J.G. and U.S. Postal Service, Bay Shore Post Office (Board decision, March 1, 2024)

ECAB final decision. The Board affirmed OWCP’s decision. 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). FECA compensation decisions are generally not subject to court review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b).

Plain-English summary

A postal employee sought compensation for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome attributed to repetitive work. Physicians diagnosed the condition, but neither gave an opinion linking it to his duties. Diagnostic tests alone also did not establish causation. The Board affirmed OWCP’s denial.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
• Outcome: Bilateral carpal tunnel claim denied.
• Key point: The record established a diagnosis but not its work-related cause.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
J.G., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 23-1187
) Issued: March 1, 2024
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, BAY SHORE POST
)
OFFICE, Bay Shore, NY, Employer
)
__________ )

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

DECISION AND ORDER

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

JURISDICTION

On September 18, 2023 appellant filed a timely appeal from an April 12, 2023 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act1 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over the merits of this case.2

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met his burden of proof to establish bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome causally related to the accepted factors of his federal employment.

1
5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2
The Board notes that, following the April 12, 2023 decision, appellant submitted additional evidence to OWCP.
However, the Boards Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence in the case record that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be considered by the Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from reviewing this additional evidence for the first time on appeal. Id. FACTUAL HISTORY

On January 31, 2023 appellant, then a 42-year-old clerk, filed an occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome due to factors of his federal employment, including repetitive lifting of mail trays, bags, packages, buckets, and using a computer. He noted that he first became aware of his condition on January 3, 2023 and realized its relation to his federal employment on January 23, 2023. Appellant did not immediately stop work.

In support of his claim, appellant submitted an undated statement and noted that he experienced numbness and shooting pains in his hands since June 1, 2022. He attributed his condition to performing repetitive work duties, including lifting trays, buckets, and bags filled with mail, as well as using a computer four to six hours a day for five days a week.

On January 5, 2023 Dr. Jacob Mathew, a Board-certified neurologist, treated appellant and diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. He referred appellant to a hand surgeon.

An electromyogram and nerve conduction velocity (EMG/NCV) study of the upper extremities dated January 5, 2023 revealed findings consistent with bilateral median neuropathy, left worse than right, and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.

In a February 16, 2023 development letter, OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies of his claim. It advised him of the type of factual and medical evidence necessary to establish his claim and provided a questionnaire for his completion. OWCP afforded appellant 30 days to respond.

OWCP received additional evidence. On January 23, 2023 Dr. Michael Lastihenos, a Board-certified orthopedist, treated appellant for bilateral hand numbness and tingling. Dr. Lastihenos indicated that EMG/NCV studies confirmed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, left worse than right. Appellant reported his work duties included repetitive heavy lifting and other repetitive motions. His physical examination revealed questionable mild atrophy of the left thenar eminence, full range of motion, intact strength, and negative Tinel’s and Phalen’s signs bilaterally. Dr. Lastihenos noted x-rays of the wrists revealed no abnormalities. He diagnosed pain in the wrists and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.

By decision dated April 12, 2023, OWCP denied appellant’s occupational disease claim, finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish that his bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome was causally related to the accepted factors of his federal employment.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

A claimant seeking benefits under FECA3 has the burden of proof to establish the essential elements of his or her claim, including that the individual is an employee of the United States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was timely filed within the applicable time limitation

3
Supra note 1.

2 of FECA,4 that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged, and that any disability or medical condition for which compensation is claimed is causally related to the employment injury.5 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim, regardless of whether the claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.6

To establish that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty in an occupational disease claim, a claimant must submit: (1) a factual statement identifying employment factors alleged to have caused or contributed to the presence or occurrence of the disease or condition; (2) medical evidence establishing the presence or existence of the disease or condition for which compensation is claimed; and (3) medical evidence establishing that the diagnosed condition is casually related to the identified employment factors.

Causal relationship is a medical question that requires rationalized medical opinion evidence to resolve the issue.7 The opinion of the physician must be based upon a complete factual and medical background, must be one of reasonable medical certainty, and must be supported by medical rationale explaining the nature of the relationship between the diagnosed condition and the specific employment factors.8

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome causally related to the accepted factors of his federal employment.

On January 5, 2023 Dr. Mathew diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and referred appellant to a hand surgeon. Similarly, on January 23, 2023 Dr. Lastihenos, diagnosed pain in the right and left wrist and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. He indicated that EMG/NCV studies confirmed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Appellant reported that his work duties included repetitive heavy lifting and other repetitive motions. However, Drs. Mathew and Lastihenos did not provide an opinion on the cause of appellant’s condition. The Board has held that medical evidence that does not offer an opinion regarding the cause of an employee’s condition or disability is of no probative value on the issue of causal relationship.9 As Drs. Mathew and Lastihenos did

4
F.H., Docket No.18-0869 (issued January 29, 2020); J.P., Docket No. 19-0129 (issued December 13, 2019);
Joe D. Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989).
5
L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2020); J.H., Docket No. 18-1637 (issued January 29, 2020);
James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 ECAB 312 (1988).
6
P.A., Docket No. 18-0559 (issued January 29, 2020); K.M., Docket No. 15-1660 (issued September 16, 2016);
Delores C. Ellyett, 41 ECAB 992 (1990).
7
I.J., Docket No. 19-1343 (issued February 26, 2020); T.H., 59 ECAB 388 (2008); Robert G. Morris, 48 ECAB 238 (1996).
8
D.C., Docket No. 19-1093 (issued June 25, 2020); see L.B., Docket No. 18-0533 (issued August 27, 2018).
9
See L.B., Docket No. 18-0533 (issued August 27, 2018); see also C.S., Docket No. 21-0354 (issued June 27, 2023); D.K., Docket No. 17-1549 (issued July 6, 2018).

3 not address causal relationship, their reports are of no probative value and, thus, insufficient to meet appellant’s burden of proof.10

Appellant submitted EMG/NCV studies of his upper extremities dated January 5, 2023 and x-ray films of his wrists dated January 23, 2023. The Board has held that diagnostic tests, standing alone, lack probative value on the issue of causal relationship as they do not address the relationship between the accepted employment factors and a diagnosed condition.11 For this reason, this evidence is insufficient to meet appellant’s burden of proof.

As the medical evidence of record is insufficient to establish causal relationship between appellant’s diagnosed medical conditions and the accepted factors of his federal employment, the Board finds that he has not met his burden of proof.

Appellant may submit new evidence or argument with a written request for reconsideration to OWCP within one year of this merit decision, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a) and 20 C.F.R.
§§ 10.605 through 10.607.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome causally related to the accepted factors of his federal employment.

10
Id., see also T.R., Docket No. 18-1272 (issued February 15, 2019).
11
See W.M., Docket No. 19-1853 (issued May 13, 2020); L.F., Docket No. 19-1905 (issued April 10, 2020).

4
 ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the April 12, 2023 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: March 1, 2024
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

5