13, 2017left shoulder conditions.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On November 13, 2017 appellant, then a 52-year-old sales and services associate, filed a 

traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on that date she dislocated her left shoulder while 

lifting a package. OWCP accepted the claim for left shoulder joint dislocation, and subsequently 

expanded acceptance of the claim to include incomplete left shoulder rotator cuff tear or rupture.

It paid appellant wage-loss compensation on the supplemental rolls beginning December 29, 2017 

and on the periodic rolls beginning April 1, 2018.

Appellant underwent authorized left shoulder rotator cuff shoulder repair, and left shoulder 

capsule repair on April 27, 2018. 

On November 2, 2018 OWCP referred appellant to Dr. Gregory Grau, a Board-certified 

orthopedic surgeon, together with a statement of accepted facts and medical record, for a second 

opinion evaluation as to whether she continued to have residuals or disability due to the accepted 

November 13, 2017 employment injury.

In a November 28, 2018 report, Dr. Grau, summarized appellant’s history of injury and 

medical treatment. He reviewed her medical records and provided physical examination findings.

Dr. Grau noted that appellant had not experienced further issues regarding her left shoulder,

following left shoulder arthroscopy, and rotator cuff repair in April 2018. He did, however, note

her current complaints regarding her right shoulder. Dr. Grau diagnosed status post left shoulder 

rotator cuff tear, and right shoulder impingement with acromioclavicular arthritis and underlying 

rotator cuff tear. He opined that her accepted left shoulder conditions had resolved. In support of 

this conclusion, Dr. Grau noted that the subjective and objective findings showed that appellant

was status post left shoulder rotator cuff repair and doing well based on findings that she had

regained range of motion and strength. He also opined that her right shoulder conditions, which 

he attributed to her work had not resolved based on positive examination findings and magnetic

resonance imaging (MRI) scan findings. With respect to appellant’s ability to work, Dr. Grau 

opined that she was disabled from her date-of-injury job, but would be able to work with right 

shoulder restrictions.

On April 26, 2019 OWCP requested clarification from Dr. Grau regarding whether 

appellant’s accepted conditions had resolved. It noted that he had opined that the accepted left 

shoulder conditions had resolved; however, he had also opined that conditions of unspecified right 

shoulder rotator cuff tear or rupture, right shoulder impingement syndrome, and right shoulder 

primary osteoarthritis were employment related and had not resolved. OWCP requested that

Dr. Grau provide a supplemental opinion explaining how these conditions had been caused or 

aggravated by the accepted November 13, 2017 employment injury and whether any of these 

conditions had resolved.
3

On April 17, 2019 OWCP requested that appellant’s treating physician, Dr. Thomas D. 

Cervoni, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, address appellant’s current medical status.

In response to OWCP’s request, on May 2, 2019 Dr. Cervoni, agreed with Dr. Grau that 

appellant’s accepted left shoulder conditions had resolved.

On July 30, 2019 OWCP issued a notice proposing to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits as her accepted left shoulder condition had resolved based on

Dr. Grau’s second opinion report. It advised that the right shoulder conditions were not accepted 

conditions and he had not provided any medical reasoning explaining how those conditions were 

related to the accepted November 13, 2017 employment injury. In addition, OWCP noted that 

appellant’s treating physician, Dr. Cervoni agreed that the accepted left shoulder conditions had

resolved.

In an August 27, 2019 report, Daniel Coby, a physician assistant, provided examination 

findings, detailed the injury history, and diagnosed consequential right shoulder impingement 

syndrome, right rotator cuff tendonitis, and right rotator cuff tear, unspecified tear extent.

By decision dated October 1, 2019, OWCP finalized the termination of appellant’s wageloss compensation and medical benefits, effective October 2, 2019. It found that her accepted left 

shoulder conditions had resolved based on the opinions of Dr. Grau, an OWCP referral physician, 

and Dr. Cervoni, appellant’s treating physician.

On October 29, 2019 appellant requested a review of the written record by a representative 

of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review.

By decision dated March 3, 2020, the hearing representative affirmed OWCP’s October 1, 

2019 decision terminating appellant’s wage-loss compensation and medical benefits, finding that

the medical evidence established that her accepted left shoulder conditions had resolved.3

LEGAL PRECEDENT

Once OWCP accepts a claim and pays compensation, it has the burden of proof to justify 

termination or modification of an employee’s benefits.4 After it has determined that an employee 

has disability causally related to his or her federal employment, OWCP may not terminate 

compensation without establishing that the disability has ceased or that it is no longer related to 

3 The hearing representative remanded the case for further development of the evidence on whether appellant 

sustained consequential right shoulder conditions.

4 A.T., Docket No. 20-0334 (issued October 8, 2020); R.P., Docket No. 17-1133 (issued January 18, 2018); S.F., 

59 ECAB 642 (2008); KellyY. Simpson, 57 ECAB 197 (2005); Paul L. Stewart, 54 ECAB 824 (2003).
4

the employment.5 Its burden of proof includes the necessity of furnishing rationalized medical 

opinion evidence based on a proper factual and medical background.6

The right to medical benefits for an accepted condition is not limited to the period of 

entitlementfor disability compensation.7 To terminate authorization for medical treatment, OWCP 

must establish that appellant no longer has residuals of an employment-related condition, which 

require further medical treatment.8

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits, effective October 2, 2019, as she no longer had disability or 

residuals causally related to her accepted left shoulder conditions.

In a report dated November 28, 2018, Dr. Grau concluded that appellant’s accepted left

shoulder conditions had resolved. He noted that she had a good recovery and had no left shoulder 

issues following her April 2018 surgical procedure. Dr. Grau opined that appellant’s left shoulder

conditions had resolved without residuals and that any remaining disability was due to her right 

shoulder conditions.

Dr. Cervoni, appellant’s attending physician, agreed in a report dated May 2, 2019 that

appellant’s accepted left shoulder conditions had resolved. 

As the evidence of record establishes that appellant no longer has disability or residuals 

due to her accepted left shoulder employment conditions, the Board finds that OWCP properly 

terminated her entitlement to wage-loss compensation and medical benefits effective 

October 2, 2019.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that OWCP met its burden of proof to terminate appellant’s wage-loss 

compensation and medical benefits, effective October 2, 2019, as she no longer had disability or 

residuals causally related to her accepted November 13, 2017 left shoulder conditions.

5 A.T., id.; R.P., id.; JasonC. Armstrong, 40 ECAB 907 (1989); Charles E. Minnis, 40 ECAB 708 (1989); VivienL. 

Minor, 37 ECAB 541 (1986).

6 G.B., Docket No. 20-0750 (issued October 27, 2020); K.W., Docket No. 19-1224 (issued November 15, 2019); 

see M.C., Docket No. 18-1374 (issued April23, 2019); Del K. Rykert, 40 ECAB 284, 295-96 (1988).

7 A.T., supra note 4; A.G., Docket No. 19-0220 (issued August1, 2019); A.P., Docket No. 08-1822 (issued August 5, 

2009); T.P., 58 ECAB 524 (2007); KathrynE. Demarsh, 56 ECAB 677 (2005); FurmanG. Peake, 41 ECAB 361, 

364 (1990).

8 A.T., supra note 4; K.W., supra note 6; see A.G., id.; James F. Weikel, 54 ECAB 660 (2003); Pamela K. Guesford, 

53 ECAB 727 (2002); FurmanG. Peake, id.
5

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 3, 2020 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: January 20, 2022

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board