K.H. and U.S. Postal Service, Post Office, Bakersfield, CA (Board decision, June 18, 2014)

ECAB remand decision. The Board set aside OWCP’s denial of K.H.’s occupational disease claim and returned the case for reconstruction of the record. Whether her knee condition is compensable remains unresolved. 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

K.H., a postal employee, sought compensation for bilateral knee osteoarthritis and knee replacements. She also had accepted knee conditions in a separate claim arising from a 2009 vehicle accident, but that claim file was missing from the record sent to the Board. The Board found that both files were needed for a full and fair decision. It set aside OWCP’s denial and directed the agency to combine the relevant files, reconstruct the record and issue a new decision.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: OWCP procedures for combining related claim files.
• Outcome: August 23, 2013 denial set aside; case remanded for a complete record and new decision.
• Key point: Review of the knee claim required the separate accepted knee injury file.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
K.H., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 14-478
) Issued: June 18, 2014
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,
)
Bakersfield, CA, Employer
)
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Richard Kulick, for the appellant
Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:
PATRICIA HOWARD FITZGERALD, Acting Chief Judge COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge

On December 30, 2013 appellant’s representative filed an application requesting review of an August 23, 2013 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) in claim number xxxxxx148. By that decision, OWCP denied modification of its December 19, 2012 decision denying her occupational disease claim for bilateral knee osteoarthritis and knee replacements. The appeal was docketed as 14-478.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that appellant has prior accepted bilateral knee conditions from a 2009 motor vehicle accident, file number xxxxxx303. As assembled, the case record now before the Board does not contain file number xxxxxx303. Pursuant to its procedures, OWCP has determined that cases should be combined where correct adjudication depends on cross-referencing between files. In the instant appeal, it appears that, for a full and fair adjudication, OWCP claims pertaining to appellant’s knee conditions should be combined pursuant to OWCP procedures.1 This will allow OWCP to consider all relevant claim files in developing appellant’s claim. Moreover, to consider appellant’s appeal at this stage would involve a piecemeal adjudication of the issues in this case and raise the possibility of

1
Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, File Maintenance and Management, Chapter 2.400.8(c) (February 2000). inconsistent results. It is the Board’s policy to avoid such an outcome.2 The case must be remanded to OWCP for reconstruction of the record and an appropriate merit decision issued on appellant’s claim in order to preserve her right to appeal to the Board.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 23, 2013 the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs’ decision be set aside and the case remanded to OWCP for further proceedings consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: June 18, 2014
Washington, DC

Patricia Howard Fitzgerald, Acting Chief Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

2
See William T. McCracken, 33 ECAB 1197 (1982).

2