A.H. and Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Marketing Service, Poultry Grading Branch, Austin, TX (Board decision, December 7, 2022)

Board dismisses Agriculture worker's appeal without a final OWCP decision (ECAB 22-0583)

Decision type
Board decision
Docket
22-0583
Decided
December 7, 2022
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-12

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 2022, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official ECAB release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (dol.gov)

ECAB final decision dismissing appeal. The Board dismissed the appeal for lack of a final adverse OWCP decision within its jurisdiction. It did not decide whether OWCP could terminate compensation or a schedule award. The order becomes final after 30 days under 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d). 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

A.H. appealed after OWCP sent a letter saying it intended to end wage loss compensation and a schedule award because he had refused an offer of suitable work. The Board found that the letter was informational and did not include appeal rights, so it was not a final adverse decision. Without such a decision issued within the applicable appeal period, the Board lacked jurisdiction. It dismissed the appeal without deciding the proposed benefit termination.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: ECAB jurisdiction over final adverse OWCP decisions, 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c), 501.3(a).
  • Outcome: Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
  • Key point: An informational notice of an intended action does not give the Board a final decision to review.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
A.H., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 22-0583
) Issued: December 7, 2022
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
)
AGRICULTURE MARKETING SERVICE;
)
POULTRY GRADING BRANCH, Austin, TX,
)
Employer
)
__________ )

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

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:
PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On March 1, 2022 appellant sought an appeal from a purported February 15, 2022 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0583.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. 1 This jurisdiction encompasses any final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the date appellant filed his appeal.2 By correspondence dated February 15, 2022, OWCP informed appellant of its intent to terminate his wage-loss compensation and entitlement to a schedule award effective that date as he refused an offer of suitable work, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8106(c)(2). It determined that appellant’s failure to report to the offered position was not justified as he had not submitted evidence that the position was beyond his abilities. This correspondence , however, was

1
5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).
2
20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.” informational in nature and did not include appeal rights. 3 Thus, the case record as transmitted to the Board does not contain a final adverse decision of OWCP issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of the current appeal 4 and, therefore, there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction. As such, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 22-0583 must be dismissed. 5 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0583 is dismissed.

Issued: December 7, 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

3
Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2-- Claims, Disallowances, Chapter 2.1400.3f (September 2020).
4
See supra note 2.
5
The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d).

2

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace