M.K. and Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration (Board decision, February 18, 2025)

ECAB remand decision. The Board set aside OWCP’s reconsideration denial and returned the claim for related case files to be combined and reviewed. Entitlement 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). FECA compensation decisions are generally not subject to court review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b).

Plain-English summary

A VA accountant filed separate claims involving spine and hand conditions associated with similar office duties, including typing. OWCP decided the current claim without combining the related case files. The Board found that the overlapping work factors and conditions required combined review to avoid inconsistent decisions. It set aside the denial and ordered OWCP to combine the files, consider whether the current filing duplicated an earlier claim, and issue a new decision.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: FECA; 5 U.S.C. § 8101.
• Outcome: Denial set aside; claim remanded for combined-file and duplicate-claim review.
• Key point: Related claims based on similar duties needed to be reviewed together.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
M.K., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 25-0184
)
Issued: February 18, 2025
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
)
VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, )
ST. PETERSBURG REGIONAL OFFICE,
)
St. Petersburg, FL, Employer
)
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Wayne Johnson, Esq., for the appellant1
Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge
PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On December 16, 2024, appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a June 18, 2024 nonmerit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned the appeal Docket No. 25 -0184.

On October 9, 2019, appellant, then a 56-year-old accountant, filed an occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she aggravated her underlying cervical and lumbar spine conditions due to factors of her federal employment, including sitting at a desk, typing, and viewing a computer monitor. She noted that her condition was connected to another claim she

1
In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation. filed.2 Appellant noted that she first became aware of her condition and realized its relationship to her federal employment on September 9, 2019. She stopped work on September 9, 2019.

OWCP received medical evidence concerning the neck, back, and wrist conditions alleged in both of appellant’s claims.

By decision dated November 20, 2019, OWCP denied appellant’s claim under OWCP File No. xxxxxx015, finding that although appellant had established the implicated employment factors, she had not submitted medical evidence establishing a diagnosed condition in connection with the employment factors. It concluded, therefore, that the requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by FECA.

On November 20, 2020, appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration and submitted additional medical evidence regarding the conditions alleged in both of appellant’s claims.

By decision dated December 21, 2020, under OWCP File No. xxxxx015, OWCP modified the November 20, 2019 decision to find that appellant had established diagnosed medical conditions. However, the claim remained denied as the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish an injury causally related to the accepted employment factors.

Appellant, through counsel, subsequently submitted requests for reconsideration, along with additional medical evidence. By decisions dated March 21, 2022 and June 15, 2023, OWCP denied modification.

On June 15, 2024, appellant requested reconsideration. No additional evidence or argument was received. By decision dated June 18, 2024, OWCP denied appellant’s request for reconsideration of the merits of her claim, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a).

The Board, having duly considered this matter, finds that the case is not in posture for decision.

OWCP’s procedures provide that cases should be administratively combined when correct adjudication depends on frequent cross-referencing between files, including when similar conditions are claimed in such cases. 3 This allows OWCP to consider all relevant claim files in developing a given claim. 4 As appellant’s claims under OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx015 and

2
OWCP assigned the present claim OWCP File No. xxxxxx015. Appellant previously filed a Form CA-2 on October 3, 2019, under OWCP File No. xxxxxx648, alleging that she developed carpal tunnel syndrome due to factors of her federal employment, including repetitive typing. OWCP has not administratively combined appellant’s claims. 3 Order Remanding Case, B.M., Docket Nos. 23-0426, 23-0427, 23-0428 (issued September 20, 2023); S.G., Docket No. 21-0396 (issued September 27, 2021); R.L., Docket No. 20-0901 (issued July 27, 2021); M.E., Docket No. 21- 0094 (issued May 27, 2021); L.M., Docket No. 19-1490 (issued January 29, 2020); L.H., Docket No 18-1777 (issued July 2, 2019). 4 Id.

2 xxxxxx648 both allege injuries caused by the same or similar employment factors, including typing, these claims should be administratively combined for a full and fair adjudication. 5

The case shall, therefore, be remanded for OWCP to administratively combine OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx015 and xxxxxx645 and consider whether OWCP File No. xxxxxx015 constitutes a duplicate claim. This will allow OWCP to avoid piecemeal adjudication of the issues in these cases and raise the possibility of inconsistent results. It is the Board’s policy to avoid such an outcome.6 Following this and other such further development as deemed necessary, OWCP shall issue a de novo decision. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 18, 2024 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: February 18, 2025
Washington, DC

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

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

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

5
See M.T., Docket No. 24-0753 (issued September 23, 2024); Order Remanding Case, K.W., Docket No. 22-1258 (issued March 14, 2023).
6
See Order Remanding Case, Docket Nos. 25-0118 and 25-0119 (issued December 10, 2024); Order Remanding Case, J.F., Docket No. 24-0402 (issued June 4, 2024); M.S., Docket No. 13-1024 (issued January 14, 2014); William T. McCracken, 33 ECAB 1197 (1982).

3