G.O. and Department of Veterans Affairs, Louis Stokes VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH (Board decision, September 29, 2022)

Board dismisses VA worker's late appeal (ECAB 22-1232)

Decision type
Board decision
Docket
22-1232
Decided
September 29, 2022
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-16

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. The Board dismissed the appeal because it was filed after the 180-day deadline and did not review OWCP's underlying decision. Under 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d), this order becomes final 30 days after issuance. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days unless this order specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a).

Plain-English summary

A VA medical center employee appealed OWCP's August 2, 2021 decision on August 3, 2022. The Board calculated that the 180-day appeal period ended January 29, 2022. It found the filing untimely and found no documented compelling circumstances explaining the delay. The Board dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction without reviewing the underlying OWCP decision.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: Board appeal deadline, 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e).
  • Outcome: Appeal dismissed as untimely.
  • Key point: The Board could not review an OWCP decision appealed after the 180-day period on this record.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
G.O., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 22-1232
) Issued: September 29, 2022
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
)
LOUIS STOKES VA MEDICAL CENTER,
)
Cleveland, OH, Employer
)
__________ )

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

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge JAMES D. MCGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On August 3, 2022 appellant filed an appeal from an August 2, 2021 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-1232.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. 1 For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s decision.2

The 180 th day following the August 2, 2021 decision was January 29, 2022. As appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until August 3, 2022, more than 180 days after the August 2, 2021 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 22-1232 is untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered a reason to

1
5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).
2
20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e).

explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to establish compelling circumstances. Because there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the filing of the instant appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 22-1232, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-1232 is dismissed.

Issued: September 29, 2022
Washington, DC

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

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3
The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” Id. at § 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