D.R. and U.S. Postal Service, Post Office, Chicago, IL (Board decision, April 25, 2013)

ECAB remand decision. The Board set aside OWCP’s July 27, 2012 denial of an additional schedule award and returned the claim for review of an impairment report. Whether D.R. qualifies for an additional award remains undecided. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days of issuance unless this order specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a).

Plain-English summary

D.R., a postal employee, sought an additional schedule award and submitted an impairment report from her physician before OWCP decided the claim. OWCP denied the request without addressing that report’s probative value. The Board held that OWCP had to consider evidence received before issuing a final decision. It set aside the denial and directed OWCP to review the evidence and issue a new merits decision. The order did not decide the amount of any additional impairment.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Board precedent requiring OWCP to consider evidence received before its decision.
• Outcome: July 27, 2012 award denial set aside; new merits decision ordered.
• Key point: OWCP needed to address a timely submitted impairment report before denying the claim.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
D.R., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 13-201
) Issued: April 25, 2013
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,
)
Chicago, IL, Employer
)
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Appellant, pro se
Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE
Before:
RICHARD J. DASCHBACH, Chief Judge
COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge
PATRICIA HOWARD FITZGERALD, Judge

On November 5, 2012 appellant filed an application for review of a July 27, 2012 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) denying her claim for an additional schedule award.

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that the case is not in posture for decision and must be remanded to OWCP. In the case of William A. Couch,1 the Board held that, when adjudicating a claim, OWCP is obligated to consider all evidence properly received before a final decision is issued. In the present case, appellant filed a claim for an additional schedule award and submitted, inter alia, a May 21, 2012 impairment rating report from Dr. Michael T. Foreman before the July 27, 2012 decision was issued. Nonetheless, OWCP denied her claim without addressing the probative value of Dr. Foreman’s report.

Accordingly, the case will be remanded to enable OWCP to properly consider all of the evidence in the case record at the time of the July 27, 2012 decision. Following this and any further development deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue an appropriate merit decision on appellant’s claim.

1
41 ECAB 548 (1990).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the July 27, 2012 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case for further action consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: April 25, 2013
Washington, DC

Richard J. Daschbach, Chief Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia Howard Fitzgerald, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

2