United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.G., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, NORTHPARK 

ANNEX, Charlotte, NC, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-1467

Issued: November 17, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On July 29, 2020 appellant filed a timely appeal from a February 27, 2020 nonmerit 

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

Boards docketed the appeal as No. 20-1467.1

On April 18, 2007 appellant, then a 45-year-old mail processing clerk, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she sustained head and cervical spine 

injuries with chronic daily headaches due to factors of her federal employment.

2

 She indicated 

that she sustained accepted head and neck conditions under OWCP File No. xxxxxx840 related to 

the same March 9, 2004 employment incident when part of an all-purpose container (APC) fell 

and struck her head.

3

 Appellant noted that she first became aware of her head and neck conditions 

1 The Board notes that appellant submitted additional evidence to OWCP following the February 27, 2020 decision. 

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 OWCP assigned the present claim File No. xxxxxx522.

3 OWCP File No. xxxxxx840 was accepted for a March 9, 2004 head contusion with blunt trauma, contusion of 

face and scalp, headache, and cervicalgia. 
2

on March 9, 2004, and related to factors of her federal employment on February 25, 2007. She 

stopped work on February 28, 2007 and did not return.

OWCP accepted the claim for aggravation of cervical strain. It subsequently expanded its 

acceptance of the claim to include right lateral disc herniation at C6-7, cervical radiculopathy to 

the right, and occipital neuralgia.

On February 2, 2016 appellant underwent an OWCP-authorized right C6-7 partial 

laminectomy, medial facetectomy, and foraminotomy, performed by Dr. Joe D. Bernard, a Boardcertified neurosurgeon.

On January 31, 2018 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for a schedule 

award. She subsequently submitted a February 1, 2018 report by Dr. Bernard noting that appellant 

had attained maximum medical improvement (MMI) in June 2015. Dr. Bernard found 15 percent 

permanent impairment to the back based on criteria of a state industrial commission.

On April 6, 2018 OWCP obtained a second opinion report by Dr. Seth Jaffe, an osteopath 

Board-certified in orthopedic surgery, who opined that appellant had not sustained an impairment 

of a scheduled member as there was no electrodiagnostic evidence of C6-7 radiculopathy. In an 

April 13, 2018 report, Dr. Herbert White Jr., a Board-certified occupational medicine specialist 

serving as the district medical adviser (DMA), concurred with Dr. Jaffe’s opinion. 

By decision dated April 19, 2018, OWCP denied appellant’sschedule award claim, finding 

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

scheduled member or function of the body as a result of her accepted employment injury.

On October 29, 2018 appellant requested reconsideration. In an October 19, 2018 

statement, she contended that OWCP had not fully considered bilateral upper extremity 

radiculopathy and a right shoulder condition. Appellant asserted that reports by Dr. T. Hemanth 

Rao, Board-certified in psychiatry, neurology, and electrodiagnostic medicine, were sufficient to 

establish the presence of right C6 radiculopathy. 

By decision dated January 24, 2019, OWCP denied modification of its April 19, 2018 

decision. 

On January 28, 2020 appellant requested reconsideration. She submitted additional 

medical evidence, including a September 9, 2019 report wherein Dr. Dawn Quashie, a Boardcertified family practitioner, opined that repetitive, forceful hand and wrist motions while 

processing mail directly caused right carpal tunnel syndrome. In an attached impairment rating

report, also dated September 9, 2019, Dr. Quashie found that appellant had reached MMI and that 

she had three percent permanent impairment of the right upper extremity under the sixth edition 

of the American Medical Association, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment

(A.M.A., Guides).

4

4 A.M.A., Guides(6th ed. 2009). 
3

By decision dated February 27, 2020, OWCP denied appellant’s request for 

reconsideration of the merits of her claim.

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

decision. As noted, by decisions dated April 19, 2018 and January 24, 2019 OWCP denied 

appellant’s schedule award claim, finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to 

establish permanent impairment of a scheduled member or function of the body as a result of her

accepted employment injury. 

The Board has held that a claimant may request a schedule award or increased schedule 

award at any time based on evidence of a new exposure or medical evidence showing progression 

of an employment-related conditions resulting in permanent impairment or increased permanent 

impairment.5 When a claimant has requested reconsideration and has submitted evidence of 

permanent impairment or increased permanent impairment, then he or she will be entitled to a 

merit decision on the issue.6

In the present case, appellant submitted a September 9, 2019 report from Dr. Quashie 

following OWCP’s January 24, 2019 schedule award decision. Attached was an impairment rating 

report, also dated September 9, 2019, which found threepercent permanent impairment of the right 

upper extremity under the sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides. As noted above, where a claimant 

has requested reconsideration, and has submitted evidence of increased permanent impairment, 

then he or she will be entitled to a merit decision on the issue. 7 The case must therefore be

remanded to OWCP to adjudicate this matter as a request for an increased schedule award.8 

Following this and other such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue a 

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

5

See E.S., Docket No. 20-0656 (issued February 5, 2021); J.D., Docket No. 19-0019 (July 26, 2019); R.D., Docket 

No. 18-0579 (issued September 14, 2018); E.G., Docket No. 17-1710 (issued January 4, 2018); G.E., Docket No. 

17-0594 (issued September 14, 2017);D.S., Docket No. 17-0407 (issued May 24, 2017).

6

See C.W., Docket No. 18-1110 (issued December 28, 2018).

7

Id.

8

See Order Remanding Case, T.K., Docket No. 21-0245 (issued November 30, 2021).
4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the February 27, 2020 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: November 17, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board