J.W. and Department of Veterans Affairs, West Los Angeles Veterans Administration Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA (Board decision, January 6, 2020)

ECAB final decision on this appeal. The Board set aside OWCP’s October 29, 2018 decision and remanded for further action. OWCP must still decide whether the alleged wrist incident occurred in the performance of duty and whether the claim is compensable. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days of issuance unless this decision specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a).

Plain-English summary

A VA health technician claimed a left wrist injury from handcuff constriction. Her employer said the incident happened off premises after her shift. OWCP denied the claim for lack of a medical diagnosis without resolving whether it occurred in the performance of duty. The Board set aside that decision and required OWCP to make findings on that preliminary issue and issue a new decision.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: FECA findings of fact and performance of duty.
• Outcome: October 29, 2018 decision set aside; claim remanded.
• Key point: OWCP had to address the employer’s challenge to whether the incident occurred in the performance of duty.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
J.W., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 19-0199
) Issued: January 6, 2020
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
)
WEST LOS ANGELES VETERANS
)
ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER,
)
Los Angeles, CA, Employer
)
__________ )

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

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:
CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge
PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge

On November 7, 2018 appellant filed an appeal from an October 29, 2018 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards docketed the appeal as No. 19-0199. On September 13, 2018 appellant, then a 38-year-old health technician, filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that, on August 24, 2018, she injured her left wrist due to “excessive force/handcuff constriction” while in the performance of duty. On the reverse side of the claim form, the employing establishment checked the box marked “no” when asked whether appellant was injured in the performance of duty. It noted that her tour of duty had ended and that the alleged incident occurred off premises.

In a development letter dated September 25, 2018, OWCP informed appellant of the type of factual and medical evidence needed to establish her claim. It provided a questionnaire for her completion and requested a medical report from a physician, which included a diagnosis and a rationalized opinion on causal relationship. OWCP afforded appellant 30 days to submit the necessary evidence. Appellant did not respond. By decision dated October 29, 2018, OWCP denied appellant’s claim finding that the incident occurred as alleged, but that appellant had not submitted evidence containing a medical diagnosis in connection with the accepted employment incident.

Whether an injury occurs in the performance of duty is a preliminary issue before the merits of the claim are adjudicated.1 The Board finds that the October 29, 2018 decision failed to make adequate findings on the element of performance of duty. The employing establishment controverted the claim noting that the alleged incident occurred after appellant’s shift had ended and off premises. This controversion clearly raises the issue of whether the alleged injury occurred in the performance of duty.

In deciding matters pertaining to a given claimant’s entitlement to compensation benefits, OWCP is required by statute and regulation to make proper findings of fact.2 OWCP’s procedures further specify that a final decision of OWCP should be clear and detailed so that the reader understands the reasons for the disallowance of the benefit.3 These requirements are supported by Board precedent.4

As OWCP failed to make findings of fact and provide a statement of reasons on the issue of performance of duty, the case will be remanded to OWCP. Following any further development deemed necessary, it shall issue a de novo decision.

1
T.H., Docket No. 17-0747 (issued May 14, 2018); P.L., Docket No. 16-0631 (issued August 9, 2016); see also M.D., Docket No. 17-0086 (issued August 3, 2017). 2 5 U.S.C. § 8124(a) provides that OWCP shall determine and make a finding of fact and make an award for or against payment of compensation. 20 C.F.R. § 10.126 provides in pertinent part that the final decision of OWCP shall contain findings of fact and a statement of reasons. 3 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Disallowances, Chapter 2.1400.5 (February 2013).
4
See James D. Boller, Jr., 12 ECAB 45, 46 (1960); see also R.B., Docket No. 16-1696 (issued September 7, 2017).

2
 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the October 29, 2018 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded to OWCP for further action consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: January 6, 2020
Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

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

3