United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

L.J., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

EDWARD HINES, JR., VA HOSPITAL, 

Hines, IL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0803

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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On April 4, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a January 19, 2022 merit decision

and a March 17, 2022 nonmerit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs 

(OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0803.

On December 1, 2021 appellant, then a 56-year-old personnel clerk and assistant, filed a 

traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on November 3, 2021 he was exposed to and 

contracted COVID-19 from coworkers. He explained that when he came into work on 

November 4, 2021 he went to the Employee Health Clinic to be tested for COVID. When he 

related that he was experiencing COVID symptoms appellant was told to leave the employing 

establishment premises. On the reverse side of the claim form, appellant’s supervisor 

acknowledged that appellant was injured in the performance of duty and indicated that he stopped 

work on November 4, 2021.

OWCP received a November 29, 2021 note from Dr. Akef Abu-Rmaileh, an attending

internist, who advised that appellant had COVID-19 as of November 6, 2021 and he still had 

symptoms. Dr. Abu-Rmaileh requested that appellant be excused from work through 

December 13, 2021.
2

An unsigned November 8, 2021 letter from a medical facility indicated that appellant’s 

COVID-19 test was positive.

By decision dated January 19, 2022, OWCP accepted that the November 3, 2021

employment exposure occurred as alleged, but denied appellant’s traumatic injury claim, finding 

that he had not submitted medical evidence containing a diagnosis of COVID-19. It concluded, 

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

Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA).

1

OWCP subsequently received additional medical evidence, including a November 5, 2021

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) COVID-19 test which revealed that appellant was positive.

Dr. Abu-Rmaileh, in a progress note dated November 29, 2021, provided examination 

findings. Additionally, he provided an assessment of persistent COVID-19 symptoms, mainly 

cough, dyspnea, and dizziness. Dr. Abu-Rmaileh requested that appellant be excused from work 

until December 13, 2021.

By appeal request form dated January 21, 2022 and postmarked on February 22, 2022, 

appellant requested a review of the written record before a representative of OWCP’s Branch of 

Hearings and Review regarding the January 19, 2022 decision. 

OWCP, by decision dated March 17, 2022, denied appellant’s request for review of the 

written record as untimely filed, finding that his request was not made within 30 days of the 

January 19, 2022 OWCP decision as it was postmarked on February 22, 2022. It further exercised 

its discretion and determined that the issue in this case could equally well be addressed by a request 

for reconsideration before OWCP along with the submission of new evidence.

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

decision. 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA 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,2that 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.3 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. 4

1

5 U.S.C § 8101 et seq.

2 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).

3 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).

4 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).
3

Under section 4016 of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 20215 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-19.6

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.7 To 

establish a diagnosis of COVID-19, a claimant must submit the following: (1) a positive 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.8

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 No. 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. 

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

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

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

8 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. 
4

21-09, 21-10, and 22-06 with regard to appellant’s claim for COVID-19.9 Following this and other 

such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue a de novo decision.10 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 19, 2022 decisions of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs are set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings 

consistent with this order of the Board. The March 17, 2022 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is set aside as moot. 

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

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

9

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).

10 In light of the Board’s disposition regarding the merit issue, the nonmerit issue is rendered moot.